Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
The use of plain radiographs to localize a suspected fishbone foreign body is the subject of controversy. Accordingly radiographs of 14 species of fishbone, impacted in a soft tissue phantom, were assessed by a series of observers from the ENT department (consultant surgeons, senior registrars and house officers). The agreement was assessed by graphical description of the data and tested by a Spearman's rank correlation test. The overall results showed that, for the clinician, radiography is very useful to detect the bones of: cod, haddock, lemon sole, cole fish, grey mullet and plaice; useful for red snapper, monk fish, gurnard and salmon; and unhelpful in detecting bones from herring, pike, mackerel and trout. The use of radiographs to locate these impacted fishbones can be rationalized in the light of these findings.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ell et al. (1996) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: