iniON'TITY OF AMERICAN AND FRENCH SPOROTRICHOSIS 107 



to discuss briefly the history of sporotriehosis in America and 

 France and also in the other countries where it has been ob- 

 served. 



SPOROTRICHOSIS IN NORTH AMERICA 



The recorded history of this disease in America is brief 

 and simple. In 1898 Schenck :j reported a case of chronic 

 subcutaneous abscesses from which he isolated in pure culture 

 a fungus which grew readily on artificial media and which 

 was identified by Dr. Erwin F. Smith of the U. S. Dept. of 

 Agriculture as belonging to the genus Sporotricha. The or- 

 ganism was found to be distinctly pathogenic for mice and 

 dogs and from the characteristic lesions the same fungus wars 

 recovered pure. Thus, in the first case observed, all of Koch's 

 laws were fulfilled. Illustrations of the human lesions, cul- 

 tures, and microscopic appearance of the fungus accompany 

 the paper of Schenck. 



In 1900 Hektoen and Perkins 4 observed and very carefully 

 described a second case in which the fungus was isolated in 

 pure culture and its pathogeiiicity for various animals deter- 

 mined. They were able to confirm the results of Schenck and 

 after a careful comparison of the fungi from both cases con- 

 cluded that they were identical. Schenck also examined their 

 strain and pronounced it identical with his organism. They 

 definitely named this organism 8porothrix schenckii at this 

 time. Therefore it is to be noted that in two of the most 

 prominent medical publications of the time, an accurate 

 clinical, pathological, bacteriological, and experimental de- 

 scription of this disease appeared. 



A case reported in 1899 by Brayton 5 agreed clinically with 

 the case of Schenck and of Hektoen. The organism was not 

 detected however and cultures were not made. Definite state- 

 ments as to the nature of the infection cannot be made though 

 it was probably a case of sporotriehosis. 



3 Johns Hopkins Hospital Bulletin, 9, p. 286, 1898. 



4 Jonr. of Exp. Med.. 5, p. 77, 1900. 



"' Indianapolis Med. Jour., 18, p. 272, 1899. 



