One day an official in Dresden brought his wife to me, who was 41 years
of age. The couple, all of whose children had died soon after birth,
longed once more for children. The woman had aborted several times, and
both were intelligent enough to see that everything could not be right
with the sexual organs, and even begged for a gynaecological examination.
The result was in a few words: inflammation of both lips of the uterus,
a thickening of the cervical canal with a swelling of the posterior
uterine wall as hard as cartilage, and retroversio uteri. Menstruation
too early, dysmenorrhoea, blood dark, tarry, passing in clots.
Yellowish, fetid leucorrhoea. Stools retained, appetite changeable;
pains in the broad ligaments on both sides during rest as well as on
exertion. The so-called "facies uterina"--weeps much. Frequent
exclamations on the distastefulness of life since the death of all her
children, and on account of her present childlessness. Should I register
in my journal in the beginning of a scirrhus? I wrote simply: metritis
chronica; intumescentia labiorum orificii et colli uteri.
Prognosis, not unfavorable as far as regards the swelling, after my
already well-tested experience with _Aur. mur. nat._ But how about the
removal of sterility acquired in her 41st year. I was more cautious
about this. The cure took six months, and was not only accompanied by
absorption of the affected parts, but the woman became pregnant in good
time and gave birth to a boy with comparative comfort. Thus would the
wishes of the worthy couple have been fulfilled, if their joy had not
been banished once more by the death of the child in four weeks from an
attack of eclampsia.