The seven books of Paulus Ægineta, volume 2 (of 3) : $b translated from the Greek: with a commentary embracing a complete view of the knowledge possessed by the Greeks, Romans, and Arabians on all subjects connected with medicine and surgeryPaulus, Aegineta
History
The seven books of Paulus Ægineta, volume 2 (of 3) : $b translated from the Greek: with a commentary embracing a complete view of the knowledge possessed by the Greeks, Romans, and Arabians on all subjects connected with medicine and surgery
Paulus, Aegineta
Medicine; Medicine, Arab; Medicine, Greek and Roman
Aëtius and other of the Greek authorities allude frequently to the
operation, but none of them describe it minutely except Paulus. Our
author’s statement, that there is less danger from the extraction of
large than of small stones, is at variance, we believe, with modern
experience. Aretæus states that small stones are most easily extracted.
He was, however, no advocate for the operation at all, except in extreme
cases. He speaks of cutting “the neck of the bladder.” (Morb. Acut.
Curat, ii, 9.) Does he not allude to attempts at lithotrity in the
following passage?—ὄυτε γὰρ (λίθος μέγας) θρύπτεται, ἢ πόσι, ἤ φαρμάκῳ, ἢ
αμφιθρυπτοιτο, ὂυτε ἀσινέως τέμνεται. (Morb. Chron. ii, 4.) Which passage
may be thus translated: “when the stone is large neither lithotrity, or
lithotripsy, nor lithotomy, can be practised safely.” Theophilus, in his
‘Commentary on the Aphorisms of Hippocrates,’ states that in lithotomy it
is not the bladder, properly speaking, but the neck of the bladder, which
is muscular, that is cut.
We now proceed to the Arabians. Albucasis, after detailing the symptoms
in much the same terms as our author, goes on to describe the operation
as follows. Having cleared out the bowels with a clyster, the patient
is to be shaken so as to make the stone descend, and he is then to be
secured in the arms of an assistant, with his hands under his _nates_.
The surgeon is then to press upon the perineum, and, if the stone be
felt, the operation is to be proceeded with; but otherwise, the index
finger of the left hand, if the patient be a child, and the middle if an
adult, is to be introduced into the anus, and the stone is thereby to
be gradually brought down to the neck of the bladder. Having pushed it
outwards to the place where you mean to make your incision, an assistant
is to be directed to press down the bladder from above the pubes, while
another draws up the testicles with the one hand, and with the other
stretches the skin under them. Then with a proper scalpel the operator
is to make an incision between the anus and the testicles, not in the
middle, but towards the left _nates_, straight upon the stone which is to
be pressed out by the finger. Let the incision be transverse (oblique?),
large externally, but internally of the size of the stone. If the stone
does not then start out, the operator must seize upon it with a forceps,
or a hook having a lunated extremity. If there be more than one stone,
the largest is to be extracted first, and then the others may be easily
removed. When the stone is large he directs us to break it down with a
forceps. His directions respecting the treatment afterwards are similar
to those of Paulus. When the stone sticks in the urethra he recommends
us to cut down upon it. His description of the operation on women is
likewise similar to our author’s, but more circumstantial. Having got a
dexterous midwife, or some proper person to introduce her finger into the
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.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account