Letter to the Editor

Further Reflections on Virchow’s Triad

Authors: P Colm Malone, MD, FRCS

Abstract

Brotman et al1 discussed the relation between the original, classical, and “modern” versions of Virchow’s triad. The 1856 original summarized the effects of thrombosis, not its cause, and they recognize that the “modern” triad is “not what Virchow originally described,” but they conclude “After 150 years, it turns out that Virchow’s original triad and its modern interpretation may be one and the same.” I would dissent from this conclusion in significant respects.

This content is limited to qualifying members.

Existing members, please login first

If you have an existing account please login now to access this article or view purchase options.

Purchase only this article ($25)

Create a free account, then purchase this article to download or access it online for 24 hours.

Purchase an SMJ online subscription ($75)

Create a free account, then purchase a subscription to get complete access to all articles for a full year.

Purchase a membership plan (fees vary)

Premium members can access all articles plus recieve many more benefits. View all membership plans and benefit packages.

References

1.Brotman DJ, Deitcher SJ, Lip GYH, et al. Virchow’s triad revisited. South Med J 2004;97:213–214.
 
2.Virchow R. Cellular Pathology. [F Chance transl.] 2nd edition. Philadelphia, JB Lippincott, 1863.
 
3.Wessler S. Thrombosis in the presence of vascular stasis. Am J Med 1962;33:648.
 
4.Mustard JF, Murphy EA, Rowsell HC, et al. Factors influencing thrombus formation in vivo. Am J Med1962;33:621.