[塔贝尔斯梅毒之争:19 世纪末关于塔贝尔斯背畸形和进行性瘫痪病因的争论]。

IF 0.6 4区 医学 Q4 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Fortschritte Der Neurologie Psychiatrie Pub Date : 2024-12-01 Epub Date: 2023-01-04 DOI:10.1055/a-1972-3201
Holger Steinberg
{"title":"[塔贝尔斯梅毒之争:19 世纪末关于塔贝尔斯背畸形和进行性瘫痪病因的争论]。","authors":"Holger Steinberg","doi":"10.1055/a-1972-3201","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>For some years now, the incidence of syphilis and neuroluetic clinical pictures has been increasing. As a result, tabes dorsalis and progressive paralysis are once again gaining relevance in neurology. In the last two decades of the 19th century, there was a heated debate in German neurology about the understanding of the aetiology of these conditions, the so-called 'tabes syphilis controversy'. In 1879, Wilhelm Erb had called on the German neurological community in a much-noticed lecture to finally tackle the problem to unequivocally identify the cause of tabes dorsalis. Mainly on the basis of disease statistics he himself postulated a previous syphilitic infection as of key importance. Answering this question was urgent, because the proportion of patients in psychiatric institutions suffering from progressive paralysis, to which tabes was seen in close parallel, was rapidly increasing. The Berlin neurologists Carl Westphal, Ernst Julius Remak, Martin Bernhardt and Ernst Victor von Leyden regarded Erb's thesis as a gauntlet. They saw the causes of tabes and progressive paralysis in social impoverishment such as damp and cold living conditions, in physically one-sided work overloads or in the hardships of soldiers in the army. They assumed that traumatic tabes was caused by concussions or bruises. The Leipzig neurologist Paul Julius Möbius was the first to state between 1890 and 1897 that the only cause of tabes and progressive paralysis was a previous syphilitic infection. He consistently ruled out all other aetiological theories. Above all, bacteriological and microbiological research in the following years proved Möbius right. Thus 40 years after Erb's lecture, in addition to diagnostic, specific therapeutic approaches could be developed and applied.</p>","PeriodicalId":12353,"journal":{"name":"Fortschritte Der Neurologie Psychiatrie","volume":" ","pages":"494-501"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"[The 'Tabes Syphilis Controversy' : A Dispute About the Cause of Tabes Dorsalis and Progressive Paralysis at the End of the 19th Century].\",\"authors\":\"Holger Steinberg\",\"doi\":\"10.1055/a-1972-3201\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>For some years now, the incidence of syphilis and neuroluetic clinical pictures has been increasing. As a result, tabes dorsalis and progressive paralysis are once again gaining relevance in neurology. In the last two decades of the 19th century, there was a heated debate in German neurology about the understanding of the aetiology of these conditions, the so-called 'tabes syphilis controversy'. In 1879, Wilhelm Erb had called on the German neurological community in a much-noticed lecture to finally tackle the problem to unequivocally identify the cause of tabes dorsalis. Mainly on the basis of disease statistics he himself postulated a previous syphilitic infection as of key importance. Answering this question was urgent, because the proportion of patients in psychiatric institutions suffering from progressive paralysis, to which tabes was seen in close parallel, was rapidly increasing. The Berlin neurologists Carl Westphal, Ernst Julius Remak, Martin Bernhardt and Ernst Victor von Leyden regarded Erb's thesis as a gauntlet. They saw the causes of tabes and progressive paralysis in social impoverishment such as damp and cold living conditions, in physically one-sided work overloads or in the hardships of soldiers in the army. They assumed that traumatic tabes was caused by concussions or bruises. The Leipzig neurologist Paul Julius Möbius was the first to state between 1890 and 1897 that the only cause of tabes and progressive paralysis was a previous syphilitic infection. He consistently ruled out all other aetiological theories. Above all, bacteriological and microbiological research in the following years proved Möbius right. Thus 40 years after Erb's lecture, in addition to diagnostic, specific therapeutic approaches could be developed and applied.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12353,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Fortschritte Der Neurologie Psychiatrie\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"494-501\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Fortschritte Der Neurologie Psychiatrie\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-1972-3201\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/1/4 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Fortschritte Der Neurologie Psychiatrie","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-1972-3201","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/1/4 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

