[Skip to Content]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
[Skip to Content Landing]
September 11, 1926


JAMA. 1926;87(11):851-852. doi:10.1001/jama.1926.02680110051019

Is there a physiologic basis for the surgical operation of ramisectomy as a relief in spasticity of the extremities? Is the operation successful? The latter may be true without the former, but the history of the solution of other scientific problems would not bear out such a supposition. Since Hunter's untimely death, the larger number of scientific contributions have appeared from those whose conclusions diametrically oppose those of Royle and Hunter. These contributions have included both experimental and clinical data. In this issue Dr. Royle1 presents his view of these observations, contributing, however, no further scientific facts as evidence of his beliefs.

Royle's criticisms of the work of Kanavel, Pollock and Davis are concerned for the most part with the type of animal and the method of decerebration used in their experiments, together with a statement that the patients reported on by them were not suited for the operation.

First Page Preview View Large
First page PDF preview
First page PDF preview