Periscope of Medical and General Science in their Relations to Dentistry. [Volume: 2, Issue: 7, February, 1861, pp. 401-409]

PERISCOPE OF MEDICAL AND GENERAL SCIENCE.

405

with each other. Although the teeth were extracted, the infant was unable to suck, and died of trismus on the fourth day after birth. Canton
reports the case of a child in the practice of Dr. Tomes, born with two
teeth in the lower jaw, by which the breast of the mother and its own
upper jaw had been injured. On examination he found two sharp, rough
incisors, protruding from the centre of the lower jaw. They were ill
shaped, imperfectly coated with enamel, and loose in the gum, and stood
across, instead of in a line with the alveolar arch. They were removed,
and it was found that the fangs were not more than one-third developed.
In fact, the teeth had attained about the normal amount of development
for the age of the child, but had protruded through the gums before they
were fitted for eruption. An after process had been effected before the
preparatory one had been completed. A similar case occurred in Canton's own practice. Brown mentions the case of a child born with the
central incisors through the gums. They were extracted. Two other
children were afterward born of the same mother, in each of whom the
same anomaly was found. All the children were females. The teeth
were allowed to remain. Crump and Lethbridge have each observed a
case of complete dentition at birth; the case of the former observer
occurring in a still-born negro child. The sockets were very imperfectly
formed. Baumes, while quoting the cases of congenital teeth observed
by Columbus, Van Swieten, Marcellus Donatus, and Antigonus, reports
the case of a French lady who bore a girl with two congenital incisors in
the upper jaw, followed by two teeth on each side of the former, in the
same jaw, three days afterward. The infant died in convulsions. Richard III., and Mirabeau, the hero of the commencement of the great
French revolution, had teeth when they were born. Similar cases are
reported by Churchill, Fleming, Denman, while the celebrated Haller collected nineteen. I cannot conclude this long list without adding that
Whitehead, the worthy professor and clinical teacher at Manchester, England, removed two teeth from the lower jaw of a newly born infant, in
order to facilitate suckling. They were reproduced at the time when
the canine teeth were formed, viz., after a year and a half, instead of the
usual time of seven or eight months.
"In Billard's opinion congenital teeth are not firm, but are liable to get
loose and be lost; but such is not the experience of Meissner and others.
The last author is, as a rule, opposed to the advice of Billard, and the
practice of Whitehead, of extracting such premature teeth when they
prevent suckling. Meissner's opinion is, that no animal is prevented from
sucking by the teeth in its mouth-a theory which is good enough for
animals, but not for our race. Whitehead's case, in which it was necessary to remove a tooth to enable the mother to nurse the child, the fact
that the nipples are very liable to become sore where the teeth are fully
developed before weaning, and finally the few cases reported above, in
which congenital teeth did not fall out to give place to the real temporary
teeth, are valid proofs against such practice, at least in a number of
cases.
"Congenital teeth have been made the subject of special remarks by
Dr. Nessel, professor of dental surgery at the University of Prague. As
his opinions differ somewhat from others, I will state them more definitely.
He removed congenital teeth in three cases. In his opinion, they are,
properly speaking, not genuine teeth, as they differ greatly in substance
and form, and especially in the nature and consistency of their exterior