The Cleveland Medical Gazette, Vol. 1, No. 3, January 1886Various
History
The Cleveland Medical Gazette, Vol. 1, No. 3, January 1886
Various
Medicine -- Periodicals; Surgery -- Periodicals
Having all arrived at this conclusion, independently of each other, it
was agreed that as there was some obscurity in the case, and also that
in the event of there being a fœtus outside of the uterus it had now
advanced to about the fourth month of gestation; consequently the most
favorable time for the employment of the electric current had passed. In
view of these facts, and also of the fact that exploratory incisions are
attended with comparatively little danger, it was decided to make an
exploratory incision and determine what was the condition of things. If
a fœtus was found remove it if possible. If the trouble was something
that could not be removed, the incision could be closed and the patient
probably in no wise injured. Dr. Allen was asked to operate, and on the
sixth of August the operation was performed. There were present, Dr.
Allen, Dr. Scott, Dr. Millikin and the house staff. The anæsthetic was
administered, and before commencing the operation an aspirator needle of
good size was introduced into the tumor through the vagina. Upon
exhausting the air no fluid was obtained, but upon partially withdrawing
the needle about a drachm of clear serum was obtained, which was thought
to be peritoneal fluid. It was then decided to proceed with the
operation. An incision was made about an inch above and parallel to
Poupart's ligament, commencing at the anterior superior spinous process
of the ilium, and terminating at the outer margin of the rectus muscle.
On opening the abdomen an adherent mass was found closely attached to
the coecum. Strong bands also passed from the mass toward the symphysis
pubis. In order to reach the mass more fully, and also the annexes of
the uterus, the adhesions to the pubis were divided between ligatures.
This having been done, it was still found to be impossible to detach the
intestines which were closely adherent to the coecum, and nothing
abnormal could be found in connection with the uterus. Failing to
discover the cause of the adhesions about the coecum from the abdominal
cavity, it was thought this might be accomplished by separating the
peritoneum from the iliac fossa, and reaching the coecum from the outer
and posterior side. This separation was continued until it could be
carried no further without great danger of wounding the external iliac
vessels, which were exposed for several inches. Although nothing further
than a closely adherent mass of intestines had been found, an attempt to
separate which had been carried to the limit of safety, and the cause of
the malady had not been demonstrated with entire satisfaction, it was
deemed best to close the abdominal incision, which was accordingly done.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account