The Waterbury Democrat. [volume] (Waterbury, Conn.) 1917-1946, 1939-11-09
THE FOCAL INFECTION
PRINCIPLE

It is not a theory nor fad, but
well established principle of
practice that certain systemic all
ments, such as arthritis, neuritis,
valvular heart disease, perhaps
some cases Of peptic ulcer, are
caused by focal infection. That is
to say the joint, nerve, heart valve
or lining of stomach or duodenum
become inflamed from lodgment
therein of germs carried through
the blood stream from indus or
focus elsewhere in the body, in the
tonsils, about the teeth or gums, in
root canal, where the germs have
gained a foothold and multiplied
for weeks, months or years before
the more or less accidental en-
bolism or travelling of colony or
clump Of the germs through the
bloodstream to the place of lodge
ment occurs. Strains of the notori-
Gus Streptococcus are most fire.
quently concerned In focal infection,
especially Streptococcus hemolyticus
(blood destroying )and Streptococ-
Gus virdans (green colonies).
Indiscriminate application of the
focal infection principle in practice
has brought 1t into low repute.
Certainly many sound teeth have
been needlessly sacrificed in a
blind hope of getting rid of the
| poison" On the other hand, ere
grets over the late discovery of a
septic focus heretofore overlooked
or ignored" are even greater In
some instances than those over the
unavailing sacrifice of useful teeth
1t is a matter of the BEST judg-
ment Of doctor and dentor, after
consultation in the individual case
whether to attempt to eradicate q
presumptive focus when this means
removal of a useful tooth. Further
than to say that it Is always q
question of opinion whether an in
fected tooth Is actually the focus
I leave the problem there.
The test of the principle, the only
test, is the result of the removal
of the focus. Not the immediate re-
suit merely; in some cases the i'm
mediate reaction is apparently ag-
gravation Of the joint trouble OF
whatever the condition may be: but
the ultimate result of such treat
ment becomes manifest generally
several weeks, perhaps two or three
months after the extraction or Other
operation.
In case several teeth are infected
and doctor and dentor agree upor
the ACCESSIBILITY of removing them
1t is usually wise, in the presenc,
Of systemic trouble Of any con
siderable severity, to carry out tn,
extractions in several sittings O
intervals Of several weeks, and no
to remove more than two teeth q
any one time. In this way the pa
tient suffers no overwhelming sep
tic flood, but rather gets the ben
eft of a moderate or therapeutic
dose of autogenous bacterin or bac
terial vaccine" the bacteria o
their products absorbed from tn
fresh wound area.
So-called dead" teeth, properl
| SoASd PAApACoo, Oub 4lVb ucdQ d
long as the tooth structure get
any nourishment controversial
point among modern dental path
ologists - have so commonly beef
inculpated and circumstantiall
proved responsible for focal infec
ton, even though the patient Is no
aware Of any trouble In the tooth
that many good dentors. not al
urge extraction of such teeth as tn
safest course In any case. If ha,
a pulpless tooth serving a usefu
purpose In my mouth I'd want NOR
than the mere knowledge of 1t
presence or even an equivoca
X-ray shadow around the root, II
convince me to sacrifice the tooth
On the other hand If I were de
veloping some vague chronic join
condition not otherwise occounte,
for, I'd gamble the tooth agains
the chance of arresting the prog