English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Inflammatory changes in muscles have long been recognized as occurring independently or in connection with certain diseases. Hunter (1) is said to have described cases of myositis in 1784 and to have noted the insusceptibility of muscular tissue to inflammation and its consequences. I have been unable to find any such reference in his writings. During the past century cases have been published in many different countries and a considerable amount of literature is to be found on this affection. A multiple muscle inflammation, however, presenting also other well known symptoms, was not described as such until 1887. In that year E. Wagner (2) of Leipsic, Unverricht (3) of the Poly-clinic at Jena, and Hepp (4) of Kussmaul's clinic at Strasburg, almost simultaneously reported cases. Though Wagner's case was first published, it was in reality the last seen, for Hepp made his observation two months previously and Unvcrricht's case had been noted seven years before either of the above two. The pathological findings, with a meager history of this last case, were presented by Marehand (5) to the Schlesische Gesellschaft fiir vaterl~nd. Cultur on October 2~, 1880, and later appeared in the society's transactions and in the Breslauer ~rztliche Zeitschrift of that same year. The case has caused a good deal of confusion among writers on this disease. Herrick (6), Jacoby (7), and others have described it as another case of an earlier observation, while Lewy (8) thinks it is an additional one which Unverricht has later more fully reported. This error may be due to the fact that Unverricht in two of his articles

DERMATOMYOSITIS, WITH REPORT OF A CASE WHICH PRESENTED A RARE MUSCLE ANOMALY BUT ONCE DESCRIBED IN MAN