{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01904761904761905, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.512396694214876, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 1, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
XCIX. Recent Developments in the Proximally Lighted Bronchoscope

The art of bronchoscopy, like many another art, depends for its ultimate success on two factors, the skill of the workman and the quality of his tools. The former can be supplied only through natural ability, indefatigable practice and long experience, while the latter is the result of mechanical ingenuity, endless experimentation and the desire always to find some better instrument for the purpose at hand. Instrument dealers' showcases and older bronchoscopists' dusty shelves contain some of the most ingenious products of the human mind, which, superseded by more modern and efficacious ones, no longer recall even the names of their inventors. Through such vicissitudes have passed the instruments which we now designate as the laryngoscope, bronchoscope and esophagoscope, evolved primarily by a few men who are too well known to require mention. Throughout their development, these instruments have shown a definite and persistent tendency to divide themselves into two groups, differing so fundamentally in one important characteristic, namely, the source of illumination, that their adherents form two distinct schools of bronchoscopic technic. Those men who enthusiastically endorse the instrument lighted by a proximally placed lamp are to be found largely in European clinics, while those favoring a terminally placed lamp are, for obvious reasons, predominantly American. In each group are bronchoscopists of great skill, capable of dexterous manipulations with the instrument of their choice.