[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]
March 11, 1905


JAMA. 1905;XLIV(10):794-795. doi:10.1001/jama.1905.02500370042004

Whether one is a "peripheralist" with Bethe, Apathy, Kennedy, Ballance and Stewart, or a "centralist" with Kölliker, Howell and Huber as regards the manner of peripheral nerve repair after suture, is of little practical moment to the clinical worker. The process of regeneration in the peripheral portion of a divided nerve at first may be autogenous, but permanent repair is possible only by union with the proximal segment, whose benign influence in restoring function is by no means small. Secondary suture and anastomosis of divided peripheral nerves are not only invaluable procedures in the treatment of isolated lesions of peripheral nerves of the extremities, is current medical literature attests, but the work, happily, has been extended to the treatment of many different types of peripheral and spinal palsies. This is notably true in operative repair of chronic facial palsy after mastoid disease, and in old cases of Bell's palsy; in