Page:The Armed Forces Institute of Pathology-ItsFirstCentury.djvu/24

THE INSTITUTE AND ITS ANCESTRY constitutes a living link between the operations of the Institute and civilian practitioners in regard to matters of pathology.

Pathology has been defined "as that specialty of the practice of medicine dealing with the causes and nature of disease, which contributes to diagnosis, prognosis and treatment through knowledge gained by laboratory applications of the biologic, chemical or physical sciences to man, or material obtained from man."

Broad as it is, the definition is not broad enough to cover all the activities and contributions of the Institute. Being limited to man, it does not cover the work of the Institute in veterinary science, a field in which what is probably the largest staff of veterinary scientists in the country is engaged. Nor does it cover much of the work of the Medical Illustration Service, one of the four departments which make up the Institute, and one which is called upon for many services outside the perimeter of pathology.

The heart and core of the Institute is in its work of consultation, research, and education, carried on largely by its Department of Pathology. To this Department goes the daily intake of specimens sent in by medical officers in the field, pathologists at military hospitals, and civilian practitioners seeking light on some puzzling piece of pathological material. No matter whence it comes, the sender is asked to designate the degree of urgency which attends its sending by the use of code words which tell the staff at the Institute whether the utmost in expedition is required, or whether the specimen may safely be given ordinary expedited attention, or if it may go into the backlog of cases awaiting opportunity to be worked over by the Institute's pathologists.

In numerous instances, review of the original diagnosis by the Institute has profoundly altered the therapy applied. In other instances, materials have been submitted to the Institute too late for treatment to be affected by the revised diagnosis. Such was the case of a 22-year-old air cadet who developed a growth, upon an eye, which though actually benign was mistakenly diagnosed in the first instance as "malignant melanoma." The eye was removed, and the enucleated eye, along with the benign nevus, was sent to the Institute—too late to save the young cadet's eye. More fortunate in its outcome was a similar case in which the nevus, mistakenly diagnosed as malignant, was submitted to the Institute in time for a telegraphic report to save the patient's eye from enucleation.

Review of diagnoses by the Institute staff has prevented unnecessary operations, including amputations of limbs, in a number of cases. Such cases are