Abad, L. D., and Mangboo, M. C., J. Phillipine Islands M.A., 1938, xviii, 627 Per Index Medicus: sparking plug in frontal sinus for 15 years.Google Scholar

Abercrombie, P. H., J. Laryng. and Otol., 1925, xl, 586–89: nasal tooth.Google Scholar

Abrand, H., Rev. Laryng., 1920, xli, 278–85: two case reports; one was complicated by rhinitis caseosa.Google Scholar

Agar, M. F., Med. Press & Circ., Lond., 1893, N.S., lv, 526: nucleus not sought.Google Scholar

Allen, H., Internat. M. Mag., Philad., 1894–1895, iii, 189–91: case 1, weight 2.45 gm., 30 × 25 × 8 mm.; case 2, nucleus not mentioned.Google Scholar

Alskne, J., Z. Laryng., etc., 1910, ii, 15–22: sunflower seed nucleus; analysis.Google Scholar

Anderson, C. M., Trans. Inter. Colon. Med. Congr. Austral.; report in J. Laryng. and Rhin., 1890, iv, 258–9 (Wolfenden): cherry stone nucleus.Google Scholar

Arauz, S. L., and Belou, A. P., Rev. Assoc. Méd. Argent., 1941, lv, 145–6: nasal tooth, incrusted; per Index Medicus.Google Scholar

Ascenso, M., Arch. ital. Otol., Torino, 1901, xi, 100–01: roll of paper as nucleus.Google Scholar

Axmann, , Arch. Gén. de Méd., 1829, xx, 102–03: first analysis of a rhinolith.Google Scholar

Baber, E. C., B.M.J., 1885, ii, 736–7: medical man; boot button nucleusGoogle Scholar

Baber, E. C., Lancet, 1887, i, 772–3: rag nucleus.Google Scholar

Baber, E. C., Proc. Laryng. Soc., Lond., 1895–1896, iii, 76–7. Former two cases and a third with bead nucleus; all three are also described in an article on “Foreign Bodies in the Nose and Epistaxis” in Burnett's System of Diseases of the Ear, Nose and Throat (cited by Baber, 1895–6).Google Scholar

Baden, G., Hosp.-Tidende, 1889, vii, 41–3: cherry stone nucleus.Google Scholar

Baelde, (Brussels), Arch. Internat. de Laryng., 1927, vi, 859: cherry stone nucleus.Google Scholar

Baginsky, B., Berl. klin. Wschr., xxi, No. 48, 772.Google Scholar

Baginsky, B., abstract Rev. Sci. Méd., 1886, xxviii, 303–4; also abstract by Didsbury; (Case xxviii): no nucleus found.Google Scholar

Bailey, F. W., Ann. Otol., Rhin. and Laryng., St. Louis, 1925, xxxiv, 814–18: case report; nucleus a probability, but not found.Google Scholar

Bain, E. W., Personal communication, 1942: nasopharyngeal rhinolith; signet ring nucleus.Google Scholar

Ball, J. B., B.M.J., 1890, i, 478: vegetable nucleus.Google Scholar

Ballács, V., Mschr. f. Ohrenh., 1936, lxx, 1432–5: rhinolith causing “rhinitis caseosa” no details.Google Scholar

Ballenger, W. L., Ninth Ann. Meeting, Amer. L.R. & Otol. Soc.May, 1903Google Scholar

Ballenger, W. L., report in J. Laryng., Rhin. and Otol., 1903, xviii, 494–5: nasal foreign body; breech-pin of musket.Google Scholar

Bark, J., Lancet, 1895, i, 1059.Google Scholar

Bark, J., Lpool. med-chir. J., 1896, xvi, 235–8.Google Scholar

Bark, J., Rev. de Laryng., Paris, 1897, xvii, 1047.Google Scholar

Bark, J., Rev. Internat. de Rhin., Otol. et Laryng., 1898, i, 581–2: one report; slate pencil nucleus.Google Scholar

Barola, A., Oto-rhino-laryng., ital., 1933, iii, 629–35; per Index Medicus: chip of granite in nose for 16 years; spontaneous expulsion.Google Scholar

Barraud, A., Rev. méd. Suisse rom., 1911, xxxi, 586–91: two case reports; cherry stone and boot button nuclei.Google Scholar

Barrett, , ? 1896; cited by Seifert: ? case report.Google Scholar

Bartholin, , Hist. Anatom. Rav., 1654, Cent. i, Hist. 13, p. 47.Google Scholar

Bartholin, , Hist. Anatom. Rav., 1654, Cent. iv, Hist. 85, P. 407; cited by Demarquay and others: case 1, cherry stone nucleus; case 2, no nucleus described; first cases on record.Google Scholar

Bary, , ? 1930; cited by Joukovsky: ? one case report.Google Scholar

Bass, A. L., Kentucky M. Jl., 1927, xxv, 533–4; per Index Medicus: rhinolith of unusual Size.Google Scholar

Baumgarten, , Wien. med. Wschr., 1889, No. 51Google Scholar

Baumgarten, , abstract J. Laryng. and Rhin., 1890, iv, 126: grape stone nucleus.Google Scholar

Baumgarten, E., Gégészet, Budapest, 1906, 13: dental rhinolith; per Index-Cat. Surg. Gen.Google Scholar

Baumgarten, E. translations in Rev. hebd. de Laryng., 1906, ii, 513–15.Google Scholar

Baumgarten, E.Wien. Med. Presse, 1907, xlviii, 12.Google Scholar

Beach, R. E., Med. Rec. N. Y., 1885, xxviii, 38: seed and cherry stone nuclei.Google Scholar

Béal, V., Centre méd. et pharm., Gannat., 1910–1911, xvi, 355–58; Index Medicus: two case reports.Google Scholar

Beggs, W. E., Homæop. Eye, Ear & Throat Jl., Lancaster, Pa., 1910, xvi, 546; per Index-Cat. Index-Cat. Surg. Gen.: case report.Google Scholar

Bergeat, H., Münch. med. Wschr., 1895, xlii, 262–4: cherry stone nucleus.Google Scholar

Bergstrand, A., Hygiea, Stockh., 1936, xcviii, 475–9: details of one, and mention of 3 other rhinoliths.Google Scholar

Berini, , ? 1901; cited by Key-Åberg: button nucleus.Google Scholar

Berlioz, A., Arch. Internat. de Laryng., 1891, iv, 132–9: analysis of 4 cases; abstract by Didsbury.Google Scholar

Moure, , in Mschr. f. Ohrenh., 1893.Google Scholar

Bettman, J., J. Amer. med. Ass., 1884, iii, 257–9: cherry stone nucleus.Google Scholar

Betz of Mainz, Münch. med. Wschr., 1893, xl, 740: rhinoliths in cement workers.Google Scholar

Bichaton, , Union méd. du nord-est, Reims, 1907; xxxi, 304; per Index-Cat. Surg. Gen.: case report.Google Scholar

Biélitsky, , ? 1926; cited by Joukovsky: ? case report.Google Scholar

Bigelow, J. M., Albany M. Ann., 1887, viii, 178; cited by Hériset: case report.Google Scholar

Bijlveld, , ? 07, 1891; cited by Seeligmann: no nucleus found.Google Scholar

Binder, , ? 1894; cited by Seifert: no nucleus found.Google Scholar

Birkett, H. S., Mont. Med. Jl., 06, 1899.Google Scholar

Birkett, H. S., abstract J. Laryng., Rhin. and Otol., 1899, xiv, 429: nasopharyngeal stone, containing a thimble.Google Scholar

Birman-Bera, Z.Hals.-Nas.-u. Ohrenh., 1931–1932, xvii, 749: bilateral stones.Google Scholar

Bishop, S. S., Laryngoscope, 1902, xii, 29–30: weight 71 grains.Google Scholar

Blas, , ? 1892; cited by Seifert: cherry stone nucleus.Google Scholar

Blegvad, N. R., ? 1909; cited by Key-Åberg: ? case report.Google Scholar

Bleicher, , Rev. méd. de Nancy, 1939, lxvii, 104–06: two cases, cherry stone in one, and no nucleus in second.Google Scholar

Böhm, W., Mschr. f. Ohrenh., 1907, xli, 27–8: snuff-taker; nucleus of ground glass and chalk.Google Scholar

Bollinger, , ? 1882; cited by Seifert: cherry stone nucleus.Google Scholar

Bomfim, D. M., Publ. méd. S. Paulo, 1941, xiii, 41–44.Google Scholar

Bomfim, D. M., Med.-cir. pharm., 11., 1940, pp. 262–5; per Index Medicus: case report.Google Scholar

Boonacker, A. A., Nederl. Tijdschr. Geneesk., Amst., 1915, p. 1703; per Index Medicus: case report.Google Scholar

Botey, R., Arch. latinos de rhin.-laringo.-otol., 12, 1905.Google Scholar

Botey, R., abstract per Ann. des. mal. de l'oreille, etc., 1906, xxxii, 496–9: weight 110 gm.Google Scholar

