SALIVAEY GLANDS, STOMACH AND INTESTINES 749 



was left intact, but no pancreatic juice was permitted to enter the duo- 

 denum. In this case glycosuria did not develop although the animal 

 became emaciated and his duodenum still contained the normal amount of 

 prosecretin. Evans concludes that the loss of the pancreatic juice is not 

 responsible for the loss of prosecretin, but that it is due to the loss of the 

 internal secretion. Hedon and Lisbonne (1913) report that removal of 

 the pancreas does not affect the prosecretin content of the duodenum in 

 three to twenty-five days after the operation. Pemberton and Sweet (1901) 

 arrive at similar conclusions. It is very doubtful indeed whether the 

 extraction method for secretin is to a sufficient extent quantitatively de- 

 veloped to be of use in determining slight changes in prosecretin content ; 

 and the physiological assay of such extracts is also very likely to lead to 

 erroneous results, especially if carried out on anesthetized animals. 



A number of very indefinite conclusions have been reached following 

 the removal of the duodenum. Thus Pfliiger (1907) found complete 

 removal of the duodenum in frogs to cause a more severe glycosuria than 

 complete removal of the pancreas. He also reports that destruction of 

 the nervous connections between the duodenum and pancreas causes a 

 glycosuria. Rosenberg (1908) reports that similar operative procedure 

 in dogs does not always cause glycosuria. Zack (1908) reports that in 

 two cases of suicide in which the duodenum had been injured by corrosive 

 poisoning, glycosuria was observed. A similar corrosion of the esophagus 

 and stomach led to no glycosuria, but an experimental corrosion of the 

 duodenum caused glycosuria. Gaultier (1908) destroyed the duodenal 

 mucosa by incision and by cauterizing with silver nitrate in two dogs, and 

 observed glycosuria in both cases. Minkowski (1908), however, reports 

 temporary glycosuria following complete removal of the duodenum and 

 partial pancreatectomy. Four weeks later the remainder of the pancreas 

 was removed and the usual severe glycosuria set in at once. 



Finally, we have the attempts to use secretin solutions as a thera- 

 peutic measure in diabetes mellitus. Thus Bainbridge and Beddard 

 (1906) gave 90 c.c. of secretin solution daily by mouth in each of three 

 mild cases, and observed no beneficial effects. Moore, Edie and Abram 

 (1906), in the first studies, obtained fair results in three out of a total 

 of five cases, but in a more extensive series later most of the results were 

 negative. Nellis B. Foster (1907), with nine cases, and Charles (1906), 

 with three, reported entirely negative results. Croftan (1909) obtained 

 favorable results in one case and Dakin and Ransom (1907) report a tem- 

 porary beneficial effect in one case, but even after twelve weeks' treat- 

 ment, the glycosuria was as severe as before. In view of the destruction 

 of secretin by gastric and pancreatic juices it certainly is not justifiable 

 to give secretin by mouth. The results obtained clinically fail also to 

 warrant the further use of secretin in the treatment of diabetes mellitus. 



