| Description | Notes relating to the treatment of calculi in the bladder. Notes include a table 'showing the number of cases and mortility of vesical calculi operated upon in the Civic ?Hospilic [or ?Hospital] Hyderabad Sind for the year 1892'. Notes include a 'Table of Statistics showing: - 1. the abandonment of the cutting operation 2. the extension of the sphere of lithotrity 3. and the introduction of perineal lithotrity, and comparative rates of mortality of these operations' for 1889 - 1893. Notes also include information presented in graphs.
Includes draft of 'A Report on the Complete Abandonment of the operation for removing calculi entire from the bladder and the different methods employed instead at the Civil Hospital Hyderabad Sindh by Surgeon Major J. Forbes Keith MD & CM. Aber. Civil Surgeon and superintendent out of the Medical School etc etc'. The report begins with: 'Seeing a discussion by the Medical Society of London in the Lancet of 21st March 1891 Concerning the Various methods adopted at the present time for removing calculi from the bladder I thought it my duty to lay before the profession a report on the complete abandonment of the operation for removing calculi entire from the bladder and the various methods employed instead in the Civil hospital under my charge'. The report refers to 'Surgeon Major Keegan' [see the Reprint MSU 1095/2/7/6].
Notes also include a written document entitled 'Prostatic ?Lithotimity'.
Includes draft of 'An Account of another method for Crushing Calculi in the bladder too large for the largest lithotrities, by Surgeon Lieut. Col. J. F. Keith MD & CM Aber. I.M.S. Civil Surgeon and superintendent of the Medical School Hyderabad Sindh'. This account begins with: 'The following case is an illustration of another method, in addition to those published in the Indian Medical Record of 1st December last, for the removal from the female bladder of calculi whose diameters are too large for the screws of the largest lithotrities'. Keith describes: 'the idea suddenly occurred to me to hit the end of the lithotrite with a hammer and break up the stone, in the first instance, in that [corrected to 'this'] way; and when the fragments were small enough to coincide with the screw of the lithotrite all the more obstinate difficulties connected with the size of the stone would be surmounted. The idea was entertained with a certain amount of enthusiasm ...' |