Next in importance and value to colchicum in the abortive treatment of gout are salicin, salicylic acid, the sodium salicylate, and the oil of wintergreen. Unlike colchicum, which has no marked effect upon acute rheumatism, these medicines appear to act with similar energy on gout and rheumatism. The rapidity and the almost uniform way with which they allay the inflammatory symptoms in rheumatic fever are well known; their value as specific remedies in both acute and subacute gout is not so generally appreciated. Whether the specific action of colchicum in gout differentiates this disease from rheumatism, or whether the similar action of the salicin compounds indicates that these diseases are allied in their etiology, are questions yet to be solved. The good effects of salicin and the sodium salicylate in many of the forms of irregular gout, and notably in the dyspeptic disorders and the erythematous tegumentary lesions, are especially worthy of notice. In acute attacks of articular gout the salicylic acid or the sodium salicylate, in 15 or 20 grain doses repeated every three or four hours, will often cut short the attack, and will very certainly allay within twenty-four hours the acuteness of the symptoms. As in rheumatism, the medicine should be continued in smaller doses after the acute symptoms have subsided for several days, the tendency to relapse being marked if the drug be discontinued too soon. In subacute articular gout and in the irregular forms of the disease, where the medicine has to be continued for some time, salicin and the oil of wintergreen are to be preferred to salicylic acid and the sodium salicylate. They are less liable to disturb the stomach and to produce toxic effects.
It is unnecessary to describe the treatment of the different forms of irregular gout, inasmuch as the general principles described in the treatment of the gouty dyscrasia involve the most important considerations in the management of these affections.
RACHITIS.1
BY A. JACOBI, M.D.
1 There is a difference of opinion as to the correct spelling of this word, and strong reasons exist to regard the form rhachitis as the proper one. It is true that this spelling of the word has been remarked upon as unorthographical by many, mostly modern, authors. Even Virchow writes "Rachitis," claiming that Glisson took the term from "the then popular rickets." This is a mistake, as H. Rohlffs points out (Deutsches Arch. f. Gesch. d. Med., 1883, p. 294). Rachitis is a Greek word, and was used in the classical time of Hellenism. It has, however, seemed best to preserve here the usual spelling, rachitis, which has become sanctioned by general usage.
DEFINITION.—Rachitis is a general nutritive disorder, almost always of long duration, usually with an introductory stage of weeks or months and a course mostly extending over months or years. Its beginning is mostly gradual, its final recovery slow. It is complicated with or dependent on disorders of the digestive or respiratory apparatuses, which are preceded by a disposition probably created by an undue width of the arteries. It exhibits amongst its prominent symptoms muscular debility; perspiration; anomalies of the subcutaneous tissue, which is either very much infiltrated with fat or deprived of it; disturbances of the intellectual and moral functions, and of those of the large thoracic and abdominal viscera and lymphatic glands; changes in the latter may outlive all others. Its most perceptible symptom, however, consists in an inflammatory disease of the primordial cartilage of the epiphyses, a copious deposit in that region and also under the periosteum of the bones; curvature of the diaphyses, and, while absorption remains intact, softening and retarded ossification of the bone. Without these affections of the osseous system the diagnosis of rachitis is not complete.
ETIOLOGY AND PATHOLOGY.—The nature of rachitis has been considered to be inflammatory by F. A. Walter.2 Renard looked for that inflammation in the periosteum. Guérin emphasizes the vascular increase in periosteum, bone, and marrow; Trousseau and Lasègue the congestive character of the local tumefaction, besides fever and pain. Virchow also3 inclines to the opinion that the rachitical process is of an inflammatory nature, though it be impossible to state the exact cause of the process. Still, he claims that we are no better off in regard to other inflammations of unknown character—for instance, those of the skin—and that we have to look for a future increase of our knowledge of such constitutional predisposition of the organism and of such specific qualities of the blood as will produce the local irritation of the osseous tissue in rachitis. Last, and mainly, it is Kassowitz who seeks the essence of the rachitical process in a chronic inflammation originating in the points of apposition of the growing bones of the foetus or infant. During the chronic inflammation blood-vessels are formed in large numbers, and a morbid congestion takes place in all blood-vessels, but mainly in those of the localities in which new bone is forming; thus in the chondro-epiphyses, in the perichondrium and periosteum, and the sutural substances. Faulty introduction or elimination of lime has nothing to do with this process. It cannot be deposited in the current of a copious circulation; in fact, it is not deposited in the immediate neighborhood of blood-vessels to any extent. Even in otherwise normal bone hyperæmia produced by the experimenter softens the bone, which was fully formed before. If the relative percentage of lime were of any account in the etiology of rachitis, the periosteal and cartilaginous proliferations would find no explanation. But why is it that this peculiar process takes place at an early age only? and in the bone only? Kassowitz urges the fact that the growth of the bone differs in this from the development of all other tissues: that the latter grow uniformly through their whole mass; that the circulation in them is more uniform and carries material through and into every particle simultaneously, while in the bones the only places in which the whole circulation can contribute to their growth—the few blood-vessels distributed in the interior not adding to their growth at all—are the periosteum and the places of apposition between epiphysis and diaphysis. Every morbid irritation, whether resulting from bad air, habitation, and food, or from either chronic or acute ailment, acts on the whole mass of other tissues and organs, but in the bones only on the growing ends or surface.