You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT ARCHIVES
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 89 No. 6, JUNE 1952 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  Archives
  •  Online Features
  Books
 This Article
 •Full text PDF
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Similar articles in this journal
 Social Bookmarking
  Add to CiteULike Add to Connotea Add to Del.icio.us Add to Digg Add to Reddit Add to Technorati Add to Twitter What's this?

Urine and Urinary Sediment.

By Richard W. Lippman, M.D. Price, $7.50. Pp. 124, with 61 illustrations. Charles C Thomas, Publisher, 301-327 E. Lawrence Ave., Springfield, Ill., 1952.

AMA Arch Intern Med. 1952;89(6):997.

Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

This compact little volume is a remarkably interesting combination of the theory and practice of clinical urinalysis, with special emphasis on the interpretation of the urinary sediment. The general approach to the subject is that of the late Dr. Thomas Addis, whose guidance the author fortunately experienced.

The book comprises three sections—the first, on the significance of proteinuria and the elements of the urinary sediment; the second, on urinary findings in all types of renal disease, and the third, on details of technique. The text is clear and concise, and almost every page furnishes answers to questions that would arise in the mind of an intelligent medical student or physician. The bibliography is excellent.

The numerous illustrations in the form of color photographs of urinary sediments are virtually perfect. They have been carefully selected to show individual items and typical combinations found in specific renal diseases.

Two criticisms are in . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]



Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter     What's this?





HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | CME | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 1952 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.