几年来,梅毒和神经性临床症状的发病率不断上升。因此,Tabes dorsalis 和进行性瘫痪在神经病学中的重要性再次上升。在 19 世纪的最后 20 年里,德国神经病学界对这些病症的病因进行了激烈的讨论,即所谓的 "梅毒之争"。1879 年,威廉-埃尔伯(Wilhelm Erb)在一次备受关注的演讲中呼吁德国神经病学界最终解决这一问题,以明确确定扁桃体背痛的病因。他本人主要根据疾病统计数据推测,梅毒感染是关键因素。回答这个问题迫在眉睫,因为精神病院中患有进行性瘫痪的病人比例正在迅速增加,而背趾瘫痪与进行性瘫痪密切相关。柏林的神经病学家卡尔-韦斯特法尔、恩斯特-朱利叶斯-雷马克、马丁-伯恩哈特和恩斯特-维克多-冯-莱登将埃尔伯的论点视为一种挑战。他们认为塔布症和进行性瘫痪的原因在于社会贫困,如潮湿和寒冷的生活环境、单调的超负荷工作或军队士兵的艰苦条件。他们认为外伤性 Tabes 是由脑震荡或瘀伤引起的。莱比锡神经学家保罗-尤利乌斯-莫比乌斯(Paul Julius Möbius)在 1890 年至 1897 年间率先指出,引起 Tabes 和进行性瘫痪的唯一原因是梅毒感染。他始终排除了所有其他病因学理论。最重要的是,随后几年的细菌学和微生物学研究证明莫比乌斯是正确的。因此,在埃尔伯演讲 40 年后,除了诊断外,还开发并应用了特定的治疗方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
[The 'Tabes Syphilis Controversy' : A Dispute About the Cause of Tabes Dorsalis and Progressive Paralysis at the End of the 19th Century].

For some years now, the incidence of syphilis and neuroluetic clinical pictures has been increasing. As a result, tabes dorsalis and progressive paralysis are once again gaining relevance in neurology. In the last two decades of the 19th century, there was a heated debate in German neurology about the understanding of the aetiology of these conditions, the so-called 'tabes syphilis controversy'. In 1879, Wilhelm Erb had called on the German neurological community in a much-noticed lecture to finally tackle the problem to unequivocally identify the cause of tabes dorsalis. Mainly on the basis of disease statistics he himself postulated a previous syphilitic infection as of key importance. Answering this question was urgent, because the proportion of patients in psychiatric institutions suffering from progressive paralysis, to which tabes was seen in close parallel, was rapidly increasing. The Berlin neurologists Carl Westphal, Ernst Julius Remak, Martin Bernhardt and Ernst Victor von Leyden regarded Erb's thesis as a gauntlet. They saw the causes of tabes and progressive paralysis in social impoverishment such as damp and cold living conditions, in physically one-sided work overloads or in the hardships of soldiers in the army. They assumed that traumatic tabes was caused by concussions or bruises. The Leipzig neurologist Paul Julius Möbius was the first to state between 1890 and 1897 that the only cause of tabes and progressive paralysis was a previous syphilitic infection. He consistently ruled out all other aetiological theories. Above all, bacteriological and microbiological research in the following years proved Möbius right. Thus 40 years after Erb's lecture, in addition to diagnostic, specific therapeutic approaches could be developed and applied.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
16.70%
发文量
139
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Fundiertes Wissen für den Berufsalltag Relevante Originalarbeiten Informative Übersichten zu wichtigen Themen Fortbildungsteil mit Zertifizierung – 36 CME-Punkte pro Jahr Interessante Kasuistiken Referiert & kommentiert: Internationale Studien Aktuelles zu Begutachtung und Neurobiologie International gelistet und häufig zitiert
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信