This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Reply to article  • 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?

G. C. Ebers, MD, FRCP(C)
Department of Clinical Neurological Sciences Division of Neurology University Hospital 339 Windermere Rd PO Box 5339, Postal Station A London, Ontario N6A 5A5 Canada

Arch Neurol. 1982;39(2):131-132.

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

To the Editor.—

Drs Maroon and Kennerdell (ARCHIVES 1981;38:326) have taken issue with the description by myself and my colleagues (ARCHIVES 1980;37:781-783) of their report "Microsurgical Removal of a Primary Intraorbital Meningioma," published in the American Journal of Ophthalmology.¹ In their letter in the ARCHIVES, they asserted that "the dura was indeed identified, that the tumor was separated from the dura, and that this was clearly an optic nerve sheath tumor." I am puzzled by their comments: the following excerpts from their report speak for themselves.

During surgery "a plane between tumor and nerve was found.... No dural tissue could be identified on multiple cut sections." The last paragraph of the report states, "Although dural tissue could not be identified histopathologically, suggesting that this tumor arose outside the sheath, purely etopic [^sic] meningiomas are rare.... Because of this, we acknowledge the possible fortuitous nature of . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

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