Dr. Debout stated, as the result of some experiments on animals, in which he was assisted by M. Duroy, that if it sufficed to double the quantity of chloroform in order to transform the anæsthetic dose of that agent into a poisonous dose, it was necessary to quadruple that of ether, and to quintuple that of amylene, in order to arrive at the same result; and that, therefore, the innocuousness of the new agent was still greater than that of sulphuric ether.[[179]]
In a paper which Professor Tourdes, of Strasbourg, read before the Academy of Medicine of Paris, he came also to the conclusion, from a series of experiments and observations, that “amylene was evidently much less dangerous than chloroform, perhaps even than ether.”[[180]]
According to my experiments, amylene ought to be placed between chloroform and ether in respect to its comparative safety by the ordinary methods of administration; and by breathing it from a bag, in the manner previously mentioned, it would be absolutely safe, so long as the right quantity were put into the bag.
Papers on amylene were read to the Academy of Medicine of Paris by Dr. Debout and M. Tourdes, and were reported on favourably. M. Giraldis afterwards presented a paper in which he stated the very favourable result of seventy-nine cases in which he had employed it. The Academy on this occasion recommended the disuse of amylene on account of the accidents which had happened in my hands, apparently overlooking the circumstance that M. Giraldis himself had been much more successful in the use of amylene than in that of chloroform. M. Jobert de Lamballe, the reporter of the Commission, stated that amylene deprived the blood of its red colour and that chloroform does not. But there is no difference between these agents in this respect; the blood retains its proper colour under the use of either of them, unless the effects are carried so far as to interfere with the breathing.
THE MONOCHLORURRETTED
CHLORIDE OF ETHYLE.
This substance was discovered some few years ago by M. M. G. Regnault. It is made by exposing to the sun’s rays a mixture of the vapour of chloride of ethyle (muriatic ether) and chlorine gas. One equivalent of the hydrogen of the chloride of ethyle is replaced by an equivalent of chlorine. Its composition is four atoms carbon, four atoms hydrogen, and two atoms chlorine. It has the same composition as Dutch Liquid, which is made by the combination of olefiant gas and chlorine gas; the specific gravity of its vapour, 3·42, is also the same as that of Dutch liquid, which it resembles also in taste and smell. The boiling point is however different, and it differs from Dutch liquid in not being decomposed by an alcoholic solution of potassa.
I tried several times to make the monochlorurretted chloride of ethyle in 1849 and 1850, but did not succeed in procuring more than a drachm or two at once, owing to the constant over-action of the chlorine and the production of other chlorurretted products. In 1851, however, these products which result from the decomposition of muriatic ether by chlorine gas were recommended in Paris as local applications in rheumatism and other painful affections, and Mr. Mason was kind enough to obtain for me from that capital a pint bottle of a liquid consisting chiefly of the monochlorurretted chloride of ethyle. It was mixed with a certain portion of the bichlorurretted and terchlorurretted products, but I was able to separate by distillation as much of the monochlorurretted product as enabled me to administer it to twenty-two patients. Mr. Mason was, however, not able to obtain any more liquid containing any of the monochlorurretted chloride. What he afterwards was able to obtain had a very high boiling point, and consisted chiefly of chloride of carbon; carbon four atoms, chlorine five atoms.
The monochlorurretted chloride of ethyle resembles chloroform very much in taste and smell, and in its physiological properties. Its boiling point is 149°, whilst that of chloroform is 140°; the specific gravity of its vapour is also lower; for these reasons, it is considerably less volatile than chloroform, and it is therefore pretty certain that it would not be liable to cause the sudden deaths which have occasionally been produced by the administration of chloroform, even if it were given freely and with no great care. The difficulty of procuring it in a state of purity is, however, a barrier to its introduction into practice.
I first administered this preparation in King’s College Hospital, on June 20th, 1851, to a young woman, whilst Mr. Wm. Hewett, the house surgeon, repeated the operation of paring off venereal warts and applying nitric acid. The patient breathed it very readily without appearing to suffer from the pungency. She was a little longer in becoming unconscious than on former occasions from the chloroform, but soon after becoming unconscious, the sensibility of the conjunctiva diminished, and the operation was commenced. There was some flinching, so that she required to be held, but there were no cries or other signs of sensation. Consciousness returned almost immediately, and she seemed more exhilarated than after chloroform. She had had her dinner just before the operation, and at one time, soon after recovering her consciousness, she said that she felt rather sick, but this feeling passed off without vomiting, and she did not remember it afterwards. She did not begin to cry out from the smarting till twenty minutes after the operation, when she had been quite conscious, collected, and rational for a quarter of an hour, although on the two former occasions, after chloroform had been inhaled, she began to cry immediately after the operation, and almost before consciousness had returned. Next day she was very well.
On the following day I administered the same preparation to three patients on whom Mr. Fergusson operated in King’s College Hospital. The first was a boy seven years old, who had the forefinger removed, together with part of the metacarpal bone, on account of a large enchondroma. The second was an infant three months old, which was operated on for hare-lip; and the third was a woman about thirty-five, who had some venereal warts removed from the pudenda. There was no sickness in either of the cases, although the little boy and the woman had taken their dinners just before the operation.