Bouchardat, , see Hérisset: analysis of the stone.Google Scholar

Bovill, E., B.M.J., 1886, ii, 718: weight 165 grains.Google Scholar

SirBrodie, Benjamin C., Lancet, 1844, i, 457: case report.Google Scholar

Bron, F., Gaz. méd. de Lyon, 1867, xix, 514; cited by Hérisset: case report.Google Scholar

Bross, K., ? 1917; cited by Key-Åberg: nail nucleus.Google Scholar

Brown, W. N., Edin. Med J., 1859–1860, v, 501–03: weight 3 dr. 33 grains.Google Scholar

Calamida, U., Arch. ital. Otol., 1906, xvii, 177–97: three rhinoliths, each complicated by “rhinitis caseosa”.Google Scholar

Calatraveno, , Rev. Valenc. di cien. méd., Valencia, 1915, xvii, 253–6; per Index-Cat. Surg. Gen.: giant rhinolith.Google Scholar

Camerer, C. B., U.S. Naval Med. Bull., 1923, xix, 168–9: cork nucleus.Google Scholar

Carceller, J. C., Rev. medica de Sevilla, 1908, li, 289–92; per Index-Cat. Surg. Gen.: pomme de pin nucleus.Google Scholar

Castex, , ? 1906; cited by Key-Åberg: ? case report.Google Scholar

Chand, K., Ind. med. Rec., 1896, xi, 418; per Index-Cat. Surg. Gen.: case report.Google Scholar

Charazac, J., Rev. méd. Toulouse, 1888, xxii, 217–65; cited by Hérisset; abstract (xlii), by Didsbury: seed nucleus.Google Scholar

Cheatle, A. H., J. Laryng., Rhin. and Otol., 1902, xvii, 358: weight 140 grains; sequestrum nucleus.Google Scholar

Chender, , ? 1911; cited by Key-Åberg: ? case report.Google Scholar

Chiari, O., Wien. med. Wschr., 1885, xxxv, 1397–1400: metal button nucleus.Google Scholar

Chiari, O., Ann. des Mal. de l'oreille, etc., 1890, xvi, 18–21: two cases, cork and bone nuclei.Google Scholar

Chiari, O., Ann. des Mal. de l'oreille, etc., 1895; résumé by Hérisset: two cases, fruit stone and slate pebble nuclei.Google Scholar

Chierici, L., Boll. d. mal. d. Orecchio, etc., 1906, xxiv, 204–07: case report; weight 14 gr., no nucleus found.Google Scholar

Cini, C., Sem. méd., B. Aires, 04 25, 1929, i, 1041–4; per Index Medicus: case report.Google Scholar

Clark, R. D., Albany Med. Annals, 1883, iv, 34; cited by Hérisset: “a case of supposed nasal calculus.”Google Scholar

Clauder, , Ephem. Nat. Curios, 1685, Dec. xii, Ann. xiii. Obs. 78: abstract by Demarquay; extension through septum.Google Scholar

Clay, A. F., B.M.J., 1887, i, 328: weight 110 grains; cherry stone nucleus.Google Scholar

Clutton, H. H., Trans. Path. Soc. Lond., 1883–1884, xxxv, 330: weight 65 grains; blood clot nucleus; spectroscopy negative.Google Scholar

Cobos, S. G., ? 1909; cited by Key-Åberg: coque de pignon nucleus.Google Scholar

Cohn, , Z. f Wundärzte u, Geburish. Fellbach, 1905, lvi, 192–9; Index-Cat. Surg. Gen.: “Einige Fälle v. Fremdkörpern in Ohr und Nase.”Google Scholar

Compaired, C., Ann. des mal. de. l'oreille, 1899, xxv, 337–69; cited by Pisano: case report.Google Scholar

Cook, H., Boston Med. & S. Jl., in Ranking's Abstracts of Med. Sci., 1847, vi, 132, article 74: case report.Google Scholar

Cosson of Tours, Rev. Hebdom. Laryng., Paris, 1904, xiv, ii, 241–2: weight 20 gm.; caillou nucleus.Google Scholar

Costen, J. B., J. Missouri M.A., 1939, xxxvi, 266–8; rhinolith associated with diphtheroid bacilli bead nucleus.Google Scholar

Coupard, G., Bull. Soc. de méd. prat., Paris, 1888, 242–5; Index-Cat. Surg. Gen.: “Nasal foreign bodies causing symptoms of ozaena”: ? case report.Google Scholar

Cozzolino, V., Morgagni, Milano, 1893, xxxv, 154–69; cited by Hérisset and abstract by Didsbury: two case reports, one of ? multiple rhinoliths, unilateral.Google Scholar

Cozzolino, V., Arch. di laring., 1888, viii, 23–6; cited by Seeligmann: no nucleus found.Google Scholar

Crabbe, A. A., J.A.M.A., 1913, lxi, 121: cotton nucleus.Google Scholar

Curtis, H. H., ? 1901; cited by Lee Felt: rhinolith in gouty subject; no nucleus found.Google Scholar

Czarda, G., Gaz. méd. de Paris, 1884, Nos. 49 et 50, 7^e série, tome 1, 580–81.Google Scholar

Czarda, G., Gaz. med. de Paris, 591–3: three rhinoliths and two nasal foreign bodies reported; brief review;. case 1, wool; case 2, prune stone; case 3, jumper berry as nuclei.Google Scholar

Delavan, D. B., Arch. Laryng., N.Y., 1880, i, 69; cited by Chiari: shoe button nucleus.Google Scholar

Demarquay, , “Mémoire sur les calculs des fosses nasales,” Arch. Gén. de Méd., 1845, 4^e série, viii, 174–92; report of Blandm's case, collection of 15 cases, and first review: cherry stone nucleus.Google Scholar

Dénissow, , ? 1926; cited by Joukovsky: three case reports.Google Scholar

Deschamps, , Soc. méd. de l'Isère, 06, 1890.Google Scholar

Deschamps, , per Joal's abstract, J. Laryng. and Rhin., 1890, iv, 516–17: nasal foreign body.Google Scholar

Dethlefsen, , ? 1889; cited by Seeligmann: newspaper nucleus.Google Scholar

Didsbury, G., Thèse Paris, No. 341, 1894; report of two cases, and résumé of 52 others in the literature.Google Scholar

van Dooren, Th. P., ? 1913; cited by Key-Åberg, Oeuf de Tjitjak nucleus.Google Scholar

Doss, B., Indian med. Gaz., 1873, viii, 43: weight 88 grains.Google Scholar

Edelbrook, , ? 1895; cited by Seifert: rhinoliths amongst cement workers.Google Scholar

Enokov, I. K., Sovet. urach. zhur., 05 30, 1936, 774–6; per Index Medicus: rhinolith resembling rhinoscleroma.Google Scholar

Erichsen, , ? 1872; cited by Hinde: ? two case reports.Google Scholar

Faith, T., Laryngscope, 1906, xvi, 205–07: weight about 100 grains; pearl button nucleus.Google Scholar

Faure, , Loire méd. St. Etienne, 1908, xxvii, 363; per Index-Cat. Surg. Gen.: right nasal stone.Google Scholar

Fearnley, W., B.M.J., 1893, i, 405: “annular” rhinolith.Google Scholar

Felici, , ? 1888; cited by Seifert: clod of earth as nucleus.Google Scholar

Felix, E., ? 1913; cited by Key-Åberg: morceau de cire nucleus.Google Scholar

Felix, J., Arch. Méd. Chir. pract., Brux., 05, 1889, iii, 72; cited by Seifert: cherry stone nucleus.Google Scholar

Felt, C. L., Internat. Med. Mag., N.Y., 1901, x, 207–10: two case reports, nucleus of only one mentioned; brown paper.Google Scholar

Ferié, or Ferré, , ? 1887; cited by Seeligmann (Ferié) and Hérisset (Ferré): grape-stone nucleus.Google Scholar

Fethke, J., Königsb. i. Pr., 1897, 8°; cited by Mercier-Bellevue and Hérisset: sequestrum nucleus.Google Scholar

Flatau, , ? 1893 and ? 1895; cited by Seifert as case of rhinolith with septal perforation.Google Scholar

Flodquist, , ? 1908; cited by Key-Åberg: cherry stone nucleus.Google Scholar

Fotiade, , Arch. internat. de Laryng., 1927, vi, 352: cherry stone nucleus.Google Scholar

Fraenkel, B., Berl. klin. Wschr., 1895, xxxii, 87: flint nucleus.Google Scholar

Francis, R., J. Laryng. and Otol., 1922, xxxvii, 416–18: blood clot nucleus.Google Scholar

Friedberg, S. A., J. Ophth. and Oto-Laryng., 1909, iii, 180; per Index-Cat. Surg. Gen.: case report.Google Scholar

von Gámán, , ? 1908; cited by Key-Åberg: cherry stone nucleus.Google Scholar

van Gangelen, G., Nederl. Tijdschr. Geneesk., 1922, lxvi, pt. 2, 510; per Index Medicus: case report.Google Scholar

