Abstract
The purpose of this chapter is to present how past surgeons have viewed the pericranium and how they have reacted to its appearances. In ancient times, the membrane was considered formed by the dura through the sutures and it retained a relationship with the dura via vessels in the sutures. It was considered advisable to strip it totally from any area to be examined for fissure fractures and also for any area to be trepanned, as pericranial injury was thought to lead to fever and inflammation. In the 18th century, a new idea arose that posttraumatic spontaneous separation of the pericranium from the bone was a reliable indicator of the development of intracranial suppuration. This idea was subsequently refuted. For over two millennia, the pericranium was considered to be an important membrane requiring the close attention of the surgeon. It is no longer required to receive more than minimal attention.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
