Клинический анализ мочи: историческое значение для развития медицины
Клинический анализ мочи: историческое значение для развития медицины
Захарова И.Н., Османов И.М., Мачнева Е.Б. и др. Клинический анализ мочи: историческое значение для развития медицины. Педиатрия. Consilium Medicum. 2019; 1: 83–88. DOI: 10.26442/26586630.2019.1.190302
________________________________________________
Zakharova I.N., Osmanov I.M., Machneva E.B. et al. Clinical analysis of urine: historical significance for the development of medicine. Pediatrics. Consilium Medicum. 2019; 1: 83–88. DOI: 10.26442/26586630.2019.1.190302
Клинический анализ мочи: историческое значение для развития медицины
Захарова И.Н., Османов И.М., Мачнева Е.Б. и др. Клинический анализ мочи: историческое значение для развития медицины. Педиатрия. Consilium Medicum. 2019; 1: 83–88. DOI: 10.26442/26586630.2019.1.190302
________________________________________________
Zakharova I.N., Osmanov I.M., Machneva E.B. et al. Clinical analysis of urine: historical significance for the development of medicine. Pediatrics. Consilium Medicum. 2019; 1: 83–88. DOI: 10.26442/26586630.2019.1.190302
Анализ мочи имеет столь же древнюю историю, как и болезни человека. В древности исследование мочи помогало врачам диагностировать разные болезни, а позже послужило стимулом для появления таких разделов медицины, как урология, нефрология, эндокринология. Сам метод эволюционировал на протяжении многих веков от сугубо визуально-описательного (уроскопии) до современного, включающего физико-химическое, биохимическое, микроскопическое, молекулярно-генетическое исследование мочи. Клинический анализ мочи и в настоящее время остается одним из самых часто выполняемых исследований в практике врача, в том числе педиатра, несмотря на появление в последние годы новых точных и более совершенных методов исследования биологических жидкостей. В статье представлены исторические этапы развития исследования мочи как диагностического метода и его современные перспективы. Ключевые слова: анализ мочи, инфекция мочевых путей, матула, микроскопия, моча, мочевой осадок, протеинурия, уроскопия.
________________________________________________
Urinalysis is as old as human disease. In antiquity, urine research helped doctors diagnose various diseases, and later served as a stimulus for the emergence of such sections of medicine as urology, nephrology, and endocrinology. The method itself has evolved over the centuries from purely visual-descriptive (uroscopy) to modern, including physico-chemical, biochemical, microscopic, molecular-genetic examination of urine. Clinical analysis of urine and currently remains one of the most frequently performed research in the practice of the doctor, including the pediatrician, despite the emergence in recent years of new, accurate and more advanced methods for the study of biological fluids. The renaissance of this oldest diagnostic tool in medicine is currently taking place thanks to the latest technological advances in microanalysis and molecular biology. The article presents the historical stages of the development of urine as a diagnostic method and its current prospects. Key words: urine analysis, urinary tract infection, matula, microscopy, urine, urinary sediment, proteinuria, uroscopy.
Список литературы
1. Utsch B, Klaus G. Urinalysis in Children and Adolescents. Dtsch Arztebl Int 2014; 111 (37): 617–26.
2. Cameron JS. A history of urine microscopy. Clin Chem Lab Med 2015; 53 (Suppl. 2): s1453–64.
3. Eknoyan G. Looking at the urine: the renaissance of an unbroken tradition. Am J Kidney Dis 2007; 49 (6): 865–72.
4. Bolodeoku J, Donaldson D. Urinalysis in clinical diagnosis. J Clin Pathol 1996; 49 (8): 623–6.
5. Lines JG. A chronicle of the development of clinical chemistry. IFCC Newsletter 1977; 18: 3–9.
6. Rosner F, Munter S. Moses Maimonides' aphorisms regarding analysis of urine. Ann Intern Med 1969; 71: 217–20.
7. Симонян Е.Э., Макулин А.В. Ведическая медицина. Науч. исследования. 2016; 10 (11): 96–100.
[Simonian E.E., Makulin A.V. Vedicheskaia meditsina. Nauch. issledovaniia. 2016; 10 (11): 96–100 (in Russian).]
8. Foster WD. Chemical pathology. In: A short history of clinical pathology. London: E and S Livingstone Ltd., 1961; p. 34– 51.
9. Bush RB. Urine is an harlot, or a liar. JAMA 1969; 208: 131–4.
10. Berger D. A brief history of medical diagnosis and the birth of the clinical laboratory (Part 1. Ancient times through the 19th century). Med Lab Obs 1999; 31: 28–30, 32, 34–40.
11. Keele KD. The quest for significant physical signs. In: The evolution of clinical methods in medicine. Part II. London: Pitman Medical Publishing, 1961; p. 21–49.
12. Keele KD. The impact of science on clinical methods: the basic sciences. In: The evolution of clinical methods in medicine. Part III. London: Pitman Medical Publishing, 1961; p. 50–74.
13. Fogazzi GB, Cameron JS. Urinary microscopy from the seventeenth century to the present day. Kidney Int 1996; 50 (3): 1058–68.
