631

All this occupied about five minutes, afterwhich she became gradually sensible, andthen complained of severe pain in theside. There was no thirst of any conse-

quence, but a constant burning in themonth and pharynx, so that the passageof flnid was compared to" the hissingof water thrown upon hot iron." The

pain undergone was described to be of themost violent description, and yet if askedto drink by either of her surgeons, sheHever positively refused to do so, muchrather endeavouring than otherwise toovercome the great dislike she had tofluids. Mr. Tomkin suggested a trial ofthe liquor arsenicalis, and the use of un-guentum veratriæ to the arm and throat.

R Liq. Arsenicalis gutt. xv, in lacte,stat. et repet. in dosibus guttarum x, 4tishoris.

a. Eleven a.m. Un taking the mecti-cine, the quantity of which did not exceeda tablespoonful, some severe fits of thesame convulsive character were produced,followed by distressing tremor, and con-striction about the chest. Says she hasalso felt very sick, but has not vomited. i

Has had several fits during the nightwithout any apparent exciting cause, andfour this morning since six o’clock. Fore-arm painful. One of the wounds slightlyinflamed. With the concurrence of Mr.Tomkin the bitten parts were freely cutaway by Mr. Varenne.R Liq. Arsenic. nlv, 4tis horis; Vera-

triæ gr. vii ; Adipis iv. M. Bra-chis et coleo infricatur per sex-tam horæ partem.

9. Eleven a.m. Has had no pain inthe fore-arm since the excision, and butone fit. She was senseless for twentyminutes during the night. The ointment,the entire quantity of which was appliedin the evening, produced a general glowover the arm and neck, and seems to havebeen serviceable in allaying, the pain ofthe throat, which pain has been constantfor the last two days. Each dose of themedicine makes her sick. Aversion tofluids diminished.

Liq. Arsenicalis gutt. ij, 4tis horis. Rep.Unguent. Pars magnitud. nucis avel-lanæ partibus affectis 4tis horis in-fricatur.

15. Since the 9th the patient has beengradually improving, though the processof deglutition is even at present ratherpainful, and the trickling of water cannotbe borne without uneasiness. Her gumsare swelling, probably from the effects ofthe arsenic, which she has been taking inthe last-mentioned dose ever since. Fromthe steady progress which has already

been made towards recovery, there seems

every chance of a permanent cure..Aug. 10. Up to the present time there

has been no return of the complaint.All the symptoms of hydrophobia which

this woman had, appear to have arisenfrom nervous irritation, and not alto-gether from absorption of the virus, thepain being clearly traced along the courseof the musculo-spinal nerve towards theelbow-joint, and from thence to the axilla,and afterwards to the brain. The case

warrants, we think, the free excision ofbitten parts at any period after an acci-dent, as a practice likely to prove the bestprophylactic against the terrible disorderof hydrophobia, and also as one whichought to be adonted. if uracticable. evenwhen the disease has set in, until experi-ence shall have decided upon its utility.Dr. Bardsley, of Manchester, in his ablearticle on the subject in the "Cyclopaediaof Practical Medicine," quotes a ease, re-lated by Professor Rust, where the woundwas excised thirty-one days after the bite,and after hydrophobic symptoms had ap-peared, and where the patient’s life wassaved.

THREE CASES OF

STONE IN THE BLADDER

TREATED BY

LITHOTRIPSY.

HEURTELOUP, M.D.

To the Editor of THE LANCET.

SiR,-May I request you to insert inyour valuable Journal three more cases ofcalculus treated by lithotripsy, as addi-tional proofs that this operation is effica-cious ill its application, and that its curesare complete. I have the honour to be,1Sir, yours most obedientlv.

18, Holles-street, Cavendish-square,July 30, 1835.

CASE I.-Operation performed pttblicly cct.the Royal Military Hospital, Chelsea.—

, Patient aged 28.-Good Constitution.—Stricture of the Urethra.-Two Calculiof considerable size.—Fragment stoppingbehind the Strictured Portion of theUrethra.—Removal of these Fragmentsb.1I appropriate means.—Recovery of thePatient since nearly two years.

