7.2 ENZYMES 



reaching a maximum in three hours. '^^ Whipple''^ finds the blood 

 Hpase (butyrase) increased whenever there is injury to the liver, such 

 as in chloroform anesthesia and puerperal eclampsia; it is lowered 

 in cirrhosis. Poulain^^ found that the butyric-splitting power of 

 lymph-glands draining infected areas was decreased. Fischcr^^ 

 observed, in a case of extreme lipemia in diabetes, that the lipolytic 

 power of the blood was absent. The lipase of lipomas presents no 

 demonstrable difference from that of ordinary fatty areolar tissues.*" 



Lipase has also been demonstrated in pus by a number of ob- 

 servers,*^ who agree that there is more in exudates than in transu- 

 dates. Zeri*2 found lipase in the urine only when pus or blood was 

 also present, but Pribram and Loewy*^ found it in nephritis, con- 

 gestion, polyuria and other conditions. Lorenzini,** however, re- 

 ports that in albuminuria the lipase content of the urine is reduced, 

 in common with other enzymes, there being a simultaneous accumula- 

 tion of enzymes in the blood. 



Fiessinger and Marie*^ contend that the lymphocytes of exudates 

 are the chief source of lipase, and suggest that this may be of effect 

 in defense against the fatty tubercle bacilli. Toxins were found by 

 Pesci*® to increase the butyrase but not the other lipases of liver 

 tissue. In syphilis the lipolytic activity of the serum is increased,*' 

 which may be related to Bergell's** observation on the origin of lipase 

 in lymphocytes (corroborating Fiessinger and Marie). Jobling and 

 Bull** state that a specific serum lipase increase occurs in animals 

 immunized to red corpuscles, and that this lipase has to do with 

 hemolysis; but MendeP** found no evidence that hemolj'sis by ricin is 

 related to lipase. Abderhalden and Rona*^ found that excess feeding 

 of fats leads to an increase in the lipase of the blood. 



The part played by lipase in fatty degeneration must be of great 

 importance, but as yet it has been little considered, except that Loeven- 

 hart, and Duccheschi and Almagia*^ found no appreciable difference 



'" Jobling et al, Jour. Exp. Med., 1915 (22), 129. 



" Whipple et al, Bull. Johns Hopkins Hosp., 1913 (2-4), 207 and 357. 



'« Comp. Rend. Soc. Biol., 1901 (53), 786. 



'^Virchow's Arch., 1903 (172), 218. 



'" Wells, Arch. Int. Med., 1912 (10), 297. 



" Achalme, Comp. Rend. Soc. Biol., 1899 (51), 5GS; Zeri, II Policlinico, 1903 

 (10), 433; Memmi, Clin. Med. Ital., 1905 (44), 129. 



82 II PoUclinico, 1905 (12), 733. 



8' Zeit. phvsiol. Chem., 1912 (76), 489. 



"'Policlinico, 1915 (22), 358. 



" Compt. Rend. Soc. Biol., 1909 (68), 177. See also Resell, Dout. Arrh. klin. 

 Med., 1915 (118), 179. 



8« PatholoM;ica, 1912 (3), 207. 



8' Citron and Reicher, B(>rl. klin. Woch., 1908 (45), 1398. 



88 Miinch. nicd. Wocli., 1909 (56), 64. 



89 Jour. Kxp. Med.. l',M2 (16), 483. 

 «<• Arch. Fisiol., 1<)09 (7), 1()S. 

 "Zeit. plivsiol. Chem., 1911 (75), 30. 

 "2 Arch. Ital. Biol., 1903 (39), 29. 