Di Gardi, M., “Pratica,” Venetiis, 1502, pars II; cap. xiv, p. 408; cited by Morell Mackenzie, Noquet and others: ? first case report.Google Scholar

Garel, J., Ann. des mal. de l'oreille, etc., 1889, xv, 337; cited by Garel, 1897; case reportGoogle Scholar

Garel, J., Ann. des mal. de l'oreille, etc., 1897, xxiii, 193–203: four new cases, all five with cherry stone nuclei.Google Scholar

Geizer, , cited by Moure, 1893: early quantitative analysis.Google Scholar

Gerber of Königsberg, Deut. med. Wschr., 1892, xviii, 1165–66: cotton wool nucleus.Google Scholar

Gillett, , Union mé4. Par., 1876, 3s., xxx, 121–5; per Index-Cat. Surg. Gen.: case report.Google Scholar

Glas, E., Wien. klin. Wschr., 1907, xx, 483–4: incrusted tooth, republished in Mschr. f. Ohrenh., 1913, xlvii, 164–6, with new case: vegetable nucleus.Google Scholar

Glas, E., Wien. kim. Wschr., 1919, xxxii, 187: glass bead nucleusGoogle Scholar

Glas, E., Sitz. B. Wien. Laryng.-Rhin. Ges., p. 93, Sitz. 3.11.1925: X-ray diagnosis.Google Scholar

Goodyear, H. M., Cincinnati J. Med., 1942, xxiii, 33–4; per Index Medicus: case report.Google Scholar

Gorman, J. R., Trans. Amer. Laryng., Rhin. and Otol. Soc., 1930, xxxvi, 498–9: pebble or seashell nucleus; weight about 100 grains.Google Scholar

Götz, , ? 1893; cited by Seifert: cherry stone nucleus.Google Scholar

De Graaf, J., Geneesk. gids., 05 5th, 1932, x, 125–7; per Index Medicus: report of seven cases.Google Scholar

Gradenigo, G., ? 1893; cited by Seifert.Google Scholar

Gradenigo, G., Ann. des. mal. de l'oreiile, etc., 1895, xxi, 246–7.Google Scholar

Gradenigo, G., abstract J. Laryng., Rhin. and Otol., 1896, x, 81 (Wolfenden): cherry stone nucleus.Google Scholar

Graefe, , Ann. d'Oculistique, 1828, viii, 4 and 5 liv., p. 203; cited by Chiari: cherry stone nucleus.Google Scholar

Graefe, and Walther, , cited by Seeligmann: ? case report, no nucleus found.Google Scholar

Graham, G. W., Charlotte (N.C.) Med. Jl., 1896, viii, 155Google Scholar

Graham, G. W., abstract J. Laryng., Rhin. and Otol., 1896, x, 344 (Hunt): no nucleus found.Google Scholar

Grant, J. Dundas, J. Laryng., Rhin. and Otol., 1897, xii, 249: blotting paper nucleus.Google Scholar

Gross, , Münch. med. Wschr., 1901, xlviii, 1568; cited by Key-Åberg: case report.Google Scholar

Grove, J. H., Med. Times, Philad., 1870–1871, i, 401; per Index-Cat. Surg. Gen.; cited by Seifert: no nucleus found.Google Scholar

Gruber, J., Mschr. f. Ohrenh., 1882, xvi, 121–6: cherry stone nucleus.Google Scholar

Gugersoll, T. M., ? 1902; cited by Key-Åberg: case report.Google Scholar

Guignard, , Gaz. des Hôp., 1852, cxlv. 579; case of incrusted prune stone, mentioned during discussion of Pingault's case.Google Scholar

Guthrie, D., J. Laryng. and Otol., 1926, xli, 454–57: stone of fifty years' duration in nose.Google Scholar

Guttceit, or Gutceit, , ? 1846; cited by Chiari and Seeligmann: no nucleus found.Google Scholar

Guttmann, V., Verhandl. deut. laryng. Ges., 1908–1912, 642–4: cherry stone nucleus.Google Scholar

Guttmann, V., Arch. internat. de laryng., 1922, i, 188–94: four new cases, two cherry stones, a pebble and no nucleus, respectively.Google Scholar

Hajek, M., Internat. klinik. Rundschau, 1892, pp. 33–4.Google Scholar

Hajek, M., Internat. klinik. Rundschau, 1892, pp. 49–52: large stone; septal perforation.Google Scholar

Halász, H., Arch. f. Ohrenh., Leip., 1904, lxiii, 214–16.Google Scholar

Halász, H., Arch. f. Laryng. u. rhin., Berl., 1904, xvi, 539: case report.Google Scholar

de Hall, F. H., Trans. Clin. Soc., Lond., 1893, xxvi, 60–7.Google Scholar

de Hall, F. H., B.M.J., 1893, 06 21: no nucleus found; weight 92 grains.Google Scholar

Hamilton, W., ? 1903; cited by Key-Åberg: ? case report.Google Scholar

Hamm, , ? 1916; cited by Key-Åberg: ? cherry stone nucleus.Google Scholar

Handford, (and Waring, A.), B.M.J., 1893, ii, 117–18: cherry stone nucleus; “rhinitis caseosa”.Google Scholar

Hanquet, , Arch. méd. Belges, 1889, 3s, xxxv, 248–51; per Index-Cat. Surg. Gen.: cherry stone nucleus.Google Scholar

Harke, , ? 1895, cited by Oppikofer: antral rhinolith.Google Scholar

Harrell, R. F., New Orleans med. surg. J., 11, 1895–1896, N.S. xxiii, 269.Google Scholar

Harrell, R. F., brief abstract, J. Laryng., Rhin. and Otol., 1896, x, 80: nucleus of paper.Google Scholar

Hartmann, , ? 1889; cited by Seifert: ? case report.Google Scholar

Hays, , Trans. Coll. Phys. Phila., 1856–62 (1863), N.S. iii, 154; per Index-Cat. Surg. Gen.: foreign body retained in nose for upwards of twenty years: glass button nucleus.Google Scholar

Heinemann, O., Deut. med. Wschr., 1913, xxx, 1466: case 1, pea nucleus; case 2, exogenous nucleus probable but not found.Google Scholar

Hellot, R., ? 1902; cited by Key-Åberg: ? case report.Google Scholar

Helsmoortel, , ? 1898; cited by Key-Åberg: cherry stone nucleus.Google Scholar

Hendley, T. H., B.M.J., 1886, ii, 1161: weight 720 grains; nucleus not described.Google Scholar

Henkes, J. C., ? 1909; cited by Key-Åberg: prune stone nucleus.Google Scholar

Hennebert, C., ? 1908; cited by Key-Åberg: case report.Google Scholar

Henrichsen, J., Münch. med. Wschr., 1910, lvii, 1795; cited by Key-Åberg: cherry stone nucleus.Google Scholar

Hering, T., Gaz. lek. Warszwa, 1881, 2s, i, 29–32; Index-Cat. Surg. Gen.Google Scholar

Hering, T., Mschr. f. Phrenh., 1881, v; cited by Morell Mackenzie: button nucleus.Google Scholar

Hérisset, A., Thèse Paris, 1904, No. 297; review, bibl. 135 refs.: two cases, cherry stone and wood nuclei.Google Scholar

Herzfeld, J., Mschr. Ohrenh., 1897, xxxi, 63–5: case report; nucleus ? iron.Google Scholar

Hessler, , Münch. med. Wschr., 1892, xxxix, 23: laminaria nucleus.Google Scholar

Hewetson, H. B., J. Laryng. and Otol., 1888, ii, 485–86: 23 years' history; nucleus, part of tubing from baby's bottle.Google Scholar

Hickman, W., B.M.J., 1867, ii, 266: steel ring in the nasopharynx.Google Scholar

Hill, G. W., Proc. Laryng. Soc., Lond., 1896–1897, iv, 72–3.Google Scholar

Hill, G. W., J. Laryng., Rhin. and Otol., 1897, xii, 249: no nucleus described; “rhinitis caseosa”.Google Scholar

Hill, J. F., J. Laryng., Rhin. and Otol., 1899, xiv, 145–6: weight 275 grains; nucleus not described.Google Scholar

Hinde, A., Med. Rec. N. Y., 1888, xxxiv, 145–6: case report; specimen lost.Google Scholar

Hirschmann, , Berl. klin. Wschr., 1903, xl, 111: button nucleus.Google Scholar

Holmgren, G., Acta Oto-Laryng., Stockh., 1918–1919, i, 671: cotton-wool nucleus.Google Scholar

Hopmann, , 70th Meeting Assoc. German Scientists & Physicians, Sect. Laryng. and Rhin., reported in J. Laryng., Rhin. and Otol., 1900, xv, 208–9: bilateral rhinoliths; cherry stone nuclei.Google Scholar

Horbye of Christiana, Int. Zbl. f. Laryng., 1896, xii, 372: case report; nucleus not described.Google Scholar

Horcasitas, J., Rev. Ibero-Am. de Cien Méd., Madrid, 1915, xxxiii, 257–64; per Index Medicus: giant rhinolith.Google Scholar

Horiuchi, H., “Contribution on the origin of rhinoliths,” Dai Nippon Ji-Bi-In-Ko-Kwa-Kwai Kwai Ho, Tokyo, 1897, iii, 136–49; Index-Cat. Surg. Gen.Google Scholar

Horn, , ? 1788; cited by Demarquay and others: “Contribution à l'études des rhinoliths”; cherry stone nucleus.Google Scholar

Horne, , Jonson, , Proc. Laryng. Soc., Lond., 1905–1906, xiii, 6: in discussion of Watson Williams's case; case report; cotton wool nucleus.Google Scholar

Howard, R. L., Ohio M. & S. Jl., Columbus, 1852–1853, v, 215; Index-Cat. Surg. Gen.: thimble in post-nasal region.Google Scholar

Hunt, J. M., Glasg. M.J., 1887, xxvii, 186–88: two nasal foreign bodies, a cherry stone and half a damson stone.Google Scholar

Hunt, J. M., Lpool. med-chir J., 01, 1889, p. 62.Google Scholar

Hunt, J. M., abstract Practitioner, 1889, xlii, 292–3: rhinolith containing sequestrum.Google Scholar

Hutcheon, J. R., Med. J. Austral., 04 12, 1941, i, 451: ? pus nucleus; “rhinitis caseosa”.Google Scholar

Iakontow, , ? 1924; cited by Joulovsky: ? case report.Google Scholar

Imarugi, M., and Imafugi, S., “Two supplementary cases (see Horiuchi) as a contribution on rhinoliths”; Dai Nippon Ji-Bi-In-Ko-Kwa-Kwai Kwai Ho, Tokyo, 1899, v, 39–158; Index-Cat. Surg. Gen.Google Scholar

Ingersoll, J. M., N.Y. Med. Record, 1902, lxi, 575–76.Google Scholar

Ingersoll, J. M., abstract J. Laryng., Rhin. & Otol., 1902, xvii, 324–5: two cases; nuclei, bean and pea respectively.Google Scholar

Ireland, J., Arch. Otolaryng., 1929, x, 190–91: ? felt nucleus; 30 × 25 × 15 mm.: weight 5.0 g.Google Scholar

Ito, M., Taiwan Igakkai Zasshi, 1935, xxxiv, 1381; per Index Medicus: newspaper nucleus.Google Scholar

Ivanoff, V. M., Vrach. Gaz., St. Peters., 1913, xx, 343–5; Index-Cat. Surg. Gen.; case report.Google Scholar

Jacquemart, , Ann. des mal. de l'oreille, etc., 1884, x, 47–51: fruit stone nucleus.Google Scholar

Jana, A. P., Indian med. Gaz., 09, 1930, lxv, 504–5: ? blood clot nucleus.Google Scholar

Janatka, F., Wien. klin. Rundschau, 1896, x, 643; résumé by Hérisset: nasopharyngeal rhinolith; bilateral otitis.Google Scholar

Le Jeune, P., Ann. de méd. et chir. inf., Paris, 1913, xvii, 397; Index-Cat. Surg. Gen.: case report.Google Scholar

Jones, S., Trans. Path. Soc., Lond., 1888–1889, xl, 401–02: unilateral multiple rhinoliths; nuclei not described.Google Scholar

Joseph, G., Med. Rec. N. Y., 1914, lxxxvi, 673; per Index-Cat. Surg. Gen.: rhinolith in a child aged 8 years.Google Scholar

Joukovsky, A., Ann. d'oto.-laryng., 1931, ii, 147–51: four cases; sunflower seed, cherry stone and piece of veneer respectively in three; no nucleus found in fourth; Russian cases reviewed.Google Scholar

Jurasz, A., Die Krankh. d. ob. Luftwege, 1891, heft i, 96–7; Index-Cat. Surg. Gen.: screw nucleus (Seifert).Google Scholar

Khan, or Kan, , ? 1905; cited by Key-Åberg: prosthetic dental appliance nucleus.Google Scholar

Kahnity, , ? 1902; cited by Oppikofer: antral rhinolith.Google Scholar

Kayser, R., Mschr. Ohrenh., 1891, xvii, 824–5: incrusted incisor nasal tooth.Google Scholar

Kayser, R., Mschr. Ohrenh., 1898, xxxii, 149: two rhinoliths amongst 572 nasal patients.Google Scholar

Keen, J. A., J. Laryng. and Otol., 1930, xlv, 333–43: incidence of foreign bodies in the nose.Google Scholar

Keilin, M. I., Prakt. Vrach, 1903, ii, 1130; Index-Cat. Surg. Gen.: “nasal calculi.”Google Scholar

Keiper, G. F., N.Y. Med. J., 1894, lix, 21; per Index Medicus: cherry stone nucleus.Google Scholar

Kelemen, G., Z. f. Laryng. u. Rhin., 1926–1927, xv, 93–5: ? blood clot nucleus; good radiograms.Google Scholar

Kern, or Kerne, , “Douleurs de tête causées pas des calculs”; Ephem. Nat. Curios., 1700, dec. iii, ann. v et vi, obs. 43, p. 100, résumé by Demarquay: ? unilateral multiple calculi; nucleus not described.Google Scholar

Key-Åberg, H., “La Rhinolithase. Monographie et étude de cas”; Acta Oto-Laryngol., 1921–1922, iii, 449–472; bibliography extensive but many of the references are not now traced; eleven rhinoliths described;.Google Scholar

Key-Åberg, H., Svenska läk-sallsk. handl., Stockh., 1921, xlvii, 1–12; cited by Key-Åberg.Google Scholar

Kiesselbach, , ? 1889; cited by Seeligmann and Seifert: no nucleus found.Google Scholar

Kispert, , El Genio, , ? 1886; cited by Seifert: case report.Google Scholar

Klein, W., ? 1906; cited by Key-Åberg: ? case report.Google Scholar

Knight, C. H., Med. News, Phila., 1891, lviii, 6–8: removal of sequestrum from nose; not apparently incrusted.Google Scholar

Kohan, L. N., Prakt., Vrach., St. Peters., 1908, vii, 528–30; per Index-Cat. Surg. Gen.: “nasal calculi.”Google Scholar

Köhler of Posen, ? 1886; cited by Voltolini and Seifert; résumé by Didsbury: two cases, one with wood nucleus.Google Scholar

König, , ? 1878; cited in an annotation, B.M.J., 1885, ii, 662–4: ? case report.Google Scholar

Korsakow, , ? 1927; cited by Joukovsky: case report.Google Scholar

Köstlin, , Würt. Kor.-Blatt., 1854, xxiv, 51; per Index.-Cat. Surg. Gen.: grape stone (Voltolini; Chiari).Google Scholar

Krause, or Kruse, , ? 1885; cited by Seeligmann; résumé by Didsbury: cherry stone nucleus.Google Scholar

Kravchenko, F. K., Zhur. ush. nos. i gorl. bolez., 1938, xv, 425–9; per Index Medicus: case report.Google Scholar

Krebs, G., Z. f. Ohrenh., 1907, lvi, 141–4: two cases, incrusted baby's bottle teat, and grain of wheat nuclei.Google Scholar

Kuhn of Strassburg, Mschr. f. Ohrenh., 1892, xxvi, 189–90: cherry stone nucleus.Google Scholar

Lacoarret, , ? 1904; cited by Key-Åberg and Mercier-Bellevue: case 1, graine de citrouille, and case 2, cherry stone nuclei.Google Scholar

Lang, , ? 1904; cited by Key-Åberg: ? case report.Google Scholar

Lang, , Verhandl. d. Budapest K. Gessell. d. Aerzte, 1907, Budapest, 1908, 100; Index-Cat. Surg. Gen.: cherry stone nucleus.Google Scholar

von Láng, K., Arch. f. Laryng. u. Rhin., 1912, xxvi, 445–50 (pp, 448–9): bullet in sphenoid sinus; inverted tooth in antrum and rhinolith 38 × 27 × 15 mm.; weight 5.8 g.; nucleus not described.Google Scholar

Lantin, G., Arch. f. Laryng. u. Rhjn., 1896, iv, 137–62 (pp. 143–56): four case reports; respective nuclei: fruit stone, paper, and none in two cases.Google Scholar

per abstract by Trivas, , Rev. hebd. de Laryng., 1896, xvi, 1502–04.Google Scholar

Lauffs, F., Med. Kor.-Blatt. d. Württ., 1897, lxvii, 399; Index-Cat. Surg. Gen.: four cases, cherry stone nucleus in one.Google Scholar

Law, E., Proc. Laryng. Soc., Lond., 1896–1897, iv, 73; in discussion of Hill's case: bead nucleus.Google Scholar

