Advertisement

Irish Journal of Medical Science (1926-1967)

, Volume 17, Issue 2, pp 58–70 | Cite as

The capillary permeability test in pregnancy

  • E. Kawerau
Article

Summary

  1. (1)

    A capillary permeability test is described which is a modified Goethlin method, and differs from those used by other workers in many respects.

     
  2. (2)

    It was shown by this test that the pregnant women and the women who had aborted showed a tendency to suffer from abnormal capillary permeability three to four times greater than the ordinary normal adult. The women after parturition showed only a small rise of abnormality in this respect.

     
  3. (3)

    The test cannot be used for patients who suffer from a high diastolic blood pressure; for this reason the toxæmic conditions of pregnancy could not be investigated to any extent.

     
  4. (4)

    90 per cent. of pregnant women suffering from iron deficiency anæmia exhibited well-marked abnormal capillary permeability.

     
  5. (5)

    There is no evident relationship between capillary permeability and gingivitis.

     
  6. (6)

    The possibilities of attributing capillary deficiency to avitaminosis C have been discussed.

     
  7. (7)

    The suggestion is made that the test should be of great value in determining rapidly the adequacy or inadequacy of a person’s nutritional state. This seems to be a reasonable thing to do if one keeps in mind the many arguments which point to the possibility that more than one food factor is responsible for the maintenance of capillary health.

     

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Bibliography

  1. (1).
    St. Rusznyák, and Benkó, A.: (1941)Science, 94, 2427, 25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. (2).
    Fearon, W. R., and Dockeray, G. C.: (1939)Irish Jo. Med. Sci., 1.Google Scholar
  3. (3).
    Lewis, T.: (1923)Jo. Physiol., 58;Proc. Physiol. Soc., p. 1. (1927)The Blood Vessels of the Human Skin and their Responses. Google Scholar
  4. (4).
    Wolbach, S. B. and Howe, P. R.: (1926)Arch. Path., 1, 1.Google Scholar
  5. (5).
    Fox, F. W.: (1941)Brit. Med. Jo., i, 311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. (6).
    Falkiner, N. McI.: (1932)Journ. of Obst. & Gyn. Brit. Emp., 39, 471.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. (7).
    Spanner, R.: (1935)Z. f. Anat. und Entwgsch., 105, 163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. (8).
    Bartholomew, R. A. and Kracke, R. R.: (1932)Am. Jo. Obst. & Gyn., 24, 797. (1936)Am. Jo. Obst. & Gyn., 31, 549.Google Scholar
  9. (9).
    Goethlin, G. F.: (1931)Skand. Arch. f. Physiol., 61, 225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. (10).
    Goethlin, G. F.: (1937)Lancet, ii, 703.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. (11).
    Dalldorf, G.: (1933)Am. Jo. Dis. Child., 46, 794.Google Scholar
  12. (12).
    Dalldorf, G.: (1938)Jo. Am. Med. Ass., III, 1376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. (13).
    Bell, G. H.; Lazarus, S. and Munro, N. N.: (1940)Lancet, ii, 155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. (14).
    Snelling, C. E. and Jackson, S. H.: (1939)Jo. Paediat., 14, 447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. (15).
    Schultzer, P.: (1934)Biochem. Jo., 31, 1937.Google Scholar
  16. (16).
    Falk, G.; Gedda, K. O. and Goethlin, G. F.: (1932)Skand. Arch. f. Physiol., 65, 24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. (17).
    Sadovsky, H.; Weber, D. and Wertheimer, E.: (1940)Jo. Am. Med. Ass., 191.Google Scholar
  18. (18).
    Kellie, A. E. and Zilva, S. S.: (1939)Biochem. Jo., 33, 153.Google Scholar
  19. (19).
    Kahn, N. U. and Minn, M.: (1941)Brit. Med. Jo., i. 752.Google Scholar
  20. (20).
    Davis, E.: (1940)Lancet, ii, 312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 1942

Authors and Affiliations

  • E. Kawerau

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations