If the exudation be in considerable quantity, three or four weeks may be required for its absorption. If this process is sluggish, can we by medicines promote it? Mercury has lost its old reputation as a remedy for this purpose. Iodine externally, and iodide of potassium in decided doses, still retain, to a limited extent, the confidence of practitioners. Preparations of iron, especially the muriatic tincture, have had better effects in the hands of the writer than any other remedy. Large blisters cause great discomfort, and their utility is very questionable. Alkalies possess the power of dissolving exudation, and of these the most efficient is ammonia, especially carbonate of ammonium in doses of from five to ten grains. Saline laxatives, by producing watery stools, have some power in reducing the amount of fluid. Some authors recommend highly the acetate and citrate of potassium dissolved in a decoction of scoparium. J. W. Hunt55 places most reliance upon pilocarpus pinnatus, which has given him most marked and successful results, even where other remedies have failed. He pushes it to the extent of producing extreme diaphoresis. He commences with thirty minims of the fluid extract four times daily, rapidly increasing the quantity and the frequency of the doses to the extent of fluidrachm j every two hours. The one-eighth of a grain of its alkaloid, pilocarpine, given hypodermically, acts very promptly. He admits that the vital forces are so exhausted by this treatment as to require at once the administration of tonics, especially of iron with strong food. Grasset56 reported 5 cases of effusion treated by jaborandi. They were cases of pleurisy without fever or sign of inflammation—cases which ordinarily require several blisters to produce an effect.
55 Dublin Journal Med. Sci., Dec., 1882.
56 Journal de Thérapeutique, Avril, 1876.
Ernest Wernaere57 reported 7 cases of acute pleurisy where there was considerable febrile reaction. Jaborandi was effectual in every case, and the effusion rapidly disappeared after two doses of the infusion. The fever at the same time was diminished, and there was no return of it, as frequently occurs in non-inflammatory cases. It has less effect upon children than upon adults. In a case of Wernaere's only one dose was given.
57 Thèse de Paris, 1876.
The value of counter-irritants has been frequently questioned of late years. Fly blisters give relief in limited dry pleurisy. Many practitioners have great confidence in large blisters used over the chest after the febrile stage has subsided. Woillez, in tabulating the results of the various means of promoting absorption, puts purgatives first in utility, and blisters last. Blisters, he claims, had no effect in 90 per cent. of cases. The iodide of iron, in pills, or the compound syrup of the iodide of iron and manganese, with improved digestive powers, are the best means of promoting absorption. At this period of the disease it is an advantage to lessen, within certain limits, the amount of fluid taken into the stomach, forcing the blood to abstract water by absorption from the chest. Jaborandi has the same effect by withdrawing water from the blood.
There are cases of excessive quantity of fluid, and others which resist all drugs given to promote absorption. Among these are some acute cases, but many of a subacute and chronic nature, where the effusion remains stationary, injuring respiration and often mechanically endangering life. This occurred in nearly one-third of Mason's cases.
Thoracentesis.—In studying the history of this operation we have seen how frequently, since the time of Hippocrates, it has been in favor with practitioners, and then has fallen into discredit. During the past thirty years, thanks especially to Bowditch and Trousseau, its unquestionable value has been established, and is now universally recognized. Improved knowledge of pathology, safe and easily-applied instruments, together with the discovery, by Lister, of the means of securing the operation from septic dangers, have perfected this surgical treatment. Observation in hundreds of cases has proved that, properly used, it is almost without risk. As a means of diagnosis it is the most accurate we possess; as a treatment for affording positive relief it is a boon to suffering humanity; as a method of cure it has been most successful.
Such being the estimate of its value, let us study, 1st, the indications for its use; 2d, the manner of operating; 3d, and finally, the objections founded upon the accidents that have followed its application.