14. Simon JF. Beiträge zur physiologischen und pathologischen Chemie und Mikroskopie. Berlin: August Hirschwald, 1843; b.s. 190.
15. Brock WH. Matter and medicine. In: From protyle to proton: William Prout and the nature of matter, 1785–1985. Bristol, Boston: Adam Hilger Ltd., 1985; p. 12–33.
16. Seldin, DW. Scientific achievements of John P. Peters. Am J Nephrol 2002; 22: 192–6.
17. Robinson RR, Richet G. and International Society of Nephrology. A forty years history. Kidney Int (Suppl.) 2001; 79: 1–100.
________________________________________________
Литература/References
1. Utsch B, Klaus G. Urinalysis in Children and Adolescents. Dtsch Arztebl Int 2014; 111 (37): 617–26.
2. Cameron JS. A history of urine microscopy. Clin Chem Lab Med 2015; 53 (Suppl. 2): s1453–64.
3. Eknoyan G. Looking at the urine: the renaissance of an unbroken tradition. Am J Kidney Dis 2007; 49 (6): 865–72.
4. Bolodeoku J, Donaldson D. Urinalysis in clinical diagnosis. J Clin Pathol 1996; 49 (8): 623–6.
5. Lines JG. A chronicle of the development of clinical chemistry. IFCC Newsletter 1977; 18: 3–9.
6. Rosner F, Munter S. Moses Maimonides' aphorisms regarding analysis of urine. Ann Intern Med 1969; 71: 217–20.
7. Симонян Е.Э., Макулин А.В. Ведическая медицина. Науч. исследования. 2016; 10 (11): 96–100.
[Simonian E.E., Makulin A.V. Vedicheskaia meditsina. Nauch. issledovaniia. 2016; 10 (11): 96–100 (in Russian).]
8. Foster WD. Chemical pathology. In: A short history of clinical pathology. London: E and S Livingstone Ltd., 1961; p. 34– 51.
9. Bush RB. Urine is an harlot, or a liar. JAMA 1969; 208: 131–4.
10. Berger D. A brief history of medical diagnosis and the birth of the clinical laboratory (Part 1. Ancient times through the 19th century). Med Lab Obs 1999; 31: 28–30, 32, 34–40.
11. Keele KD. The quest for significant physical signs. In: The evolution of clinical methods in medicine. Part II. London: Pitman Medical Publishing, 1961; p. 21–49.
12. Keele KD. The impact of science on clinical methods: the basic sciences. In: The evolution of clinical methods in medicine. Part III. London: Pitman Medical Publishing, 1961; p. 50–74.
13. Fogazzi GB, Cameron JS. Urinary microscopy from the seventeenth century to the present day. Kidney Int 1996; 50 (3): 1058–68.
14. Simon JF. Beiträge zur physiologischen und pathologischen Chemie und Mikroskopie. Berlin: August Hirschwald, 1843; b.s. 190.
15. Brock WH. Matter and medicine. In: From protyle to proton: William Prout and the nature of matter, 1785–1985. Bristol, Boston: Adam Hilger Ltd., 1985; p. 12–33.
16. Seldin, DW. Scientific achievements of John P. Peters. Am J Nephrol 2002; 22: 192–6.
17. Robinson RR, Richet G. and International Society of Nephrology. A forty years history. Kidney Int (Suppl.) 2001; 79: 1–100.
1 ФГБОУ ДПО «Российская медицинская академия непрерывного профессионального образования» Минздрава России. 125993, Россия, Москва, ул. Баррикадная, д. 2/1;
2 ГБУЗ «Детская городская клиническая больница им. З.А.Башляевой» Департамента здравоохранения г. Москвы. 125480, Россия, Москва, ул. Героев Панфиловцев, д. 28;
3 ФГБОУ ВО «Российский национальный исследовательский медицинский университет им. Н.И.Пирогова» Минздрава России. 117997, Россия, Москва, ул. Островитянова, д. 1;
4 ФГБОУ ВО «Южно-Уральский государственный медицинский университет» Минздрава России. 454092, Россия, Челябинск, ул. Воровского, д. 64
*zakharova-rmapo@yandex.ru
________________________________________________
Irina N. Zakharova*1, Ismail M. Osmanov2, Elena B. Machneva3, Eteri B. Mumladze1, Nataliia V. Gavelia2, Oksana V. Brazhnikova1,2, Irina N. Lupan4
1 Russian Medical Academy of Continuous Professional Education of the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation. 2/1 Barrikadnaia st., Moscow, 125993, Russian Federation;
2 Z.A.Bashlyaeva Children City Clinical Hospital of the Department of Health of Moscow. 28 Geroev Panfilovtsev st., Moscow, 125480, Russian Federation;
3 N.I.Pirogov Russian National Research Medical University of the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation. 1 Ostrovitianova st., Moscow, 117997, Russian Federation;
4 Medical University of South Ural State of the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation.
64 Vorovskogo st., Chelyabinsk, 454092, Russian Federation
*zakharova-rmapo@yandex.ru