One day an official in Dresden brought his wife to me, who was 41 years of age. The couple, all of whose children had died soon after birth, longed once more for children. The woman had aborted several times, and both were intelligent enough to see that everything could not be right with the sexual organs, and even begged for a gynæcological examination. The result was in a few words: inflammation of both lips of the uterus, a thickening of the cervical canal with a swelling of the posterior uterine wall as hard as cartilage, and retroversio uteri. Menstruation too early, dysmenorrhoea, blood dark, tarry, passing in clots. Yellowish, fetid leucorrhoea. Stools retained, appetite changeable; pains in the broad ligaments on both sides during rest as well as on exertion. The so-called "facies uterina"--weeps much. Frequent exclamations on the distastefulness of life since the death of all her children, and on account of her present childlessness. Should I register in my journal in the beginning of a scirrhus? I wrote simply: metritis chronica; intumescentia labiorum orificii et colli uteri.
Prognosis, not unfavorable as far as regards the swelling, after my already well-tested experience with _Aur. mur. nat._ But how about the removal of sterility acquired in her 41st year. I was more cautious about this. The cure took six months, and was not only accompanied by absorption of the affected parts, but the woman became pregnant in good time and gave birth to a boy with comparative comfort. Thus would the wishes of the worthy couple have been fulfilled, if their joy had not been banished once more by the death of the child in four weeks from an attack of eclampsia.
I now come in conclusion to a gratifying case, which I relate partly because we make ourselves guilty of sins of omission in certain instances through neglect of the needful investigation. A woman in her twentieth year, quite healthy, had been delivered with forceps for the first time two years before, nominally on account of deficient labor pains. There was nothing unusual about the confinement. Immediately after the first getting up, she began to have constant pain in the right side of the uterine region, and soon a feeling "as if something would fall out of the parts." The family physician paid no attention to these persistent complaints for a whole year, until finally a constantly increasing leucorrhoea demanded an examination. He now expressed himself as unable to make a diagnosis alone, and the lady was referred to a celebrated gynæcologist in Leipsic. Cauterizations were now undergone at the professor's house at short intervals, and further treatment of a similar character was to be carried out at the patient's own house, which was, however, discontinued when the patient was referred to me. Examination showed: metritis following upon sub-involution of the uterus, anteversion with prolapsus of the whole organ. Both uterine lips were swollen, and on examination with the speculum a greenish-yellow discharge was seen to flow from the uterus. All local treatment was discontinued, the woman received for the first time in April, 1876, _Aur. mur. nat._, and in June, 1876, again became pregnant; the treatment with gold was continued until the 8th month of pregnancy, in consequence of which the uterus was found in its normal position on examination twelve days after her safe confinement on March 30th. The menses, which up to this time had been very painful, returned for the first time on the 25th of April, and were quite free from suffering.