Shell-shock and momentary burial: Muscular weakness, followed (third day) by complete paralysis (save neck and head). Diagnostic hypotheses.
Case 411. (Léri, Froment and Mahar, July, 1915.)
A big shell burst October 3, 1914, a little over 3 meters from a soldier crouching in a shallow Saint Mihiel trench. The shell made a hole two meters in diameter and 1.5 meters deep, and covered the man with loose earth, from which he was readily released. During the next few days, the man found difficulty in following his comrades on short marches (1 to 4 kilometers). He was unable to buckle on his knapsack. The patient was himself not alarmed at his condition.
Up to the time of his accident, this man, a farmer, had never had any motor trouble, nor was there any nervous disorder in any of his relatives. He had been in several conflicts, August 24-25, September 4-6, in the Argonne and in the Haute Meuse, and he had never found it hard to keep up with his comrades. In fact, once in the Haute Meuse, he took part in an exceedingly difficult and hasty retreat, and only a week before the shell-shock above described he had put in a very long march. Thus a man, perfectly normal before the shock, had fallen into a general state of slight muscular paralysis.
On the third day very suddenly this paralysis became complete. The wounded man, while sitting in the trench, found that he could not stand up either with or without the use of his hands. Now, that very morning he had marched three kilometers from his cantonment to the trench. He was supported on the way to the relief post, hardly 200 meters away, and was then sent to the hospital at Bar-le-Duc. At this time he was so weak that he had to be fed like a child.
For a period of three weeks he lay, unable to rise or sit up. There was one exception to the generalization of the paresis: the movements of the head and neck were normal. A general muscular atrophy set in during the three months, but gradually diminished in amount. The diagnosis of myopathy was made, based upon the evident degree of lumbar wasting, kyphosis, the man’s attitude, gait, manner of rising, galvanotonic contractions.
The history was, of course, rather against the diagnosis of myopathy, as well as the marked atrophy of the hands and the existence of an incomplete R. D. Moreover the fact that he improved may be regarded as rendering the diagnosis of myopathy doubtful.
Other diagnoses, less likely than that of myopathy, may be considered,—hematomyelia, recurrent traumatic poliomyelitis affecting the anterior horns, polyneuritis.
Without making decision as to the nature of this case, Léri proposes the question whether there is a shell-shock myopathy and whether there is a myopathy due to gas or to hemorrhage?