Abstract
To the Editor.— We do not judge the usefulness of electrocardiography on the basis of technically unsatisfactory ECGs; neither do we evaluate ultrasonography on the basis of technically unsatisfactory sonograms. So we should not conclude, as have Nystrom and his colleagues (241:381, 1979), that roentgenography is of little help in finding occult primary malignant neoplasms. The evaluation by Nystrom et al is based on single-contrast colon examinations and urograms done without routine tomographic scans, and these are technically unsatisfactory examinations. The potential of diagnostic roentgenography cannot be judged by such examinations. It seems likely that true-positive and true-negative detection of occult malignant neoplasms would have been much improved by the routine use of air-contrast colon examinations and the routine use of tomographic scans during intravenous urographic examinations.
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 callMore From: JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association
Disclaimer: 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.
