This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

COMMANDER NATHAN C. NORCROSS, M.C.

Arch Surg. 1945;50(2):67-68.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

The longer a damaged nerve is left unrepaired the less is the chance of there being a satisfactory end result. Primary suture is of course desirable, but under wartime conditions it is rarely possible. Even though it has been found that some time, as measured in weeks, or even in a few months, can lapse before the end result is effected in a measurable degree, it seems desirable to keep the time element to a minimum; this has been done during the past two and one-half years.¹ The decision whether surgical intervention is necessary during this early period is difficult to make, and a thorough knowledge of the physiology of the nerve and of the clinical manifestations of disordered function is of paramount importance. Various features of this problem will be dealt with in later communications, but briefly they are those set down by Tinel years ago.²

Recently, . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

Author Affiliations
U.S.N.R.

Footnotes
This is the second of a series of communications on injuries of the peripheral nerves.

This article has been released for publication by the Division of Publications of the Bureau of Medicine and Surgery of the United States Navy. The opinions and views set forth in this article are those of the writer and are not to be construed as reflecting the policies of the Navy Department.

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?