. Journal of roentgenology . ip of the catheter; and in IV it is fully a centi-meter away from the tip of the catheter; whereas, accordingto Figure II the stone shadow should be exactly in theupper major calyx. It was just this last mentioned point that made us doubtthe accuracy of our diagnosis. In other words the findingsof our pyelography did not fit in with the roentgen findingsof the catheter in the ureter. In examining the patients back there was found a pig-mented mole in the right lumbar region. It was about onecentimeter in diameter. In order to determine whether ornot it was this mol
. Journal of roentgenology . ip of the catheter; and in IV it is fully a centi-meter away from the tip of the catheter; whereas, accordingto Figure II the stone shadow should be exactly in theupper major calyx. It was just this last mentioned point that made us doubtthe accuracy of our diagnosis. In other words the findingsof our pyelography did not fit in with the roentgen findingsof the catheter in the ureter. In examining the patients back there was found a pig-mented mole in the right lumbar region. It was about onecentimeter in diameter. In order to determine whether ornot it was this mole that cast the shadow, we fastened a 230 THE JOURNAL OP ROENTGENOLOGY marker over its center and made two exposures at differentangles. These are shown in Figures V and VI, and theyboth show the marker exactly in the center of the shadowthat we had mistaken for a renal calculus. The diagnosis was therefore changed from that of renalcalculus to that of a right pyelitis, and under treatment thepatient has responded very Fig. I
Size: 1390px × 1797px
Photo credit: © Reading Room 2020 / Alamy / Afripics
License: Licensed
Model Released: No
Keywords: ., bookcentury1900, bookdecade1910, bookidjour, booksubjectradiology
