Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-s2hrs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-06T07:16:30.490Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Clinical Pathology of Aural Discharges1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 August 2007

Wyatt Wingrave
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Special Articles
Information
The Journal of Laryngology, Rhinology, and Otology , Volume 23 , Issue 7 , July 1908 , pp. 347 - 363
Copyright
Copyright © JLO (1984) Limited 1908

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

(1)Abbott, .—“Acid-fast Bacilli,” “Principles of Bacteriology,” 1906.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(2)Abbotts, and Gildershain, .—Brit. Med. Journ., 1, 1902.Google Scholar
(3)Andrewes, .—“Aërial Microbes,” Lancet, 1902.Google Scholar
(4)Crookshank, .—“Spiral Form of Cladothrix,” “Text-book of Bacteriology,” 1905.Google Scholar
(5)Eschle, .—Deutsch. med. Wochenschr., Berlin, 1883, ix, p. 441.Google Scholar
(6)Eyre, .—“Pyogenic Activities of the Pneumococcus,” Lancet, 02, 1908.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(7)Goadby, .—“Spirochæte and Aural Infection from Mouth,” Lancet, 03, 1907.Google Scholar
(8)Gordon, .—“Meningoeoccus Culture,” Brit. Med. Journ., 1907.Google Scholar
(9)Gulland, .—“Rôle of the Lymphocyte,” Brit. Med. Journ., 1904Google Scholar
Muir, Beattie, Drysdale, Fergusson, Houston, McCallum, Melland.Google Scholar
(10)Horne, Jobson.—Journ. of Laryngol., Rhinol., and Otol., 1903.Google Scholar
(11)Klein, .—“Bacillus proteus vulgaris and Ptomaine Producer,” Lancet, 1908.Google Scholar
(12)Klotz, .—“Evidence afforded by Aural Discharge,” Brit. Med. Journ., 02, 1908.Google Scholar
(13)McEwen, .—“Pyogenie Diseases of Brain and Spinal Cord,” 1893.Google Scholar
(14)McLennan, .—“Spirochæte,” Brit. Med. Journ., 05, 1906, 11, 1907.Google Scholar
(15)Miller, .—“Bacteria of Middle-ear Disease,” Brit. Med. Journ., 12, 1907.Google Scholar
(16)Milligan, .—Brit. Med. Joum., 10, 1907.Google Scholar
(17)Milligan, .—Brit. Med. Journ., 03, 1908.Google Scholar
(18)Muir, and Ritchie, .—“Manual of Bacteriology,” 1897.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(19)Nourse, .—Brit. Med. Journ., 10, 1907.Google Scholar
(20)Osler, .—“Pneumococcal Infections,” Med. Soc. Lond., 12, 1907.Google Scholar
(21)Rankin, .—“Meningococcus,” Lancet, 1907.Google Scholar
(22)Rist, .—“1Anaërobes and Fœtid Otitis,” Brit. Med. Journ., 1901.Google Scholar
(23)Robson, Mayo.—“Clinical Diagnosis,” Brit. Med. Journ., 03, 1906.Google ScholarPubMed
(24)Rolleston, and Higgs, .—Brit. Med. Journ., 05, 1907.Google Scholar
(25)San Felici, and Metschnikoff, .—Brit. Med. Journ., 1904.Google Scholar
(26)Schottmüller, .—Münch. med. Wochenschr., 1903, xx, xxiGoogle Scholar
Schottmüller, .—Münch. med. Wochenschr., 1905, xxx.Google Scholar
(27)Shennan, .—“Spirochæta refringens,” Lancet, 03, 1906.Google Scholar
(28)Simionescu, .—“Bacteriology of Fœtid Otitis,” Arch. Gén. de Méd., 03, 1906Google Scholar
Simionescu, Brit. Med. Journ., t.p., 1907.Google Scholar
(29)Smith, Maceuen.—“Otogenous Sepsis,” Brit. Med. Journ., 1906.Google Scholar
(30)Snydracker, .—“Microscopical Examination of Aural Discharge,” Archive of Otol., xxx, No. 6.Google Scholar
(31)Symmus, and Wilson, .—“Meningococcus,” Brit. Med. Journ., 1907.Google Scholar
(32)Tunnicliffe, .—“Bacillus fusiform,” Journ. of Infec. Dis., 1906.Google Scholar
(33)Wingrave, .—“Spirochsætæ in Aural Discharges,” Journ. of Laryngol., Rhinol., and Otol., 1907.Google Scholar
(34)Wingrave, .—“One Hundred Cases of Middle-ear Suppuration,” Journ. of Laryngol., Rhinol., and Otol., 1903.Google Scholar
(35)Wright, A. E..—“Bacillus hastilis,” Lancet, 1904.Google Scholar