Abstract
The study of crystals in stone patients has helped to properly evaluate and treat patients with urinary stone disease (1). The relative merits of early morning urine (EMU) samples and those randomly collected are hotly debated. This paper analyzes the differences between the findings from EMU and random urine samples collected from 200 crystalluric patients.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
PG Werness, JB Bergert, and LH Smith, in: “Urolithiasis, Clinical and Basic Research,” LH Smith, WG Robertson, and B Finlayson, eds., Plenum Press, New York (1981).
GA Rose, in: “Urinary Stone-Clinical and Laboratory Aspects,” GA Rose, ed., MTP Press Ltd., London (1982).
JS Elliot and JN Rabinowitz, J. Urol. 123:324 (1980).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1989 Springer Science+Business Media New York
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Marickar, Y.M.F., Sachidev, K., Joseph, T., Sindhu, S., Vathsala, R. (1989). The Relative Merits of Early Morning vs Random Urine Samples for Studying Crystalluria. In: Walker, V.R., Sutton, R.A.L., Cameron, E.C.B., Pak, C.Y.C., Robertson, W.G. (eds) Urolithiasis. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4899-0873-5_11
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4899-0873-5_11
Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA
Print ISBN: 978-1-4899-0875-9
Online ISBN: 978-1-4899-0873-5
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive