Publication information |
Source: Dental Brief Source type: journal Document type: editorial Document title: “The Surgical Aspects of President McKinley’s Case” Author(s): anonymous Date of publication: October 1901 Volume number: 6 Issue number: 10 Pagination: 594-96 |
Citation |
“The Surgical Aspects of President McKinley’s Case.” Dental Brief Oct. 1901 v6n10: pp. 594-96. |
Transcription |
full text |
Keywords |
William McKinley (autopsy); William McKinley (medical condition); William McKinley (death, cause of); William McKinley (surgery); William McKinley (medical care: personal response); McKinley assassination (poison bullet theory); McKinley assassination (personal response). |
Named persons |
William McKinley. |
Document |
The Surgical Aspects of President McKinley’s Case
So world-wide is the interest felt in every
phase of the case of the late President McKinley, and so much at variance are
many of the statements regarding it which have appeared in the lay as well as
the medical press, that an epitome of the facts, in so far as up to the present
writing they have been determined, is herewith given.
The extent of the injury inflicted by the two
shots fired by the assassin is stated in the following report of the autopsy
issued by the attending physician:
“The bullet which struck over the breast-bone
did not pass through the skin and did little harm. The other bullet passed through
both walls of the stomach near its lower border. Both holes were found to be
perfectly closed by the stitches, but the tissue around each hole had become
gangrenous. After passing through the stomach the bullet passed into the back
walls of the abdomen, hitting and tearing the upper end of the kidney. This
portion of the bullet track was also gangrenous, the gangrene involving the
pancreas. The bullet has not yet been found. There was no sign of peritonitis
or disease of other organs. The heart-walls were very thin. There was no evidence
of any attempt at repair on the part of nature, and death resulted from the
gangrene, which affected the stomach around the bullet wounds, as well as the
tissues around the further course of the bullet. Death was unavoidable by any
surgical or medical treatment, and was the direct result of the bullet wound.”
A full official report of the whole history of
the case is in course of preparation, and will be made public at an early day.
In the mean time [sic] the following facts appear to have been established with
a reasonable degree of certainty:
First. As regards injury to
the viscera, other than the stomach, the wound of the kidney was not sufficiently
severe to cause any appreciable functional disturbance; there was no appearance
of pus or blood in the urine. The pancreas was probably perforated, although
there is some obscurity upon that point, but certainly was so injured as to
result in the formation of a slough through which the pancreatic [594][595]
secretion ultimately escaped, following the track of the bullet back of the
stomach.
Second. Although the injury
to the kidney and pancreas was not discovered by the attending surgeons at the
time when the abdominal cavity was opened and the stomach perforations sutured,
it is not probable that the fatal issue would have been averted even had the
course and effect of the bullet been fully ascertained and more extended surgical
interference effected.
Third. The successful and skilful
[sic] suturing of the bullet wounds of the stomach and the increasingly favorable
symptoms which day after day followed that operation justified the hopeful prognosis
of the physicians in charge, and this notwithstanding the fact that pulse, temperature,
and respiration, although showing progressive improvement, were at no time thoroughly
satisfactory, and even in the most hopeful stage of the case remained as symptoms
of possibly ominous significance.
Fourth. That if a mistake was
made in too early imposing a digestive task upon the injured stomach, the risk
may have been warranted by the failing strength of the patient and the apparent
necessity for sustaining the vital forces, and that in any case the resultant
indigestion did not materially influence the ultimate result of the case.
Fifth. That the true reason
for the failure of modern surgical science to save a life so precious to the
nation was not faulty operative technique or mistaken medical treatment, but
was inherent in the nature of the injury and the systemic condition of the patient.
President McKinley had a small heart with thin walls showing fatty degenerative
changes; his pulse was erratic, possibly from organic lesions, as well as from
functional disturbances, to which a somewhat excessive use of tobacco may have
contributed. Like many other overworked men in public as well as private life,
he had for many years been living upon his vital capital, and had no reserve
force upon which to call in the hour of need. Hence there was enfeebled recuperative
power in the injured tissues. There was no inflammation and no pus; but nearly
the whole track traversed by the bullet became necrotic.
Sixth. The reason for the development
of gangrene in this unforeseen and unusual form has not been fully determined,
and may long remain a mystery. The theory that the bullets were poisoned has
not been sustained by the results of chemical and bacteriological examination.
Indeed, no poison, organic or inorganic, is at present known to toxicology capable
of producing the exact line of effects which followed the course of the missile.
Another theory is that the necrosis was due to the action of the escaped pancreatic
secretion upon the tissues [595][596] which it
permeated; and there are recorded cases of gangrene directly or indirectly following
injuries of the pancreas which give some degree of plausibility to the suggestion.
In the absence of much more definite knowledge regarding the physiology and
pathology of the pancreas than we at present possess this theory must, however,
be regarded as simply a possible hypothesis.
The one supreme fact is that one who will perhaps
go down in history as the best beloved of Presidents, because his gentle and
yet manly nature invited love as well as trust, was stricken down in an hour
when the arm of every fellow-citizen should have been his defence and every
breast his shield, and that all the resources of modern medical and surgical
science were powerless to save to the American people the ruler whom their suffrages
had twice raised to the chief magistracy of the nation.
If science thus disillusioned, her brightest expectations
blasted, and her most hopeful auguries set at naught, can from this cruel failure
gain one added truth helpful to others in time to come, it will be as he would
have wished. And if we as a people awaken to a stern realization of the fact
that cancerous sores infect the body politic for which the nation’s safety demands
the swift, sharp sweep of the surgeon’s knife rather than the laissez-faire
of the social optimist or the nostrum of the political quack, McKinley will
not have died wholly in vain.