[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]
February 28, 1891

Absence of Uterus.

JAMA. 1891;XVI(9):323. doi:10.1001/jama.1891.02410610035019

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


To the Editor:  —The interesting case reported in No. 8 of The Journal by Dr. McShane, of Carmel, Ind., recalls to mind a case I had a few years since. A lady, aged 24 years, consulted me to ascertain why she could not have children. She had been married six years, was well developed, not masculine; breasts were normal, the pudendum normal, and well covered with hair.I found by digital examination a good-sized vagina, but no cervix uteri; in fact, there was nothing but a smooth, well arched vagina, about 4 inches in depth. I introduced a sound into the bladder, and with my finger in the rectum I could readily feel the sound, showing that there was complete absence of the uterus.Having been a member of the Association for several years, I think it best to let well enough alone and publish The Journal at Chicago.Oneida,

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