A case of simple hypertrophy of the heart : illustrating former and modern practice, with remarks / by Sir Risdon Bennett.

  • Bennett, James Risdon, 1809-1891.
Date:
[1890?]
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: A case of simple hypertrophy of the heart : illustrating former and modern practice, with remarks / by Sir Risdon Bennett. Source: Wellcome Collection.

Provider: This material has been provided by The Royal College of Surgeons of England. The original may be consulted at The Royal College of Surgeons of England.

    5/10 (page 5)
    beginning when the patient was fifteen years of age and con- tinued till she was forty-two, comes out thus :— Cupped and bled 962 times. Leeches 593. Number of ounces of blood lost 9506, irrespective of what was abstracted by leeches. Blisters in number, 680. Setons, 3, viz. August, 1826. December, 1826. September, 1827. The bleedings appear to have been generally performed at hospital or dispensary, but sometimes and occasionally near together at home. Looking through the whole record the operation was generally performed six times a month, some- times seven, and in August, 1832, and January, 1833, ten times each month. In later years the intervals were longer, the average being reduced to two or three times a month, sometimes only once. Unless there is an omission of entry the last bleeding in 1852, to the amount of eight ounces, was on October 26th. The remaining dates are May 18th, 1853, May 28th, June 27th and 30th. On two of these occasions the amount of blood lost was six ounces and on the other two, eight ounces. The largest amount abstracted at any one time was twelve ounces. So far as could be ascertained the bleedings were resorted to for the relief of the distress in the region of the heart and in the breathing, and generally at the request of the patient, who believed that by such means alone did she ob- tain any relief; but what other remedies were tried beyond those mentioned I know not. The medical advisers one and all pursued the same line of treatment, and from their cha- racter and professional standing we are warranted in assum- ing that it was the approved practice of the day, and they may be allowed at all events to point to the prolongation of the patient's life in justification of their practice. When she came under my care her condition was such that depletory treatment seemed to me to be out of all question. What inference, it may now be asked, are we to draw from this record ? Was life really prolonged or shortened by