A probationary essay on necrosis : submitted, ... to the examination of the Royal College of Surgeons of Edinburgh, ... / by James Syme ... June 1823.

  • Syme, James, 1799-1870.
Date:
1823
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: A probationary essay on necrosis : submitted, ... to the examination of the Royal College of Surgeons of Edinburgh, ... / by James Syme ... June 1823. Source: Wellcome Collection.

    6/44 (page 6)
    man, De Necrosi Ossium), it is maintained, that the great distinguishing feature of Necrosis is the reproduction of a substitute. Indeed, we frequently, in this country at least, hear surgeons expressing a hope that the bones of their pa¬ tients are necrosing, and styling this a salutary process. Though the ancients must have seen, and do indeed seem to have noticed the disease, now generally known by the name of Necrosis, professional men were first induced to con¬ sider it with care, by the recital of some remarkable cases published by La Motte, Ruysch, Duhamel, Moreau, &c., in which the shaft of a bone was separated from the sys¬ tem in whole or greater part, without causing much lameness or inconvenience. Researches in the vaults of the dead, and museums of the curious, soon seemed to throw much light upon these very extraordinary facts, by the discovery of many bones in which the process of reproduction appeared to have been going on at the time of death or amputation, since they consisted of a cylindrical osseous shell or case, containing the old shaft, which could be heard rattling on the wall of its prison, or even seen through the numerous openings by which it was perforated. And it having been thus satisfactorily ascertained that it was possible for a bone to die and be regenerated, ingenuity was immediately employed to investigate the dark and mys¬ terious process, by which so wonderful a change was effect¬ ed. The common idea, so keenly advocated by Duhamel, that bone in a healthy state is formed by its investing membrane or periosteum, naturally led to the idea that this organ was the instrument in the process of reproduction; and, if any doubts remained, the laborious, ingenious, and faithfully de¬ tailed experiments ofTRojA, seemed altogether conclusive as to the truth of this opinion. The explanation, indeed, given by Duhamel, of osseous regeneration, is somewhat different from that offered by