PubMed2001
To illustrate how the high incidence of arrow wounds provided a major stimulus for the development of surgery until a century ago, we conducted a literature search. Our research shows that archaic peoples developed considerable surgical skill for extraction of arrows, including thoracotomy and trephination. A classical Hindu veda describes a variety of extraction methods, and Homer's Iliad introduces the term iatros, which means "he who extracts arrows." Hippocrates of Kos and Galen, representatives of the humoral doctrine, both shunned surgical intervention and considered purulence a drainage of materia peccans (spoiled humors). Cornelius Celsus was the first to systematically differentiate removal of arrows per extractionem and per expulsionem. Celsus recommended the spoon of Diocles, an ancient surgical instrument specially designed for extraction of arrows. Paulus of Aegina favored rapid extraction, aggressive therapy, and ligature on both sides of a vessel before extraction efforts. Paulus was the first to describe a special instrument for the removal of detached arrowheads per expulsionem (propulsorium). In medieval Europe, the standard of surgery declined drastically. The classical procedure under the dominant influence of the humoral concept was to await pus before extraction and to burn the wound with boiling oil and a branding iron. Arab authors had conserved the knowledge of Celsus and Paulus, and in Europe a renewal was achieved by Ambroise Paré, who has been called the creator of modern surgery. The incidence of arrow wounds increased once more in the American West. Joseph H. Bill, a famous U.S. Army Surgeon preoccupied with arrow wounds, favored rapid extraction and aggressive therapy, and he taught recruits not to apply traction on the shaft. The principles established by Celsus, Paulus, Paré, and Bill not only mark important landmarks in the evolution of surgery but can also serve as the basis for modern treatment of arrow wounds, which still occur, although on a small scale.