The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1902-07-06
KING EDWARDS CASE.


New York Pharmaceutical Era.
Since the sudden abandonment of all
preparations for the coronation Of King Ed
ward VII, following the official report that
the central figure in the imposing spectacle
was seriously Ill and had submitted 10 a
surgical operation. the daily press has been
filled with rumors and sensational state
ments, some of them absurd and ridiculous
in the extreme. A few days ago a leading
New York daily, which prides itself upon
the accuracy of it's statements, published
an editorial article in which the case OF
King Edward and that which terminated
in the death of President Mckinley were
compared. Both cases involved abdominal
surgery, and the patient in both cases occu-
pied a position of such prominence that the
bulletins from the bedside were watched
with the greatest interest in all parts of the
world.
In the article in question much emphasis
was laid upon the fact that in the treat
ment of King Edward the surgeons en-
ployed a tube for draining the wound,
while the surgeons at Buffalo closed the
opening after dressing the Presidents in
juries. Attention was called to the fact
that the King Immediately improved and
- 49, $500 49, ~ tA2 .
while the sad ending of all the efforts of the
Presidents surgeons is known to all. The
conclusion drawn was decidedly uncompli-
mentary and unjust to the American sur
geons and their methods.
A surgeon Of national reputation has
kindly given US an interview and has ex-
planned the essential difference of the two
cases and shown that the criticism Of
American surgery Is unWdrrdnt6d and alb
surd. 1t follows:
1.-The King is suffering from an abscess
which started in or about the vermiform
appendix. In the first dispatches received
this malady was called perityphlitis, which
is a term formerly universally applied to
inlammatory conditions in the right side
of the lower abdomen. If the case had
occurred on this side of the Atlantic it
would, in all probability. have been called
appendicitis. The word appendicitis was
coined in America about 1887, and in
Fowler's textbook is accredited TO Weir.
American physicians have adopted this
word TO describe these conditions because
they know that the appendix is more
often at fault than any other part of the
intestinal canal. English and continental
physicians have chung TO the term perity-
phlitis. and for this reason the Kings
malady is known as a p~erityphlitic abscess.
THE fact that the case was not at
once clearly understood mas given rise TO
also easily explained. The reason the
royal patient complained OF l~umbago-like
| pains was pEODdDly because the appendix,
which is a movable organ, was lying In
the back part of the abdominal cavity up
on the sheath of the lumbar muscles.
When in this position an Inflammation re-
suits in a deep-seated abscess. and the pain
is referred TO the back, so that an error
of diagnosis in the earlier stages is al
most unavoidable.
The statement which appeared in one OF
the papers TO the effect that a rubber tube
was employed, not for drainage. but TO
take the place Of a part OF the intestine
which had been removed, Is absolutely
false. because IL is impossible. Had any
would have been brought together, either
by the use OF the button, known In surgery
as Murphy's button, or by simply stitch
ing the two ends TO one another.
"The facts that pus was liberated at the
time Of the operation, that a rubber drain
age tube was employed and that the pa
tents Improvement has been so continu-
Gus and rapid seems 20 clear up a number
of things suggested in the daily press. In
the first place. the abscess was circum-
scribed and completely walled of from the
peritoneal cavity. and the surgeons, there
fore. contented themselves with a simple
incision, opening the abscess cavity for the
removal OF the pus and the introduction
OF a drainage tube 10 prevent any further
accumulation IN the cavity.
I'm the second place. the improvement
in the patients condition would disprove
the rumors that he is, or was, suffering
from any constitutional malady o. serious