This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1915 Excerpt: ... sinus probe from the point in question up into the frontal sinus, when practicable, would be a valuable diagnostic measure. This, too, is by no means always possible as every rhinologist has discovered. Transillumination is very disappointing in this condition, and can only be of value if the sinus is filled with pus, and then from comparison of the two sides. Valuable information may be furnished by the X-ray, which in doubtful cases, may serve to clinch the diagnosis. Given a person lately the subject of an attack of acute rhinitis, in whom the subjective and objective symptoms are of the type sketched under this discussion of the two forms of the disease just treated of, and one may feel well assured that he is dealing with a case of acute frontal sinusitis, either of the catarrhal or purulent form. Generally the differentiation between these two is comparatively easy by observing the differences referred to. (3). Chronic Catarrhal Frontal Sinusitis. This form of frontal sinus affection may result from the continuation of an acute attack or may be induced by repeated recurrences of the acute form, generally in cases where there is mechanical interference with drainage, owing to obstructive conditions, of whatever type, in the nasal cavity. The symptoms are, as a rule, of the same type as those worthy from their continuation after the subsidence of the acute rhinitis, from which the original acute attack resulted. The pain, too, is of a more constant character than in the acute type of the catarrhal inflammation. By bearing these facts in mind while considering the localizing symptoms before described, and by noting that the discharge is of mucus, not pus, it will not be difficult to determine the diagnosis. A characterizing symptom is the discharge into...