Lazarraga, , Gac. méd. de. Granada, 1906, xxiv, 163; Index-Cat. Surg. Gen.: large rhinolith.Google Scholar

Lédl, F., Časop. lék. cěsk., 1932, lxxi, 1262–6; per Index Medicus: case report.Google Scholar

von Lénart, Z., ? 1908; cited by Key-Åberg: glass bead nucleus.Google Scholar

Levi, W. D., Kentucky Med. J., Bowling Green, 1918, xvi, 351; Index-Cat. Surg. Gen.: case report.Google Scholar

von Leyden, , ? 1894; cited by Seifert: cherry stone nucleus.Google Scholar

Lincoln, W., Cleveland M.J., 1901, vi, 183; per Index-Cat. Surg. Gen.: large rhinolith.Google Scholar

Lipscher, A., ? 1914; cited by Key-Åberg: case or specimen demonstration.Google Scholar

Little, T. E., B.M.J., 1891, i, 528: specimen demonstration.Google Scholar

Lobell, A., Laryngoscope, 1927, xxxvii, 337–40: case 1, 1 in. × ¾ in. × ½ in.; nucleus not described; case 2, nucleus not obtained.Google Scholar

Locy, F. E., U.S. Naval Med. Bull., 1929, xxvii, 668–9: ? coal dust nucleus.Google Scholar

Logan, P. W., St. Louis M.S. Jl., 1885, xix, 73; Index-Cat. Surg. Gen.: no nucleus found (Seifert).Google Scholar

London Hospital, Path. Museum Specimen; series lvi, 55; cited by de Haviiand Hall.Google Scholar

Longbotham, G., B.M.J., 1903, i, 1372: cherry stone nucleus.Google Scholar

Löwenthal, S., ? 1894; cited by Seifert and Hérisset: ? pea nucleus; ? mucus nucleus.Google Scholar

Lowndes, H., B.M.J., 1867, ii, 206: brass ring, not incrusted; in posterior nares.Google Scholar

Lublinski, W., Berl. klin. Wschr., 1897, xxxi, 972: demonstration of three cases; case 1, small pebble; case 2, shoe button; case 3, nucleus not sought.Google Scholar

Lucas, , cited by Seifert: newspaper nucleus.Google Scholar

Lunin, V. J., ? 1895; cited by Seifert and Hérisset: “K kazüistike rinolitov.”Google Scholar

Lyon, , ? 1892.; cited by Seifert: no nucleus found.Google Scholar

McAldowie, , ? 1889; abstract J. Laryng. and Rhin., 1890, iv, 122: demonstration of specimen.Google Scholar

McBride, P., J. Laryng. Rhin. and Otol., 1897, xii, 66: foreign body nucleus or sequestrum presumed.Google Scholar

Macintyre, J., J. Laryng., Rhin. and Otol., 1900, xv, 357: early radiology in nasal disease.Google Scholar

Mackenzie, Morell, “A Manual of Diseases of the Throat and Nose,” 1884, vol. ii, 446–7; Churchill, Lond.: case 1, unilateral multiple rhinoliths; case 2, weight 70 grains; no nucleus found in either case.Google Scholar

M'Wheeny, Falkiner, Dublin J. Med. Sci., 1889, lxxxvii, 165.Google Scholar

M'Wheeny, Falkiner, Dublin J. Med. Sci., 1889, lxxxvii, 444: early quantitative analysis.Google Scholar

Major, G. W., Trans. Mont. Med.-Chi. Soc., 1890.Google Scholar

Major, G. W., abstract J. Laryng. and Rhin., 1890, iv, 384 (Major): sea shell nucleus.Google Scholar

Malcontine, , ? 1896; cited by Seifert: no nucleus found.Google Scholar

Malosse, , Bull. méd. Algèrie, 02. 10th, 1897.Google Scholar

Malosse, , abstract J. Laryng., Rhin. and Otol., 1897, xii, 698 (Cartaz): case report.Google Scholar

Malyutin, E. N., Med. obozr. Mosk., 1896, xlv, 418–22.Google Scholar

Malyutin, E. N., Med. obozr. Mosk., 1898, l, 334–7; per Index Medicus and Index-Cat. Surg. Gen.; case report of girl aged 12 years.Google Scholar

Marchal, , Gaz. méd. de Picardie, Amiens, 1897, xv, 257–62; résumé by Hérisset: weight 1.86 gm.; no nucleus found.Google Scholar

Marsh, F., J. Laryng., Rhin. and Otol., 1897, xii, 189: mother o'pearl button nucleus.Google Scholar

Mascarel, J., Bull. Soc. de Chir, Paris, 1852, ii, 322–26: bone, ? sequestrum, nucleus; “rhinitis caseosa”.Google Scholar

Masini, G., Gaz. d. Ospitali, Milano. 1888, ix, 426; Index-Cat. Surg. Gen.: cherry stone nucleus (Hérisset).Google Scholar

Maurer, , ? 1889; cited by Seeligmann: ? case report.Google Scholar

Medan, , Suñe, Y, ? 1921; cited by Key-Åberg: case 1, prune Stone nucleus; case 2, coque de pignon nucleus.Google Scholar

Melzi, U., Arch. ital. di otol., 1906, xvii, 312–17: case 1, cherry stone nucleus; case 2, no nucleus found; quantitative analyses.Google Scholar

Mercier-Bellevue of Poitiers, Rev. hebd. de laryngol., 1909, ii, 138–41: no nucleus found; probably “primary”.Google Scholar

Mesz, , ? 1913; cited by Key-Åberg: ? case report.Google Scholar

Meyer, F., Arch. f. Laryng. u. Rhin., 1899, ix, 64–9: metal button nucleus.Google Scholar

Meyerson, S., Medycyna Warszawa, 1884, xii, 712–14; Index-Cat. Surg. Gen.: foreign body in the nose of a child; ? ? rhinolith.Google Scholar

Meyerson, or Meyersohn, , ? 1893; cited by Seifert and Seeligmann: no nucleus found.Google Scholar

Miller, L. H., Brooklyn M.J., 1900, xiv, 398 and 400–01: cherry stone nucleus (wrongly credited to Braislin by Hérisset).Google Scholar

Milligan, W., Med. Chron., 1896, v, 182–3; no nucleus describedGoogle Scholar

Milligan, W., J. Laryng. and Otol., 1898, xiii, 284; nasopharyngeal foreign body.Google Scholar

Mink, P. J., Nederl. Tijdschr. Geneesk., 1912, i, 1061–3; Index-Cat. Surg. Gen.: case 1, cherry stone nucleus; case 2, cotton wool nucleus (Key-Åberg).Google Scholar

Minkiewcz, ,? 1885; résumé by Key-Åberg: cherry stone nucleus.Google Scholar

Miot, C., Rev. hebd. de laryng., etc., Paris, 1898, xix, 1127–36: nucleus; bout de sonde, incrusted; quantitative analysis.Google Scholar

Mitter, K. K., Indian med. Gaz., 1873, viii, 156; Index-Cat. Surg. Gen.: case report.Google Scholar

Moeller, J., Arch. internat. de laryng., Paris, 1909, xxvii, 785–88; Index-Cat. Surg. Gen.: “quelques cas de rhinolithes et un cas d'otolithase”; iron oxide, 36% in one rhinolith; translation by Menier.Google Scholar

Molinié, J., “Les corps étranger du nez chez les enfants”; Méd. Mod., Paris, 1898, ix, 633; per Index Medicus.Google Scholar

Monnié, E.-J., Thèse de Bordeaux, 1889, 4°: résumé of his two cases by Didsbury; no exogenous nuclei found; ? blood clot in one.Google Scholar

Montague, A. J. H., and Lake, R., Lancet, 1903, i, 1165: cherry stone nucleus.Google Scholar

Moore, Irwin, J. Laryng., Rhin. and Otol., 1917, xxxii, 101–2.Google Scholar

Moore, Irwin, J. Laryng., Rhin. and Otol., 386–92: foreign body in antrum for 25 years; not incrusted.Google Scholar

Morelli, K., Orvosi hetil. Budapest, 1886, xxx, 1513–18.Google Scholar

Morelli, K., Orvosi hetil. Budapest, 1896, xi, 541; per Index-Cat. Surg. Gen.:? two, or three, cases; one with cherry stone nucleus (Seifert).Google Scholar

Moriarty, M. D., B.M.J., 1886, i, 690: nucleus not found; weight 2 drachms; “rhinitis caseosa”.Google Scholar

Morwitz, S. M., Arch. oto-laryng., 1934, xx, 704–7: weight 10.4 g.; nucleus not described.Google Scholar

Mounier of Paris, Bull. Soc. franç. d'otol., etc., 1898, xiv, 382–4: lachrymal duct calculus; cannula nucleus.Google Scholar

