On the pain in pelvic cancer and its relief by morphia : illustrated by fifty cases / by Francis Henry Champneys.

  • Champneys, Francis Henry, Sir, 1848-1930.
Date:
1881
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: On the pain in pelvic cancer and its relief by morphia : illustrated by fifty cases / by Francis Henry Champneys. 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.

    25/26
    In five cases the result was uncertain. In five cases all methods are said to have given equal relief, but one of these is doubtful. In one case the patient denied that any method gave her relief, but she was dissatisfied with an absence of alcohol from her diet list, which drug she preferred to morphia. If we add up these cases, we shall find the cases in which the injection gave most relief to amount to fourteen ; those in which the draught relieved more than the injection to amount to four (one doubtful); those in which the supposi- tory gave more relief than the injection to amount to three (two doubtful). Relief was gained without sleep in six cases j in two after the injection (one of them with vomiting, which may account for the sleeplessness); in two after the suppository (one with slight relief only to pain); in two with each of the three methods, one of them with giddiness. In the remaining case the relief was unsatisfactory. Relief to difficult, frequent, or painful micturition.—In two cases of frequent micturition, and one of frequent micturi- tion and defsecation, the effect was marked. In one of these cases the patient had to rise every ten or fifteen minutes^ but with the hypodermic injection the frequency was reduced to two or three times in the night. In another all the methods relieved the pain, diminished the frequency of mic- turition, entirely banished the pain of micturition, and relieved the pain of defsecation. This was an advanced case with obstruction of the rectum^ retention of fseces, and recto-vesical fistula. Of course, the disease itself was made worse by increasing retention of faeces. This superiority of the injection consisted in its quicker, more thorough, and more enduring effect; in most cases the patients had no hesitation in preferring it, and that in spite of the puncture. At one period of the inquiry it was proposed to press each method to its physiological effects, but in consequence of the complications thus introduced, this was afterwards abandoned, the above doses being mutually compared.