Operations for retention of urine dependent on stricture of the urethra : a clinical lecture delivered at the Hospital in 1852, and now reprinted from the Medical times and gazette of that year / by John Simon.

  • Simon, Sir John, 1816-1904.
Date:
[1880]
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: Operations for retention of urine dependent on stricture of the urethra : a clinical lecture delivered at the Hospital in 1852, and now reprinted from the Medical times and gazette of that year / by John Simon. 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.

    1/26
    Ipvru^ <w^ I T~evxe^o -^otL wV^c^ 5 18<?^ ^ i7 .t*v. K'fJs.^'yjtr ^ 16*51 1^’ ^ <ju. w.ni /m-ti. entTvviO; ii» wir |«^C'j^v^ V<- fjpuLt'.^- ir^ «rv\.%i9 VcrL X , , T<v‘ I* 05:4“ ‘^vV ^T’^u ^Ki>^ s ax^Mt '^r -*“■*• •?' j^|6>^2^^0^ 4t.3?t —<3k ■ I %vvvta-«3^ : ih.'h*-4 ill-' )PE R ATIONS FOR RETENTION OF URINE DErENDE>T 0^^ STRICTURE OF THE URETHRA: 5^<Wtv«45^ J v\. Clixical Lecture delitered at rmt Hospital in 185: j pHWl'Hn 1»0»C WID < aiCBtCATf T«rC?~^AT) Q7IZET¥g^>4ff--¥ff-A^ ^<v*eri»» iiU ■> k ^ if . 'IT * ^ 1 ttwyOt>i.~ ^ \^8C, Pirgr,uroicr~NOTgr- Dear Mr. Editor,— Honoured by your invitation to contribute a paper to tbe •present series of our ^Hospital Renoids.Vbut .finding to my regret that .1 have nothing of recent work wherewith to respond to the invitation, I gladly avail myself of your willingness to print in the ^ReportsA and •thus to identify as a product (however humble) of our School, a certain 'Clinical Lecture which I gave in the Hospital more than twenty-eight years ago, and which, published at that time in one of the Londoi Medical Journals, may perhaps be credited with having had influence in the branch of practice to which it relates—the Surgical Treatment of extreme eftsei of Urethral Stricture; and as your reprint of the Lecture will be 3vithout change from the original, it may be that the following ■littleexplanation will be proper to accompany it. At the close of the first fifty years of the present centui-y, the general ! rule of surgical practice, with regard to unyielding cases of strictural ; retention of urine, was, that the surgeon in last resort must proceed to the so-called Perinceal Seefiow which had then come into vogue, and which claimed as its distinctive feature and merit that it included , Division of the Stricture. I am not aware that before 1852 any dissent from that rule of prac- I ticc had been publicly expressed; but early in 1852 protests against it