The indications are met with in two conditions—that of excessive accumulation of fluid, and where there is non-absorption of the effused liquid. In going over the symptoms we have seen the effects of large collections of fluid in the pleura—how the heart is pushed out of its normal position, and how the large blood-vessels are distorted. We have called attention to the retraction and compression of the lung until in many cases it is airless, and thus not able to perform its functions. We have shown that all the adjoining organs and cavities are sometimes forcibly thrown out of the position nature placed them in. The liver is pressed forward into the abdominal cavity, and the diaphragm is unable, from mechanical pressure, to ascend and contract. The mediastinum, with its contents, is materially interfered with. Observation has shown that such a state is a very dangerous one. Not only does it cause great dyspnoea, pain, and oppression, but the risk to life is imminent. In a number of instances it has caused death. Trousseau tells us of 3 deaths; Lacaze reports others. Bowditch, having seen several fatal cases produced by the quantity of fluid, worked with energy and perseverance until he was furnished by Wyman with his ingenious aspirator, of which he promptly availed himself, notwithstanding the objections he met with from others. "Ridicule," he says, "was pointed at me by some high in surgery: at first the whole medical profession was against me." He could not stand still and see men die whose lives could be saved. Chew had a patient die suddenly from this cause. Many authors mention cases of death from the large amount of fluid. Wilson Fox summed up from the records between 50 and 60 deaths from effusion in the pleural sac. Moreover, many patients have died where the disease was not recognized. The condition of the circulatory apparatus is such that we can readily understand that emboli would form in the heart, in the large blood-vessels, and in the parenchyma of the lung itself. These clots produce grave results. If they form in the pulmonary veins or in the left heart, they determine an embolic obstruction of the central artery, with all its consequences—apoplexy, hemiplegia, etc. If it forms in the right heart or in the pulmonary artery, it may produce rapid aphasia and death (Paget). Louis was certainly wrong when from his 150 cases of pleurisy he deduced the law that none died of this disease per se. It is thus a matter of the utmost importance that we should be able to recognize that there is a quantity of fluid capable of producing such serious results. The call for relief and diminution of the amount of fluid by thoracentesis is urgent. What amount is dangerous to life, and how can we arrive at an accurate estimate? To what extent can we judge by the subjective symptoms, especially by the dyspnoea? Andral and Trousseau both speak of it as a very fallacious and uncertain symptom, and by itself may be unimportant as an indication. In the beginning of the disease we find suffocating dyspnoea for a time when there is very little fluid. Diffusible stimulants and anodynes give relief. On the other hand, there are patients who with large amounts of fluid, even two quarts, walk about with but little difficulty in breathing, and attend to their pursuits unconscious of being in danger of sudden death. Bowditch58 speaks of several fatal cases in simple pleurisy from excessive amounts, "from sudden failure of the power of the heart, with or without more or less dyspnoea." This is especially the case where the fluid forms insidiously, without marked general symptoms. When, however, we meet with dyspnoea, together with other and more reliable symptoms, it is very significant of danger, and ought to force us to resort to thoracentesis to afford mechanical relief. If we rely upon general symptoms, we may be deceived as to the amount of fluid, and serious results may follow. However, we must bear in mind that the most imperative reasons for thoracentesis are the signs of threatened failure of cardiac power. Bowditch lays down the rule that "if the dyspnoea is excessive, so as to amount to permanent orthopnoea, or if I learn that within a few hours previous to my visit there has been even one attack of momentary orthopnoea during which the patient felt as if the breath would be wholly lost, I tap immediately, provided I am sure that there is even a small quantity of fluid in the pleural cavity, and that it is apparently the chief or perhaps only cause of the orthopnoea. I fear," he says, "death may occur before my next visit." This eminent American authority on this subject lays down as the result of his vast experience the rule that "when a patient comes under notice in whom a large quantity of fluid has been long effused, I advise thoracentesis as the first remedy." The author ventures to assert that where the amount is excessive there is imminent danger to life from the mechanical results of the presence of the fluid, even during the febrile stages; consequently thoracentesis is urgently necessary. I am confirmed in this view by Dieulafoy, Fernet, Clifford Allbutt, Marshall, and Cross. Barnes59 says in all cases where the effusion is large and where dyspnoea is urgent it is better to operate at once. "It is my practice