William Dawson, a soldier, aetat. 28, ex-perienced symptoms of stone in the blad.--der shortly after his enlistment, but thesensations at first were so slight that forthree years he paid little or no attention

632

to them, Mid continued to discharge his remain under his eye for some time; heduties. Soon after this, however, his suf- stayed for a couple of months, during whichferings gradually increased; his general time he did not experience an unpleasanthealth was affected, and he became so symptom, and was then dismissed.weak that he wished to be discharged, Remarks.—With the exception of theconsidering himself unfit for service. His stricture, there is no particular feature inpain was excessive during long marches, this case. But I have again to alhule toand on such occasions he used to void the difficulties which are occasioned bybloody urine, at short intervals, and with strictures, even when they are not verygreat pain. He sought for medical advice considerable. These difficulties ariseat last, but attributed the symptoms to a chiefly from the facility with which frag-stricture of the urethra which existed at ments of calculus remain behind the con-that time, not supposing that there was tracted portion of the urethra. This cir-calculus. In introducing instruments for cumstance happened in Dawson’s case.

the purpose of treating the stricture, a After each operation, which produced aforeign body was felt in the bladder. The great number of fragments, I found be-

patient was made acquainted with the hind the stricture a string of fragmentscause of his sufferings, but refused to which it was necessary to remove, andundergo the operation of lithotomy which some of which required to be broken inwas proposed to him at Chatham. the urethra, being either too large, or of anShortly after this he was declared unfit, unfavourable shape, to be extracted entire.for service, and received his dismissal; he This was accomplished by means of par-was admitted by particular favour into ticular instruments adapted to that pur-’the Military Hospital, Chelsea, under the pose, but which it would be too long tocare of Dr. Somerville, who considered describe here. Generally speaking, I con-that although he had refused to be cut sider it preferable to have a patient withfor the stone, he might not object to litho- a moderately capacious urethra, than onetripsy, and proposed this operation to him, with a very large urethra, which is notto which he consented unhesitatingly. Dr. equally so in its whole length. It is true,Somerville kindly recommended this pa- in the first case we do not see such largetient to my care, and he came to my house fragments voided as in the second; buton the llth of December 1833, to be these fragments pass through the urethrasounded. more readily and do not obstruct it. ThisThe urethra was moderately capacious, patient was operated on in presence of the

but there was a strictured portion at about Commandant of the Hospital, Dr. Somer-six inches from the meatus urinarius, ville, Mr. Lawrance, Mr. Babbage, Mr.which, however, allowed the introduction Bramah, Professor Sedgwick of Cam-of a catheter, No. 11 ; the bladder was bridge, Dr. Watson, Mr. Biggs, and manyrather contractile, not very capacious, and other gentlemen of the profession.contained two oval-shaped calculi of con- It is nearly two years since the recoverysiderable size, easily moved with the of Dawson, and he has not experiencedcatheter, the slightest symptom to lead him to fearAt the request of Dr. Somerville, who a return of his complaint.

wished that the operation might be per-formed at the Hospital, the first applica- CASE 2.—Patient aged 60.—Weak Con-tion of the lithotriptic instruments took stitietion.- Calculits of Mixecl Phosphatesplace on the 23rd of December; the two of about an inch in diameter.—Consider-calculi were taken and broken in about able Disease of the Bladrier.-Iaeep Sac-two minutes. A considerable quantity of culus in the Basfond, in which severalpowder and fragments was voided after Fragrnents were lodged.—Pulverizationthis operation. Three subsequent ones of these Fragments in the Cavity.-Re-performed with the pere2tte?tr, at intervals covery of tlae Patient more than a yearof a few days, sufficed to bring away the and a half cyo.stone that remained in the bladder. Mr. Watson, ætat. 60, residing near Bos-On the 7th of January, that is, a fort- ton, Lincolnshire, of a weak constitution,

night after the first application, Dawson was thrown from a horse at the age of 15,was carefully examined by Dr. Somerville, by which two of his ribs were broken, andMr. Lawrance, surgeon to the Royal Mili- two inguinal hernia were produced; he,tary Asylum, and Mr. Heartshorn, con- however, enjoyed pretty good health afterjointly with mvself, and no remnant of this till about eight years before I sawcalculus being detected, the patient was him. He then experienced pain in thepronounced cured. loins, but not violent; this continued at

Dr. Somerville, however, in order that different intervals, and more or less in-the recovery should be confirmed beyond tenselv, for nearly three years, when hea doubt, wished that the patient might experienced symptoms of stone in- the

