Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-8bhkd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-03T07:58:01.956Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Wassermann and Luetin Reactions in Leprosy

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 May 2009

William Fletcher
William Fletcher
Affiliation:
Pathologist, Institute for Medical Research, Kuala Lumpur, Federated Malay States.
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

1. One hundred lepers were examined by Browning, Cruickshank and McKenzie's modification of the Wassermann reaction with positive results in 22 cases. The amount of complement deviated was in some cases exceptionally large.

2. In a control group of 110 non-leprous persons there were 11 positive reactions.

3. In only one of the lepers was there visible evidence of former venereal disease but 33 of the lepers admitted that they had suffered from syphilis or from chancres, and of these 33, 13 reacted positively, while only nine of the remaining 66 gave positive reactions.

4. In the control group, 21 admitted former syphilitic infection and, of these, eight reacted positively; among the remaining 89, who denied syphilis, there were three positive reactions.

5. There were 12 positive reactions among 44 cases of tubercular leprosy and 10 positive reactions among 56 cases of the anaesthetic type.

6. The average duration of the disease, among the 22 lepers who reacted positively, was four years and eight months, as compared with an average of three years and eight months for the 78 patients who reacted negatively; but among the latter there were many old-standing cases.

7. Seventeen of the 22 positive cases were in an advanced stage of leprosy and in some of them the disease was progressing; but among those lepers who reacted negatively there were also many advanced and progressing cases.

8. Serum from the lesions in 10 of the lepers who reacted positively was examined by dark-ground illumination, but in no case was the Treponema pallidum found.

9. The luetin test was applied to 21 lepers, with negative results in every instance; 13 of these cases gave positive and eight gave negative Wassermann reactions. The test was also applied to a control group of non-leprous persons selected because they were likely to be latent syphilitics. In this group there were 11 positive luetin reactions.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Hygiene , Volume 15 , Issue 1 , July 1915 , pp. 102 - 126
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1915

References

REFERENCES

Baermann, and Wetter, (1910). Die Wassermann, Neisser-Brucksche Reaktion in den Tropen. München. med. Wochenschr. lvii. 2131, quoted by H. D. Bloomberg (7).Google Scholar
Bloomberg, H. D. (1911). The Wassermann reaction in leprosy, syphilis and yaws. Philippine Journal of Science, vi. 335.Google Scholar
Browning, C. and McKenzie, J.Recent methods in the diagnosis and treatment of syphilis.Google Scholar
Clegg, M. T. (VII. 1913). The absence of the luetin reaction on lepers showing a positive Wassermann reaction. Treasury Dept. U. S. Pub. Health Bulletin and Tropical Dis. Bull. 1914, p. 191.Google Scholar
Ehlers, E. J. and Bourret, G. (1909). La réaction de Wassermann dans le lèpre. Lepra, xi. 368.Google Scholar
Eitner, E. (1906). Wien. klin. Wochenschr. Quoted by Ehlers and Bourret in Lepra, xi. 368.Google Scholar
Fox, H. (V. 1910). The Wassermann and Noguchi complement fixation test in leprosy. American Journ. Med. Sc. and Lepra, xiii. 107.Google Scholar
Jundell, J., Almquist, J. and Sandmann, C. (1908). Wassermanns Syphilis-reaktion bei Lepra. Centralblatt für inn. Med. and Lepra, xi. 368.Google Scholar
McIntosh, J. and Fildes, P. Syphilis from the modern standpoint, p. 151.Google Scholar
Montesanto, D. and Sotiriadès, D. (VIII. 1910). La Séro-réaction de Wassermann dans 48 cas de lèpre. Presse Méd. and Lepra, xii. 85.Google Scholar
Photinos, G. and Michaélidès, N.La Séro-réaction de Wassermann et la cuti-réaction de Pirquet dans le lèpre. Lepra, xii. 207.Google Scholar
Principal Medical Officer (1913). Medical Report for the Federated Malay States.Google Scholar
Recio, A. (1909). Sanidad y Beneficencia, Habana, and Lepra, ix. 178.Google Scholar
Rocamora, J. P.Le Salvarsan dans le lèpre; son influence sur le Wassermann dans cette Maladie. Lepra, xiii. 4.Google Scholar
Schnitter, F. (1914). Leprosy in its relation to treponematous disease. The Military Surgeon, p. 311, and Tropical Dis. Bull. p. 493.Google Scholar
Slatineanu, and Daniélopolu, (1908). Sur la présence d'anticorps spécifiques dans le sérum de malades atteints de lèpre. C. r. de la soc. de biol. Quoted by Ehlers and Bourret in Lepra, xi.Google Scholar
Wechselmann, W. and Meier, G. (1908). Wassermannsche Reaktion in einem Falle von Lepra. Deutsche med. Wochenschr. 1339 and Lepra, viii. 226.Google Scholar