South Bend news-times. (South Bend, Ind.) 1913-1938, 1917-10-05

Bat the motto Of the surgeon
/ must be thorough" 80 matter
/ how huge and gaping the wound
! or how enormous the scar appears
/ likely 20 be. SO far from saving
/ every scrap and vestlre or
skin that is possible. so as 10 close
I IL over, the surgeon deliberately
/ goes around the whole edge OF the
wound with the scissors or scalpel
and cuts of and clears away
strip one-third 10 one-half an inch
( all around the wound Because eX-
| perience shows that although 10
even looks healthy IL has been SO
/ badly damaged by the slash OF the
shell that il is certain 10 break down
and become a source OF infection
TO the wound.
Then the wound is explored by
sterilized fingers and drawn as
widely as is safe and feasible. 10 get
as clear sight Of the sides and bot
tom OF the wound as possible and
every particle Of torn, crushed or
badly damaged flesh or fragments
cut off from their blood supply are
cut and scraped away After
]
over the end of some blunt instru-
ment and the whole inner surface
of the wound scrubbed and scrap
ped with IT,
In wounds that go right through
/ from one side or the limb 70 the
other I have seen good sized strips
of guaze pushed through. and then
the surgeon takes hold of the two
ends. one IN each hand. and saws
/ backward and forward through the
wound so as TO clean and scrub
/ thoroughly out OF the wound all
dead or badly damaged tissues.
This thorough scrubbins out and
laundering Of the wound takes time
and trouble AMI looks az first siEht
rather drastic and heroic for the
patient. but he is. OF course. under
] ether and feels nothing. and the
lrdpiditv with which wounds VIII
/ begin to heal after a thorough
cleaning and "debridement' IS
something most gratifying.
| SO strikinsly Ulr2istakable is the
success of this t.-rugh debride-
ment' that practically all surgeons
of experience. and even advocates
of other methods Of treating wounds
in the war are in favor Of IT, In
fact, some are SO delighted with
il that they claim 20 have invented
it themselves and have attempted
10 deny that il was an essential or
original part Of the Carrel treat
ment But documentary evidence
is fatally against them.
The second great step is that OF
the continual irrigation OF the
wounds with an antiseptic fluid
strong enough to Kill the germs. but
not strong enough 10 be irritatine
or dangerous TO the tissues OF the
body itself This last requirement
is by no means as simple as t
sounds, for ever since the very
first discovery Of antiseptics boy
Lister the medical profession had
been driven more and more strong
! ~ 10 the conclusion that almost all
antiseptics capable OF destroying
8 germs were even more capable Of
damaging the tissues Of the body
To put it very briefly, we We're
more easily poisoned 10y them than
our germ visitors were.
So far had this conviction gone
2 that the vast majority OF surgeons
3 objected 10 the very name anti
r septic, which means. literally
against infection" 10 put il very
2 crudely. poisoning the germs after
they had got into the wound. They
S insisted upon a new term invented
= long after Lister. Asepsis. which
z means without infection, neEer
IL nI
2 wound from the patients body. the
S surgeons hands or instruments.
The majority Of our surgical oper-
atoms within the last 0 years have
e been carried out on this plan us
r ing no germicides on the instru-
q ments or surgeons hands and put
d ting nothing at all in the wound
9 except sterilized water or "a little
alcohol so that Il was entirely
o. against our unodern and. in very
s recent sense, traditional practice
o. ard ideas TO attempt 20 use anti
- septics for the purpose of killing
s the germs in the wounds
n A hundred eager DIRECTORS were
s ready 10 prove al once that any an
n tiseptic fluid. necessarily a poison
10 10 cell life, was and must be lar
more dangerous 20 the cells Of the
II patients body than 20 the germs
10 And this accounted for. IN con-
Z siderable degree. the tremendous
y; prejudice and opposition on the
"a part Of the medical profession to
o the Carrel treatment i'm the begin
n ming. a prejudice that was anytaine
but creditable 10 the 0pen-minednes.
i of the profession But in the lau-
n suage Of famous -president
1T was a condition and not thecr
n that confronted u.s." Although rhf
~ lCarrel Ia Rim ant.septic fluid ne.
n oreticaIly should do more dama-e
4 10 the patients body than ir did t1
- the germs there was absolutely nl
! denying or getting away from rne
fact that a patient treated WIN d
+. rot well in less than half the time
- required under any other method
Even though a few cells were dr-
stroyed. the millions left seemed
20 be invigorated by the process
The Carrel treatment even rndt'
IFS Vulnerable notifications Aai
done more 20 save Hfe save limbs
from anputation. 20 diminish sur