A REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE OF SYPHILIS IN INFANCY AND CHILDHOOD

PARK J. WHITE
1922 Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine  
Jeans 1 has reviewed the literature on this subject up to It is the object of the present review to bring the literature to date (December, 1921). A brief survey suffices to show the extent to which contributions from the laboratory predominate over those from clinic and practice. The reason for this is not far to seek. Syphilis, hereditary or acquired, is a disease in whose investigation and partial conquest the laboratory has played an important, an essential part. Excepting statistical
more » ... g statistical reports, there are relatively few clinical observations or contributions to symptomatology. Clearly, serology, chemistry and pathology offer the widest fields for original endeavor in this disease. INCIDENCE Jeans and Cooke 2 made a study of the placentas, and of the Wassermann reactions of the cord blood of a series of 2,030 unselected infants in St. Louis. By examining the blood of 389 of these infants after 2 months of age, it was determined that the proportion of cases of hereditary syphilis that could be diagnosed with certainty by placental examination alone was 27 per cent. From the Wassermann reaction on the cord blood, 63.6 per cent, could be recognized. By applying these two methods to the series, the number of cases of hereditary syphilis, in the entire group was determined to be 15 per cent, in the colored race, 1.8 per cent, in the poor of the white race, and less than 1 per cent, in the well-to-do classes. The incidence of hereditary syphilis at birth for all classes in St. Louis is 3 per cent., of which the colored population, although only 9 per cent, of the total, con¬ tributes approximately half the cases. In a somewhat similar study, Ross and Wright3 found 3.5 per cent, of the specimens of (placental) blood to be positive. In evaluating such statistical reports, two very important factors to bear in mind are the race and the standard of living of the people From the
doi:10.1001/archpedi.1922.01910410069008 fatcat:gsfxrttb5zd4lcuuynfeys7n44