Moure, E. J., Rev. de laryng., 1894, xiv, 187–98: case 1, classical “primary” rhinolith; ? blood clot nucleus; case 2, graine d'orange ou de citron nucleus; rhinitis caseosa; case 3, morceau de bouchon nucleus.Google Scholar

Moure, E. J., Mschr. f. Ohrenh., 1893, xxvii, 219–222; 257–61 (cases 1 and 2).Google Scholar

Moure, E. J., Rev. mens. de laryng. et rhin., 1882, cited by Moure (case 2).Google Scholar

Moure, E. J., Gaz. hebd. d. Sc. méd. de Bordeaux, 1893, xiv, 376–88; résumé by Hérisset (case 1 again).Google Scholar

Moure, E. J., Mschr. f. Ohrenh., 1895, xxix, 343: on the necessity for histological and chemical examination of rhinoliths.Google Scholar

Mühlenkamp, , Münch. med. Wschr., 1909, xxv, 1282: two cases of intra-nasal bodies, not incrusted.Google Scholar

Myerson, M. C., Laryngoscope, 1928, xxxviii, 393–5: weight 56 g.Google Scholar

von Navratil, D., Pest. Med.-Chir. Presse, Budapest, 1908, xliv, 932; Index-Cat. Surg. Gen.: case report.Google Scholar

Nemai, J., Fuleszet, Budapest, 1910, 1–4; per Index Medicus.Google Scholar

Nemai, J., ? Orvosi hetil., 1910, xlvii (Key-Åberg): caroub nut nucleus.Google Scholar

Nitsche, , Mschr. f. Ohrenh., 1891, xxv, 196–7: bilateral rhinoliths: cherry stone nuclei.Google Scholar

Nolte, , Allg. med. cent.-zeit., Berl., 1887, lvi, 1181; per Index Medicus: large rhinolith; qualitative analysis by Eharius.Google Scholar

Noquet of Lille, Bull. méd. du Nord., 1887; cited by Noquet, 1894: boot button nucleus.Google Scholar

Noquet of Lille, Rev. de Laryng., Paris, 1894, xiv, 623–8: cherry stone or boot button nucleus.Google Scholar

Noquet of Lille, Rev. de Laryng., Paris, 1890, 07 1st, 425 (Seeligmann): ? third case; black silk nucleus; cited by Noquet as 1890.Google Scholar

Nourse, W. E. C., B.M.J., 1883, ii, 728: weight 46 grains, 1 in. × 8/10 in. × 6/10 in.; bone nucleus.Google Scholar

Nowotny, E., Przegl. Lek., Krakow, 1904, xliii, 681, 697; Index-Cat. Surg. Gen.: “Foreign Bodies of the Nose, Pharynx & Oesophagus, extracted after being present for two years”; ? any case report of rhinolith; included by Key-Åberg.Google Scholar

Omatski, V. I., Protok. i trudi Obsh., Archangel vrach (1896), 1897, 26–32; Index-Cat. Surg. Gen.: case report.Google Scholar

Ónodi, A., “Lachrymal stone in nasal cavity”; Orvosi hetil., Budapest, 1901, xlv, 481; Index-Cat. Surg. Gen.Google Scholar

Oppikofer, E., Arch. f. Laryng. u. Rhin., Berl., 1908, xx, 31–7: antral rhinolith; qualitative analysis; review of literature; also ? 1911; cited by Key-Åberg: nasal stone; cherry stone nucleus.Google Scholar

Ostino, G., Giorn. d. R-Accad. di Med., Torino, 1898, 4s, xlvi, 215; per Index Medicus: case report.Google Scholar

Otto, , ? 1891; cited by Seifert; “Z. Casuist, d. Steinbild. in d. Nase”: ? if any case reported.Google Scholar

Pant, H. D., Indian med. Rec., 1898, xiv, 188; per Index Medicus: large rhinolith causing nasal deformity.Google Scholar

Parker, R., Lancet, 1885, i, 378: gun-breech and bolt in nose; not incrusted.Google Scholar

Parker, W. W., N.Y. Med. J., 1890, li, 75: incrusted piece of wood.Google Scholar

Paterson, D. R., J. Laryng., Rhin. and Otol., 1899, xiv, 252–3: nasopharyngeal rhinolith; part of feeding bottle nucleus.Google Scholar

Peláez, P. L., Gac. méd. di Granada, 1897, xv, 528–31; per Index Medicus: case report.Google Scholar

Peresweton, , ? 1882; résumé by Didsbury; noix de cédre nucleus.Google Scholar

Phillips, and Cunier, , Arch. de méd. belge (Brux.), 1842, ix, 389–90: lachrymal calculus.Google Scholar

Pingault, , Gaz. des Hôp., 1852, cxlv. 578–9.Google Scholar

Pingault, , Bull. Soc. de méd. de Poictiers, 1852, xx, 74–6; per Index-Cat. Surg. Gen.: cherry stone nucleus.Google Scholar

Pisano, G., Arch. internat. de laryng., 1907, xxiv, 150–6: pepin de poire nucleus.Google Scholar

Plater, , De olfactus lesione, 1736, lib. 1, c.9, p. 264; theory of inspissated mucous nucleus; no new case reported (Hérisset); case report, blood clot nucleus (Seifert).Google Scholar

Pohl of Salzbrunn, Berl. klin. Wschr., 1893, xxx, 586: cherry stone nucleus.Google Scholar

Polisar, J. M., Laryngoscope, 1933, xliii, 658–63: case 1, weight 53 gr., 25.4 × 19.5 × 19.5 mm.; Indian nutshell nucleus; case 2, weight 45 gr., 19.5 × 13.1 x 6.5 mm.; nucleus not described; case 3, weight 68 gr., 39.8 × 25.4 × 12 mm.; nucleus not described.Google Scholar

Polo of Nantes, Gaz. méd. de Nantes, 1895–1896, xiv, 77.Google Scholar

Polo of Nantes, Rev. hebd. de laryng., 1896, xvi, 964–6.Google Scholar

Polo of Nantes, abstract J. Laryng., Rhin. and Otol., 1896, xi, 147 (Joal): cherry stone nucleus; quantitative analysis.Google Scholar

Polson, C. J., J. Laryng. and Otol., 1942, lvii, 160–77: on “Rhinitis Caseosa”.Google Scholar

Polyák, L., Orvosi hetil., Budapest, 1900, xliv, 828; per Index-Cat. Surg. Gen.: “cases of rhinoliths.”Google Scholar

Poole, W. H., N.Y. Med. J., 1898, lxviii, 45–6.Google Scholar

Poole, W. H., abstract J. Laryng, and Otol., 1898, xiii, 564: no nucleus found.Google Scholar

Poole, W. H., in Louisville M. Month., 1898–1899, v, 297.Google Scholar

Poole, W. H., in Nashville J.M. & S., 1898, xxxiv, 161–4 (Hérisset).Google Scholar

Popoff, V. A., Trudi i Protok. Imp. Kavkazsk. Med. Obsh., Tiflis, 1907–1908, xliv, 455–7; Index-Cat. Surg. Gen.: incrusted nasal tooth.Google Scholar

Porst, E., ? 1907; cited by Key-Åberg: nut nucleus.Google Scholar

Power, , D'Arcy, , Trans. Path. Soc., Lond., 1886–1887, xxxviii, 321: weight 33 gr., piece of rag as nucleus.Google Scholar

Preobrazhenski, S. S., Wratsch. Gaz., 1904, xi, 4, 43; Index-Cat. Sung. Gen.: “Nine cases of foreign bodies and rhinoliths.”Google Scholar

Presencia, G., and Ucelay, A. Bosch, Archivos latinos d. rhin.-laring. Otol., Barc., 08., 1904; per Index Medicus and Index-Cat. Sung. Gen..Google Scholar

Presencia, G., and Ucelay, A. Bosch, abstract Ann. des mal. de l'oreille, etc., 1906, xxxii, 91–2 (Mossé; authors names given as Presencia and Melay): weight 85 grammes; nucleus not described.Google Scholar

Price-Brown, , ? ? 1892; cited by Seifert: no nucleus found.Google Scholar

Prichard, A. W., Trans. Bristol Med.-Chi. Soc., 1878, i, 101Index-Cat. Surg. Gen.: case report.Google Scholar

Pringle, , ? 1887; cited by Seifert: nasal foreign body.Google Scholar

Pucnkovski, A., Vrach. Gaz., St. Peters., 1908, xv, 830–51; Index-Cat. Surg. Gen.: “Zur Kasuistik der Rhinolithen.”Google Scholar

Pusateri, S., Arch. ital. di otol., 1904–1905, xvi, 295–300; case report.Google Scholar

Rabboni, I., “Contrib. allo studio dei rinolite”; Gaz. sicil. di med. e chir., Palermo, 1907, vi, 113, 145; Index-Cat. Surg. Gen.Google Scholar

Rebattu, , Lyon méd., 1925, cxxxv, 496–7: no nucleus found; quantitative analysis.Google Scholar