to operate at once when the chest is two parts filled with water, without waiting for urgent dyspnoea." Dieulafoy, in discussing these questions, states,60 after consulting all the authorities accessible to him, that death has never been caused by less than two liters (equivalent to 62½ fluidounces), except in one instance reported by Blackey, where after death there was found 1500 grammes (47 fluidounces). In adults with well-formed chests he considers 1800 or 2000 grammes as the amount demanding surgical interference. He candidly acknowledges that he cannot make this an absolute rule, because the capacity of the pleural sacs must necessarily vary in different individuals according to their height, breadth, development of thoracic muscles, sex, etc.; consequently, the inconveniences and functional disturbances produced by a given quantity of fluid in the chest must be different in different persons. But how can we arrive at an accurate estimate of the amount in the chest? Dieulafoy,61 in calculating the quantity, states that if it amounts to 1200 grammes when it reaches the sixth intercostal space, it ought to be valued at 2000 grammes when it is found at the third intercostal space. This is only approximative and unreliable. The height of liquid is not always proportional to quantity. It varies with size of chest, resistance of organs and walls, and condition of lungs. Potain insisted upon the difficulties that the pulmonary hyperæmia caused in the diagnosis, the abundance of fluid, the variable degree of yielding of the lung, and the adhesions which have drawn the walls to the lung. The true way of judging of the necessity for the operation is from the grave functional disturbances and by the definite positive physical signs which give us unmistakable indications which we dare not neglect. We can calculate the amount of the effusion by the level of the flatness on percussion, by mensuration with the cyrtometer, and of the impaired thoracic movements by the stethometer. Physical examination reveals the extent of the displacement of the heart and other viscera. The displacement of the abdominal viscera, the liver, the spleen, and the stomach shows that there must be excessive amount of effused fluid in pleura—enough to produce serious intra-thoracic pressure. This is a condition demanding surgical interference. The Skodaic resonance under the clavicle, the complete flatness being horizontal instead of giving us the Ellis curve, impaired resonance over the posterior triangle becoming absolute dulness, the presence of cavernous or amphoric respiration near the sternal-clavicular articulation, and, in rare instances, subclavian murmur from pressure upon the subclavian artery,—all these signs give unmistakable evidences that the pleural cavity is full of fluid. It is important, in considering the treatment, to form a correct estimate of the degree of intra-thoracic pressure, for Erichson has shown that the mere collapse of a lung affects but little the facility of the circulation through it; its compression or forcible collapse necessarily retards the circulation and throws extra work upon the already overburdened heart. The more precise our physical diagnosis, the more appropriate will be our treatment. Douglass Powell found the intra-thoracic pressure to vary from a – pressure to ½ and 1½ inches of mercury at the commencement, and from –1/8 to –½, and even –1, inch mercury at the termination of paracentesis, there being in all cases a more or less considerable amount of fluid still remaining in the pleura. He states, as the result of his own observations, that in recent cases the period of effusion at which the intra-thoracic pressure is converted from a – pressure or zero to a positive pressure upon the lung and heart is marked clinically (1) by the flatness mounting up above the third cartilage (patient in sitting position), and (2) by the Skodaic resonance becoming changed from the full note to a more tubular quality. The extent of Skodaic resonance is a very valuable indication of the amount of fluid, and consequently of the propriety of operating. If this tympanitic resonance be down to the third rib, and the cyrtometer shows no decided enlargement, we had better not interfere. On the other hand, if the Skodaic sign is not heard, and instead there is flatness, we will be sure to find decided increased measurements and tubular breathing behind. Under such circumstances we may feel confident of positive intra-thoracic pressure of from one inch to one inch and a half of mercury—an amount sufficient to compress the lung and interfere with the heart's action. There is some danger of syncope, even if the patient remains motionless in bed, but if he moves about he is in imminent danger. The subject is annoyed by a straining retching cough with frothy, viscid sputa with perhaps some discolored points. The heart and the lung of the healthy side give warning of the danger, which ought never to pass unheeded. A murmur may be heard over the displaced heart, and over the lung on the unaffected side we may hear a fine crepitant râle, showing pulmonary hyperæmia and resulting oedema. The syphon or aspirator will afford, by withdrawing perhaps a quart, the necessary relief. Nature will do the rest in a large proportion of cases.