[Skip to Content]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address 34.204.202.44. Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
[Skip to Content Landing]
Article
August 31, 1912

PUERPERAL INFECTION: A STUDY OF SOME OF THE MOST INTERESTING AND PRACTICAL FEATURES OF THE DISEASE

JAMA. 1912;LIX(9):703-708. doi:10.1001/jama.1912.04270080385005
Abstract

From the study of recent literature and also from personal observation, I am impressed by the great difference of opinion that exists concerning the treatment of puerperal infection. My investigations indicate that too much local treatment continues in use, mostly the result of tradition. The clinician has not kept pace with the pathologist in the study of infections and immunity.

I. EXTRACTS FROM GERMAN AND AMERICAN LITERATURE ON PUERPERAL INFECTION  Schottmüller1 is credited with reawakening interest in study of anaerobic infection in puerperal sepsis; he showed anaerobes in the blood and demonstrated that they are a frequent cause of thrombophlebitis.Bondy2 reports one hundred abortions of which eleven were from anaerobic streptococcus infections. In one of these cases lie obtained the anaerobic streptococci in pure culture from the blood and in one from a pelvic exudate.Fellner3 believes in non-interference except when retained tissues cause severe intoxication

×