[Skip to Content]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address 34.204.187.106. Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
[Skip to Content Landing]
Article
October 14, 1893

PHLYCTENULAR OPHTHALMIA.Read in the Section on Ophthalmology at the Forty-Fourth Annual Meeting of the American Medical Association.

Author Affiliations

PROFESSOR OF OPHTHALMOLOGY, OTOLOGY AND MEDICAL JURISPRUDENCE IN THE HOSPITAL COLLEGE OF MEDICINE, MEDICAL DEPARTMENT OF THE CENTRAL UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY.

JAMA. 1893;XXI(16):558-560. doi:10.1001/jama.1893.02420680008002a

This article is only available in the PDF format. Download the PDF to view the article, as well as its associated figures and tables.

Abstract

Phlyctenular ophthalmia has been so variously described by writers and teachers it would seem but fair to assume that each may have been faithful in describing that form most frequently observed in his practice. Believing no form of phlyctenular ophthalmia should be regarded as a merely local form of disease, calling for local treatment alone, I am led to introduce the subject in its clinical aspects. It is certain the herpetic disease described by Stellwag is just as much a local manifestation of constitutional dyscrasia as are the serpiginous ulcers, or the more common conoidal masses of lymphoid cells described by the old writers as scrofulous and syphilitic ophthalmia. It is very important to distinguish between the phlyctenular diseases of miasmatic and malarious localities, and those observed in strumous, rachitic and syphilitic subjects. According to some writers it would be difficult to determine the syphilitic from the non-syphilitic cases; but

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