This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Citing articles on Web of Science (16)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

E. LEE STROHL, M.D.; WILLIS G. DIFFENBAUGH, M.D.

AMA Arch Surg. 1957;74(5):709-718.

	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 small intestine constitutes 75% of the alimentary tract and averages 22 ft. in length. For the area exposed, the small intestine enjoys as great an immunity from new growth as any part of the body. In contrast, the stomach and the colon, which precede and follow the small bowel, are the sites of more than 40% of all malignant growths. No satisfactory explanation has been found for the low incidence of new growth in this segment of the gastrointestinal tract. The most widely accepted hypothesis is that of the alkalinity of the bowel contents and the minimum of stasis and kinking in this segment of the bowel.¹

The preoperative recognition of small bowel tumors parallels the development of roentgenology. During the past few years these lesions have aroused an increasing interest and are being recognized with greater frequency.^2-7

In 1951⁸ we reported a series of 16 . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

Author Affiliations
Chicago

From the Departments of Surgery, St. Luke's Hospital, Northwestern University Medical School. and University of Illinois College of Medicine.

Footnotes
Read at the 64th Annual Meeting of the Western Surgical Association, Cincinnati, Nov. 29, 1956.

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