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 (4)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

COL. ROBERT M. HARDAWAY, III, MC

AMA Arch Surg. 1960;81(4):529-534.

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

Very often a patient with massive upper gastrointestinal bleeding is operated upon, and, after thorough exploration including a gastrotomy, no source of the bleeding is found. Many surgeons recommend that a 70% empiric gastrectomy be done in the hopes that the source of the hemorrhage will be found by the pathologist in the removed specimen. Small erosions have been found on some occasions.¹ The significance of these erosions is obscure. They are transient and may be found by the gastroscopist in normal control subjects. They are apparently not related to gastric ulcer.²¹ More often no source of bleeding is seen even after careful examination by the pathologist. However, the patient frequently stops bleeding and makes a good recovery. The logic of doing an empiric gastrectomy has seemed inadequate to some surgeons¹⁶ but not to others.¹⁷ The following case reports and discussion are presented in an attempt . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

Author Affiliations
USA

Chief, General Surgery Service, Martin Army Hospital, Fort Benning, Ga.

Footnotes
Submitted for publication Oct. 28, 1959.

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