Reintjes, , ? 1892; cited by Seifert: no nucleus found.Google Scholar

Renaud of Nancy, Rev. de laryng., Paris, 1895, xv, 966–8: case i, boot button; case 2: cherry stone nucleus.Google Scholar

Rendu, R., Lyon méd., 1912, cxix, 474–5: annular rhinolith.Google Scholar

Reverdin, J.; cited by Potiquet; Gaz. des Hôp., 1889, lxii, 121–9: unilateral multiple stones; “rhinitis caseosa”.Google Scholar

Révész, E., ? 1914 cited by Key-Åberg: fruit stone nucleus.Google Scholar

Reynolds, J. O., Laryngoscope, 1908, xviii, 215: foreign body in maxillary antrum; not incrusted.Google Scholar

De Rezende, M. O., “Sobre un interessante casode rhinolithe,” Brazil Med., Rio de Jan., 1919, xxxiii, 324; Index Medicus.Google Scholar

Riedlinus, V. or Reidlinus, , Ephem. Nat. Curios, 1706, dec. iii. ann. IX & X; Obs. 145, p. 268; abstract by Demarquay: unilateral multiple calculi.Google Scholar

Rindfleisch, , ? 1887; cited by Hérisset: ? case report.Google Scholar

Ripault, H., Ann. des mal. de l'oreille, etc., 1895, xxi, 520: cherry stone nucleus.Google Scholar

Ritter, C., Memorabilen, Heilbr., 1876, xxi, 311; cited by Seeligmann, Hérisset and Chiari: cherry stone nucleus.Google Scholar

Roault, A., Rev. Méd. de l'est., Nancy, 1898, xxx, 129–47.Google Scholar

Roault, A., abstract J. Laryng. and Otol., 1898, xiii, 564: cherry stone nucleus.Google Scholar

Roe, J. C., Arch. Laryng., N.Y., 1880, i, No. 2, 149–54; cited by Morell Mackenzie, Seeligmann, Hérisset and Chiari: pledget of cotton wool nucleus.Google Scholar

Rohrer of Zurich, Wien. kiln. Wschr., 1890, No. 2, 27; weight 2.29 g., 20 × 17 × 13 mm.Google Scholar

Rohrer of Zurich, Wien. kiln. Wschr., 1892, No. 5, 85: weight 0.71 gm.; nucleus not described.Google Scholar

De Rosa, M., Arch. ital. di otol., etc., 1901, xi, 133–42: case 2, rhinolith complicated by “rhinitis caseosa”.Google Scholar

Rothenaicher of Passau, Mschr. f. Ohrenh., 1897, xxxi, 65–6: cherry stone nucleus.Google Scholar

Rouyer, (Nélaton), Bull. de la Soc. Anal. de Paris, 1857, xxxii, 51 résumé by Didsbury: nucleus not described.Google Scholar

Rouyer, (Nélaton), Bull. de la Soc. Anal. de Paris, 1858, xxxiii, 3; Index-Cat. Surg. Gen.Google Scholar

Ruault, A., Rev. de Laryng., 1890, x, 530–33; discussion 534: case 1, snuff taker; case 2, nucleus not described; case 3, cherry stone nucleus; for quantitative analysis see Berlioz.Google Scholar

Rueda, F., ? 1899; cited by Key-Åberg: ? case report.Google Scholar

Runge of Hamburg, Zbl. Hals.-Nase-u.Ohrenh., 1931–1932, xvii, 254: weight 6.65 g.; ? fruit stone nucleus.Google Scholar

Russ, , ? 1904; cited by Key-Åberg: cherry stone nucleus.Google Scholar

Ruttin, , ? 1907; cited by key-Åberg: apricot stone nucleus.Google Scholar

Ruysch, , Obs. Anat Amstelodami, 1733, Obs. 44, p. 42; abstract by Demarquay.Google Scholar

Sabrazés, see Moure, 1894: histology of a rhinolith.Google Scholar

Sacher, A., ? 1903; cited by Key-Åberg: ? case report.Google Scholar

Salzberger, M., Mschr. f. Ohrenh., 1928, lxii, 1377–8: nucleus not described.Google Scholar

Sandel, A. L., 1892; cited by de Haviland Hall: case report.Google Scholar

Sandford, , ? 1895; cited by Seifert: ? case report.Google Scholar

Sänger, , ? 1897; cited by Seifert: cherry stone nucleus.Google Scholar

De Santi, , Proc. Laryng. Soc., Lond., 1905–1906, xiii, 16, in discussion of Watson's case: cherry stone nucleus.Google Scholar

Savialles, , Bull. de la Fac. Méd., 1814–1815, iv, 411; Index-Cat. Surg. Gen.: cherry stone nucleus (Demarquay).Google Scholar

Schäfer, , ? 1900; cited by Seifert as a foreign body not incrusted.Google Scholar

Schäffer, , cited by Seifert as a cherry stone nucleus; ? second case of bead in the nose.Google Scholar

Schapringer, , ? 1889; cited by Seeligmann: ? case report.Google Scholar

Schech, , cited by Siefert: “glaspapier” nucleus.Google Scholar

Scheier, , “Ueber die Verwerthing der Rüngenstrahlen in der Rhino. u. Laryngologie,” Arch. f. Laryng., 1897, vi, 57–66.Google Scholar

Scheppegrell, W., Rev. internat. de Rhinol, etc., Paris, 1896, vi, 175–77: ? blood clot nucleus (Hérisset).Google Scholar

Schiffers, F., Soc. méd. chir. de Liége, Meeting Oct. 1, 1891.Google Scholar

Schiffers, F., abstract J. Laryng. Rhin. and Otol., 1892, vi, 15 (Hicquet): nucleus not described.Google Scholar

Schlesinger, , ? 1888; cited by Voltolini: “tischglocke” nucleus.Google Scholar

Schmalowski, R., Königsberg i Pr., 1897, 8°; Index-Cat. Surg. Gen.: two case reports.Google Scholar

Schmidt, C., ? 1905; cited by Key-Åberg: cherry stone nucleus, but Seifert cites it as wool tampon nucleus.Google Scholar

Schmidt, , ? 1886; cited by Voltolini: “kreuzdornstück” nucleus.Google Scholar

Schmiegelow, E., Nord. med. Ark., Stockh., 1884, xvi, 1–10; per Index Medicus.Google Scholar

Schmiegelow, E., Rev. mens. de laryng., 1st 11, 1884, v. 380–83, and abstract by Didsbury.Google Scholar

Schmiegelow, E., in Annotation, B.M.J., 1885, ii, 662–3.Google Scholar

Schmiegelow, E., in Rev. Sci. Med., 1885, xxv, 330–1: no nucleus found; ? 1906, cited by Key-Åberg: ? new report.Google Scholar

Schoetz, , ? 1899; cited by Key-Åberg: cherry stone nucleus.Google Scholar

Scholtz, , ? 1887; cited by Seeligmann; ? Schoetz: ? case report.Google Scholar

Schuster, , Z. d. nordd. Chir. Ver. Magdeb., 1847, i, 339–48; Index-Cat. Surg. Gen.: lachrymal calculus.Google Scholar

Scott, , Texas State J. Med., 1906–1907, ii, 267; Index Medicus: weight 43 grains (Bailey).Google Scholar

Seeligmann, M., Inaug. Dissert., Heidelb., 1892: case, 1 metal splinter nucleus; iron content 37.3%; case 2, newspaper nucleus; bibl. of over 100 refs.Google Scholar

Seifert, O., ? 1888; cited by Voltolini; metal button nucleus; Rev. de laryng. etc., 1895, xv, 1021–24; Index-Cat. Surg. Gen.: incrusted tooth; also “Die Nase”, in Paul Heymann's Handbuch der Laryng. u. Rhin, A. Hölder, Wien., 1900, Band iii, heft i, pp. 550–77: over 300 refs. but several are not now traced; some probably relate to nasal foreign bodies, not incrusted.Google Scholar

Seiler, C., Trans. Path. Soc. Phila., 1885–1887, xiii, 125–7; Index-Cat. Surg. Gen.: two large rhinoliths.Google Scholar

Sewell, D. L., Lancet, 1909, ii, 712: metal ring nucleus; cited by Key-Åberg as “Sevrill”.Google Scholar

Shimada, S., Iji Kwai Ho Ogatu, etc., Osaka, 1899, 3–36; Index-Cat. Surg. Gen.: case report.Google Scholar

Siebert, J. H., cited by Key-Åberg: “morceau de palmier” nucleus.Google Scholar

Sikkel, A., Mschr. f. Ohrenh., 1896, xxx, 69: case 1, cherry stone nucleus; case 2, no nucleus found.Google Scholar

Silitch, V., St. Petersb., 1888, 8°Google Scholar

Silitch, V., Vratch, 1887, No. 1, 16Google Scholar

Silitch, V., Moskva, 1890, 120; Index-Cat. Surg. Gen.Google Scholar

Silitch, V., abstract B.M.J., 1887, i, 467: two cases, sequestrum or bone nucleus in one.Google Scholar

