0
We're unable to sign you in at this time. Please try again in a few minutes.
Retry
We were able to sign you in, but your subscription(s) could not be found. Please try again in a few minutes.
Retry
There may be a problem with your account. Please contact the AMA Service Center to resolve this issue.
Contact the AMA Service Center:
Telephone: 1 (800) 262-2350 or 1 (312) 670-7827  *   Email: subscriptions@jamanetwork.com
Error Message ......
ARTICLE |

A CRITICISM OF TWO PERCUSSION METHODS FOR THE DIAGNOSIS OF THE ENLARGED THYMUS

EDWARDS A. PARK, M.D.; W. C. McGUIRE, M.D.
Arch Intern Med (Chic). 1912;X(3):214-218. doi:10.1001/archinte.1912.00060210048005.
Text Size: A A A
Published online

Bednar (1852), Vogel (1856), von Mayr (1862) described briefly the percussion signs of the enlarged thymus. Sahli1 (1882) first made an extensive study of these signs on living subjects. Blumenreich2 (1902) investigated the signs on dead subjects, comparing the shape of the percussion dulness with the exposed portion of the gland as revealed at the subsequent autopsies. The principles for determining the thymus by percussion, as laid down by Sahli and modified and amplified by Blumenreich, hold to-day. They have the confirmation of anatomical fact. There have been advanced, however, two percussion methods for the recognition of the enlarged thymus which rest on anatomical hypotheses. The present paper is a discussion of the anatomical conditions underlying these two methods.

While the methods of Sahli and Blumenreich are directed at the more exact determination of the outline of percussion dulness, the methods in question — those of Jacobi3 and

Topics

Sign in

Create a free personal account to sign up for alerts, share articles, and more.

Purchase Options

• Buy this article
• Subscribe to the journal

First Page Preview

View Large
First page PDF preview

First Page Preview

View Large
First page PDF preview

Figures

Tables

References

Correspondence

CME
Also Meets CME requirements for:
Browse CME for all U.S. States
Accreditation Information
The American Medical Association is accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education to provide continuing medical education for physicians. The AMA designates this journal-based CME activity for a maximum of 1 AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM per course. Physicians should claim only the credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity. Physicians who complete the CME course and score at least 80% correct on the quiz are eligible for AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM.
Note: You must get at least of the answers correct to pass this quiz.
Please click the checkbox indicating that you have read the full article in order to submit your answers.
Your answers have been saved for later.
You have not filled in all the answers to complete this quiz
The following questions were not answered:
Sorry, you have unsuccessfully completed this CME quiz with a score of
The following questions were not answered correctly:
Commitment to Change (optional):
Indicate what change(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.
Your quiz results:
The filled radio buttons indicate your responses. The preferred responses are highlighted
For CME Course: A Proposed Model for Initial Assessment and Management of Acute Heart Failure Syndromes
Indicate what changes(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.
Submit a Comment

Multimedia

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Sign in

Create a free personal account to sign up for alerts, share articles, and more.

Purchase Options

• Buy this article
• Subscribe to the journal

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging & repositioning the boxes below.

Jobs
brightcove.createExperiences();