633

bla.drler; these symptoms at first were so

trifling, that they hardly attracted theattention of the patient, but they grarlu-ally increased in severity, and inducedhim to have medical advice. At the re-commendation of several medical gentle-men to whom he addressed himself, hehad recourse to many different medicines,which afforded him, however, no perma-nent benefit, and finding that the symp-toms became almost every day aggravatedhe addressed himself in 1833 to Mr.Snaith, of Boston, who examined thebladder, detected a calculus, and was goodenough to recommend the patient to me ;he was the more ready to follow the ad-vice from having seen just before in aStamford paper an account of several ope-rations which I had performed at Notting-ham. He arrived in London the 4th of

January, 1834 ; he was in a constant stateof suffering, which had worn him out, andreduced him to a state of great debility,and he was very frequently voiding thickand fetid urine.The catheter indicated a contracted

bladder ; a small and sensitive urethra.; asoft calculus of about an inch in diameter,of an irregular shape, and situated nearthe neck of the bladder. The irritable andcontracted state of the bladder, whichonly allowed a small quantity of water tobe injected, rendered the stone almost im-moveable. Notwithstanding this unfavour-able condition of the urinary organs, Iconsidered lithotripsy applicable, and per-formed the first operation on the 3rd ofFebruary. In four applications of the in-struments this calculus was pulverized,and the patient returned to Boston in themonth of March.

I requested him to write to me occa-

sionally, stating how he felt himself; andshortly after his return I had reason tobelieve by the particulars which he gaveme, that one or two fragments of calculusremained in his bladder; he had occasionto pass his water rather more frequentlythan he should do; and sometimes had asensation of heat along the urethra. Iadvised him, therefore, to come to town;this he immediately complied with. Withthe recto-curvilinear catheter nothingcould be detected; the bladder, however,was larger, more dilatable, more regular,much less sensitive, and altogether in amuch better state than before the opera-tion. This quiescent state of the bladderinduced me to continue the exploration.Catheters of various shapes were intro-duced, and at last I discovered with a

straight one, behind the neck of the blad-der, and quite to the left, a depression orsacculus into which the instrument pene-trated nearly fn inch. In this depression

several small fragments were distinctlyfelt. I succeeded in pulverizing them byemploying an instrument nearly straight,having only a curve of a few lines. Thesepieces being all voided, the most carefulexaminations with straight and curved in-struments showed that none remained;and the patient returned home, and hasbeen ever since perfectly well.Remarks.-This case affords a proof that

the operation of lithotripsy may be con-sidered advantageously applicable in casesof calculus existing at the same- time asdiseased bladder. Mr. Watson was, in this

respect, in a very unfavourable state, pre-vious to the operation. Many, I amaware, consider that lithotril).qy should notbe attempted where there is disease of thebladder, but very frequently it is thebest means of removing the bad symp-toms. This case also proves that notwith-standing an anomalous conformation of thebladder, every fragment can be removed;to accomplish this, it is only necessary toemploy suitable mahipulatiol1s and properinstruments. If, therefore, this can beaccomplished, in cases of irregularly formedbladder:), a fortiori, it may be done wherewe have to do with one that is regular inits conformation. The opinion thereforewhich would bring this point in ques.tion, is incorrect.

CASE 3. - Patient aged 17. - ImpairedConstitution.—Large Lithic-acid Calcu-lus.—Extensive Disease of the Bladder.—Lithotripsy considered inapplicable, but

afterwards performed, Lithotomy beinglooked upon as too dangerous, and thePatient being unwilling to submit to it.—Four applications of tise Perczctezcr.-Recovery, since a year and a half.

George Draper, son of a farmer, residingat Gotham, near Nottingham, seventeenyears of age, was troubled with symptomsof stone in the bladder at the age ofsix or seven; he has suffered more or

less; the least exercise brought on violentpain, and a discharge of bloody urine. At

different periods Mr. Wright and Mr. At-tenburrow, surgeons to the NottinghamHospital, were consulted; they prescribedvarious treatments, which were followedby temporary relief, but still the diseasecontinued to gain ground. Mr. Wrightproposed to sound the patient several

years ago ; but he refused to submit.Things continued in the same state until Ihad occasion to go to Nottingham to per-form several operations of lithotripsy.Mr. Wright mentioned and explained thisoperation to Draper, who, hoping that if astone was discovered he might be curedby another operation than that of cutting,consented to be sounded. I accompanied

