150 I. I.IIMA AND K. MUEATA 



Case I. — Both'. UfjwhidcR dmliarged from the vrrlJira.* — We owe 

 the knowledge of this case to the kind communication of Mr. K. 

 Namha, a physician in the province of Echigo, who also sent ns the 

 worm for examination. He writes to the following effect : the patient 

 was a boy, scrofulous and of weak bodily constitution. When three 

 vears old he suffered from frequent swelling of the scrotum on the 

 right side, consequent on inguinal hernia. This complaint ceased, 

 but after the lapse of several years, when he was nine years of age, 

 he began one day (July 1886) to experience difficulty in urination, 

 which had to be done often but only drop by drop. Two days passed 

 in this way, when, while making efforts for the passage of urine, 

 a tapeworm-like body came out of the urethra to the length of about 

 10 cm. On being drawn it contracted and tore oft' (to what length 

 is n(^t stated). On the following day, the patient came to j\Ir. Namba, 

 who put him in warm-bath and carefully wound out the worm, that 

 still hung out of the urethral opening and showed signs of movement. 

 The piece thus obtained measured over 20 cm. After this, the urine 

 passed unobstructedly and an inquiry made many days afterwards 

 showed that the boy had since felt in his usual health. 



The measurement above o-iven must be considered as üivins: onlv 

 a fairly approximate lengtli of the piece extracted. Tl'.3 piece of the 

 worm sent to us in spirit was only 8 cm. long (/'/V/. 1). We do not 

 know whether this piece is tlie whole that was pulled out by Mr. 

 Namba. At all events, luunerous wrinkles and folds observable on 

 the surface, show that it has greatly contracted. Both ends are not 

 natural, so that it was not possible to determine whicli is the anterior 

 and which is the posterior end. One eiid was greatly disfigured while 

 the other was deeply notched in the middle-line and plainly indicated 

 that the cut at this place must have been made when fresh. The 



This case was independently jiublished by Murata in CJiüuni-Iji-Shimhö. No. 181. 1887. 



