[Skip to Content]
[Skip to Content Landing]
December 20, 1941


JAMA. 1941;117(25):2173. doi:10.1001/jama.1941.02820510061020

Since the presentation in these columns1 of a discussion of the presence of histidine in urine during pregnancy and its significance as a diagnostic sign, further information has accumulated. Careful study by a number of investigators has given somewhat conflicting results. The Tschopps,2 who examined 600 specimens of urine from 300 patients, reported that histidinuria was found in both males and females, in health and in disease. These data have been essentially confirmed by Racker,3 who however demonstrated a considerably larger quantity of histidine in the urine of pregnancy than in normal urine. Langley4 concluded that, while the estimation of histidine in the urine cannot be recommended as a reliable test for pregnancy, it may be a valuable aid in the rapid diagnosis of, or routine testing for, pregnancy. Again, Racker5 has recently demonstrated that the amounts of histidine which can be isolated from such

First Page Preview View Large
First page PDF preview
First page PDF preview