634

Mr. Wright to Gotham; the patient wasin a deplorable state, weak and reducedby the constant pain under which he la-boured, and which at times was so acuteas to call from him loud and continuedthrieks, and voiding frequently and insmall quantities fetid and turbid water.The urethra was capacious, the bladder

contracted, and the catheter was preventedfrom being passed into it, by a large andrough calculus, against which the instru-ment struck, as if it had been againstsomething immoveable, such as a wall.Taking into consideration all the symp-

toms ; the reduced condition and excessivesensibility of the patient; the inflamedstate of the bladder, and, above all, thesize of the stone, I thought it right to ex-press the doubts I entertained as to thesuccess of lithotripsy, and refused to un-dertake the case. Mr. Wright, however,who looked upon lithotomy as beingequally dangerous, and to which, more-over, tne patient woniu not sunmit, urgeathat something should be done to removesuch acute sufferings, which must unavoid-ably soon terminate in death, and was olopinion that notwithstanding the disad-vantages of the case, I should employ allthe means I had in my power to give re-lief. I yielded to an opinion so just, andthe patient was conveyed to London onthe 17th February 1834.The unremitting and skilful attentions

of Mr. Wright had ameliorated the stateof the patient: the bladder was rathermore dilatable ; and on examination withthe recto-curvilinear catheter, proved theexistence of a heavy, rough, lithic-acidcalculus, about as large as a small hen’segg, and rendered immoveable by its size.The first operation was performed on

the 5th of March, with a percuteur suit-ably armed (having the teeth properly con-structed and arranged) ; a calculus wastaken which the instrument showed to bean inch and a half in its smallest diameter,and was broken by a percussion appropri-ately applied. Two of the largest frag-ments were afterwards seized and brokenin the same way.

Immediately after this operation, thepatient perceived that the most serious

symptoms under which he was labouringwhen the came to town had almost en-

tirely disappeared; although there stillremained in the bladder several consi-derable fragments. He was so well, thatin three other applications of the instru-ments, performed at a few days interval,the whole of this voluminous calculus wasremoved, and he returned home perfectlywell on the 31st of March. Mr. Wright,who has had the goodness to observe thepatient, told me only a few weeks back

: when I had the pleasure of seeing him,that young Draper had been free fromevery unpleasant sensation, and was inperfect health.

Remarks.—This case is very important,inasmuch as it proves, in the first place,that very large calculi can in a very shorttime be removed by lithotripsy. Four ope-rations of about three minutes duration

sufficed to accomplish this. It might per-haps have required as much time to ex-tract it by lithotomy, which operationsometimes lasts longer than twelve mi-nutes. In the second place, it showsthat large calculi may be removed bylithotripsy at an early age; the patient wasbut seventeen. In the third place it proves,as do the preceding case and manyothers, that voluminous stones can be

brought away, notwithstanding consider-able disease of the bladder. And in thelast place, it indicates that an erroneousopinion is held by those who suppose thata calculus, when broken into fragments,produces an increase of pain and irritation;this circumstance is exceedingly rare; in

’) the present case, after the first applicationof the instrument, the patient felt iniine-diate and great relief; and if to this weadd that this effect has come under my

observation in nearly two hundred cases, aswe may look upon this clinical point ascompletely cleared up and confirmed.

ABSTRACT OF THE EVIDENCE OF

MEMBERS OF THE ROYAL COLLEGEOF SURGEONS IN LONDON,

TAKEN BEFORE THE

PARLIAMENTARY MEDICALCOMMITTEE IN 1834.

EVIDENCE OF

MR. WILLIAM LA WRENCE.

450. "What professional appointmentsdo you hold?"—" I am surgeon and lec-turer at St. Bartholomew’s Hospital, sur-geon to Bedlam, and a member of theCouncil of the Royal College of Surgeons."

451. " Do you approve of the presentconstitution of the Council?"—" I thinkthe mode of electing the Council ought tobe altered. It is unpopular: it is not

suited to present ol)i2timis and practices.The electors should be the general body ofthose who practise surgery, excluding

: those who combine with surgery any otherbranch of practice ; yet I should not pro-I pose an absolute exclusion, and then the