[Skip to Content]
[Skip to Content Landing]
Article
December 14, 1918

THE DIAGNOSTIC AND PROGNOSTIC VALUE OF BLOOD UREA IN UROLOGY

Author Affiliations

Associate in Genito-Urinary Surgery, University of Maryland School of Medicine and College of Physicians and Surgeons; Attending Urologist to Hebrew Hospital BALTIMORE

JAMA. 1918;71(24):1957-1962. doi:10.1001/jama.1918.02600500007002
Abstract

In partially reviewing the literature on urology of the past three decades, one's attention is immediately attracted to the advances made on the surgical and diagnostic sides, though the advances of the former depend almost entirely on the latter. That is, as the newer methods in diagnosis of urologic conditions have developed, the urologist has become more competent as a prognostician and therefore was enabled to perform operations that otherwise would not seem feasible. Furthermore, the advances in diagnosis have been principally aided by the more modern laboratory methods of the blood and urine, and one finds himself dependent on the various chemical tests of the blood and urine, together with the action of various dyes on certain organs before a urologic operation is performed.

The work of Koranyi1 on cryoscopy, of Heidenhain2 on indigocarmin, of Von Mering3 with the phlorizin test, of Geraghty and Rountree4

×