Simkó, L., Sebeszet, Budapest, 1912, 17; Index-Cat. Surg. Gen.: “Nasal calculi.”Google Scholar

De Simoni, A., “Contribution à la connaissance de la fore bactérienne des calculs de nez”; Arch. int. de laryng., 1907, xxiii, 182–8.Google Scholar

Smith, Lapton, ? 1888; résumé by Didsbury: boot button nucleus.Google Scholar

Smith, L. W., Laryngoscope, 1922, xxxii, 444–46: case 2, rhinolith in cement worker.Google Scholar

Smith, T., B.M.J., 1867, ii, 547: germinating bean in nose; not a rhinolith.Google Scholar

Sniezhkoff, V. P., Terap. Obozr., Odessa, 1914, vii, 414–20; Index-Cat. Surg. Gen.: case report.Google Scholar

Snyder, J., and Feldman, M., Ann. Otolaryng., 1936, xlv., 430–5: case 1, gauze sponge nucleus; case 2, shoe button; case 3, knitted twine.Google Scholar

Sokolow, T. P., Yez hemies Ushn. Gorlov. i. Nosov. Boliez., St. Petersb., 1912, vii, 467; Index-Cat. Surg. Gen.: cherry stone nucleus (Key-Åberg).Google Scholar

Sokolowski, K., Medycyna, Warsaw, 1907, xxxv, 532, 555; Index-Cat. Surg. Gen.: pumpkin skin nucleus (Key-Åberg).Google Scholar

Spicer, S., Proc. Laryng. Soc., Lond., 1895–1896, iii, 73–4: on the detection of intranasal foreign bodies.Google Scholar

Stamm, J., ? 1916; cited by Key-Åberg: ? case report.Google Scholar

Stepanoff, , ? 1898; cited by Key-Åberg: ? case report.Google Scholar

Stockton, , ? 1884; cited by Chiari: small pebble nucleus.Google Scholar

Stoerk, , ? 1875; cited by Czarda: no nucleus described; only case in this surgeon's vast experience.Google Scholar

Stoker, G., Trans. Path. Soc., Lond., 1886, xxxvii, 449: ? blood clot nucleus.Google Scholar

Stucky, J. A., Laryngoscope, 1896, i, 102, per Index Medicus: weight 76 grains, in child aged 10 years.Google Scholar

Suprunoff, V. K., Kub. nauch.-med.-vestnik., 1930, xii–xiii, 133–37 per Index Medicus: case report.Google Scholar

Symonds, C., Proc. Laryng. Soc., Lond., 1899–1900, vii, 29–30: nucleus of rose leaves.Google Scholar

Tanner, T. H., “Practice of Medicine,” 1869, H. Renshaw, Lond., VIth edition, vol. i, p. 516: shell nucleus.Google Scholar

Taptas, , Gaz. méd. d'Orient., Constant., 1899–1900, xlii, 311; per Index-Cat. Surg. Gen.: case report.Google Scholar

Taylor, F. W., B.M.J., 1905, ii, 329: bead nucleus.Google Scholar

Tessier, L. J., L'Union Méd. du Canada&, 1936, lxv, 658–9: case 1, no nucleus found; case 2, patient kept the specimen.Google Scholar

Thost, ., Deut. med. Wschr., 1904, xxx, 1365: cherry stone nucleus.Google Scholar

Thouret, , Arch. gén. de méd., 1829, xix, 27; résumé by Demarquay: no nucleus described.Google Scholar

Tillaux, , ? 1876; résumé by Didsbury: cherry stone nucleus.Google Scholar

Todd, C. A., ? 1885; cited by Seeligmann: ? two case reports.Google Scholar

Tormene, E., Boll. d. mall. dell'or, etc., 1911, xxix, 97–105: epileptiform convulsions due to rhinolith; nucleus ? un piccolo seme di fagiolo.Google Scholar

Trautmann, G., Z. Hals.-Nasen-u. Ohrenh., 1922, i, 239–40: nucleus not described.Google Scholar

Trimarchi, A., Boll. d. mal. dell'or, etc., 1921, xxxix, 129–32: plum stone nucleus.Google Scholar

Trukenbrod, , Mschr. f. Ohrenh., 1889, xxiii, 139: boot button nucleus.Google Scholar

Tsugawa, S., Oto.-rhino.-laryng., 1937, x, 725: weight 2.8 gm., “wättestuckchen” nucleus, 25 × 16 × 11 mm.; per abstract by Yasumasa.Google Scholar

Ucelay, , ? date; cited by Key-Åberg: olive stone nucleus.Google Scholar

University College Hospital, Museum specimen 1383c.Google Scholar

University College Hospital, Museum specimen 1383d; cited by de Haviland Hall.Google Scholar

Verneuil, , Gaz. des Hôp., 1859, xxxii, 252: unilateral multiple stones; ? “pepin de raisin” nucleus.Google Scholar

Voltolini, R., “Die Krankh. der Nase”; 1888, Breslau, E. Morgensteru: no exogenous nucleus found.Google Scholar

Voorhees, I. W., J.A.M.A., 1920, lxxiv, 672; iron bolt in ethmoid sinuses.Google Scholar

Wagner, R., 1891; abstract J. Laryng., Rhin. and Otol., 1892, vi, 73 (Michael): nucleus not mentioned; ? blood clot (Seifert).Google Scholar

Wakefield, W. H., Charlotte (N.C.) M.J., 1894, iv, No. 2, 36–8 Index-Cat. Surg. Gen.: case report.Google Scholar

Waring, A., 1893; see Handford, whose patient Waring described.Google Scholar

Weil, , ? 1880; cited by Czarda, Hérisset and Seeligmann; ? coffee bean nucleus (Czarda), ? “tuchstückchen” nucleus (Chiari).Google Scholar

Weill, G. A., Oto.-rhin.-laryng., Internat., 1937, xxi, 69–70; per Index Medicus: bullet 30 years in antrum.Google Scholar

Weismann, , ? 1892; cited by Seifert: cherry stone nucleus, present for 60 years (Key-Åberg).Google Scholar

Weiss, , B.M.J., 1887, i, 882: exhibition of a rhinolith.Google Scholar

Wepfer, , 1727; résumé by Demarquay: incrusted tooth.Google Scholar

Werteprow, , ? 1895; cited by Seifert: no nucleus found.Google Scholar

Wessing, or Wessinger, , ? 1891; cited by Seeligmann and Seifert: no nucleus found.Google Scholar

West, J. F., Lancet, 1872, i, 147: pebble nucleus; weight 20 grains; ½ in. × ¼ in., not 1 in. as sometimes cited.Google Scholar

White, J. A., Virgin. Med. Monthly, 1890–1891, xvii, 438–440; per Index Medicus: case report.Google Scholar

William, , ? 1898; cited by de Simoni: ? case report.Google Scholar

Williams, , Watson, , Proc. Laryng. Soc., Lond., 1905–1906, xiii, 16: cotton wool nucleus; discussion pp. 16–17 (Baber, de Santi and Jobson Home, who related their cases).Google Scholar

Wingrave, Wyatt, J. Laryng. and Otol., 1894, viii, 814: no nucleus found.Google Scholar

Wright, A. J., J. Laryng. and Otol., 1927, xlii, 192–3: antral rhinolith; molar tooth nucleus; sinusitis.Google Scholar

Wright, Johnathan, N.Y. Med. Record, 1889, xxxvi, 396–7: case 1, sponge nucleus; case 2, piece of tooth as nucleus; case 3, incrusted tooth.Google Scholar

Yustin, K. A., Russk. oto-laring., 1931, xxiv, 398–400; per Index Medicus: case report.Google Scholar

Zakher, A. V., Vracht. Gaz., St. Petersb., 1903, x, 331, 349; cited by Hérisset: “Nasal calculi.”Google Scholar

Zakkheyeff, V. M., Khirurgia, Mosk., 1899, vi, 3–5; Index-Cat. Surg. Gen.: large rhinolith.Google Scholar

Zimm, A. M., Sibirsk Vrach., Tomsk., 1913–1914, i, per Index Medicus: “Formation of rhinoliths.”Google Scholar

Zuckerkandl, E., “Normale und Pathologische Anatomie der Nasenhöhle und ihrer pneumatischen Anhänge”; W. Braumüller, Wien und Leipzig, 1892, vol. 2, pp. 158–62.Google Scholar

Zuckerkandl, E., “Anat. Norm. et Path. des Fosses Nasales et de leur anexes pneumatiques”; Lichtwitz and Garnault's translation, 1894, i, pp. 555–8 and 578–80: case 1, cherry stone nucleus; case 2, rhinolith 50 × 25 mm.; no nucleus described and case 3, antral rhinolith size of a nut. See plate 18, figs. 1–6 for case 2.Google Scholar

Zwillinger, H., ? 1896, cited by Seifert: ? case report.Google Scholar