• IMA sites
  • IMAJ services
  • IMA journals
  • Follow us
  • Alternate Text Alternate Text
עמוד בית
Wed, 17.07.24

Search results


December 2019
Dror B Leviner MD, Guy Witberg MD, Amir Sharon MD, Yosif Boulos BsC, Alon Barsheshet MD, Erez Sharoni MD, Dan Spiegelstein MD, Hana Vaknin-Assa MD, Dan Aravot MD, Ran Kornowski MD and Abid Assali MD

Background: Current guidelines for choosing between revascularization modalities may not be appropriate for young patients.

Objectives: To compare outcomes and guide treatment options for patients < 40 years of age, who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) between 2008 and 2018.

Methods: Outcomes were compared for 183 consecutive patients aged < 40 years who underwent PCI or CABG between 2008 and 2018, Outcomes were compared as time to first event and as cumulative events for non-fatal outcomes.

Results: Mean patient age was 36.3 years and 96% were male. Risk factors were similar for both groups. Drug eluting stents were implemented in 71% of PCI patients and total arterial revascularization in 74% of CABG patients. During a median follow-up of 6.5 years, 16 patients (8.6%) died. First cardiovascular events occurred in 35 (38.8%) of the PCI group vs. 29 (31.1%) of the CABG group (log rank P = 0.022), repeat events occurred in 96 vs. 51 (P < 0.01), respectively. After multivariate adjustment, CABG was associated with a significantly reduced risk for first adverse event (hazard ratio [HR] 0.305, P < 0.01) caused by a reduction in repeat revascularization. CABG was also associated with a reduction in overall repeat events (HR 0.293, P < 0.01). There was no difference in overall mortality between CABG and PCI.

Conclusions: Young patients with coronary disease treated by CABG showed a reduction in the risk for non-fatal cardiac events. Mortality was similar with CABG and PCI.

February 2016
Amjad Shalabi MD, Ehud Raanani MD, Amihai Shinfeld MD, Rafael Kuperstein MD, Alexander Kogan MD, Alexander Lipey MD, Eyal Nachum MD and Dan Spiegelstein MD

Background: Prolonged life expectancy has increased the number of elderly high risk patients referred for surgical aortic valve replacement (AVR). These referred high risk patients may benefit from sutureless bioprosthesis procedures which reduce mortality and morbidity.

Objectives: To present our initial experience with sutureless aortic bioprotheses, including clinical and echocardiographic results, in elderly high risk patients referred for AVR. 

Methods: Forty patients (15 males, mean age 78 ± 7 years) with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis underwent AVR with the 3F Enable™ or Perceval™ sutureless bioprosthesis during the period December 2012 to May 2014. Mean logistic EuroScore was 10 ± 3%. Echocardiography was performed preoperatively, intraoperatively, at discharge and at follow-up.

Results: There was no in-hospital mortality. Nine patients (22%) underwent minimally invasive AVR via a right anterior mini-thoracotomy and one patient via a J-incision. Four patients underwent concomitant coronary aortic bypass graft, two needed intraoperative repositioning of the valve, one underwent valve exchange due to inappropriate sizing, three (7.5%) had a perioperative stroke with complete resolution of neurologic symptoms, and one patient (2.5%) required permanent pacemaker implantation due to complete atrioventricular block. Mean preoperative and postoperative gradients were 44 ± 14 and 13 ± 5 mmHg, respectively. At follow-up, 82% of patients were in New York Heart Association functional class I and II.

Conclusions: Sutureless AVR can be used safely in elderly high risk patients with relatively low morbidity and mortality. The device can be safely implanted via a minimally invasive incision. Mid-term hemodynamic results are satisfactory, demonstrating significant clinical improvement.

 

January 2016
Eyal R. Nachum MD, Ehud Raanani MD, Amit Segev MD, Victor Guetta MD, Ilan Hai MD, Amihai Shinfeld MD, Paul Fefer MD, Hamdan Ashraf MD, Israel Barabash MD, Amjad Shalabi MD and Dan Spiegelstein MD

Background: The rate of mitral bioprosthesis implantation in clinical practice is increasing. Transcatheter valve-in-valve implantation has been described for high risk patients requiring redo valve surgery. 

Objectives: To report our experience with transapical valve-in-valve implantation for failed mitral bioprosthesis.

Methods: Since 2010, 10 patients have undergone transapical valve-in-valve implantation for failed bioprosthesis in our center. Aortic valve-in-valve implantation was performed in one of them and mitral valve-in-valve implantation in nine. Mean age was 82 ± 4 years and 6 were female (67%). Mean time from original mitral valve (MV) replacement to valve-in-valve procedure was 10.5 ± 3.7 years. Follow-up was completed by all patients with a mean duration of 13 ± 12 months. 

Results: Preoperatively, all patients presented with significant mitral regurgitation; two with mitral stenosis due to structural valve failure. All nine patients underwent successful transapical valve-in-valve implantation with an Edwards Sapien™ balloon expandable valve. There was no in-hospital mortality. Mean and median hospital duration was 15 ± 18 and 7 days respectively. Valve implantation was successful in all patients and there were no major complications, except for major femoral access bleeding in one patient. At last follow-up, all patients were alive and in NYHA functional class I or II. Echocardiography follow-up demonstrated that mitral regurgitation was absent or trivial in seven patients and mild in two. At follow-up, peak and mean gradients changed from 26 ± 4 and 8 ± 2 at baseline to 16.7 ± 3 and 7.3 ± 1.5, respectively.

Conclusions: Transcatheter transapical mitral valve-in-valve implantation for failed bioprosthesis is feasible in selected high risk patients. Our early experience with this strategy is encouraging. Larger randomized trials with long-term clinical and echocardiographic follow-up are recommended.

 

March 2015
Michael Shpoliansky BSc, Dan Spiegelstein MD, Amihai Shinfeld MD and Ehud Raanani MD
December 2014
Nira Varda-Bloom PhD, Avraham J. Treves PhD, Tatiana Kroupnik MSc, Dan Spiegelstein MD, Ehud Raanani MD and Arnon Nagler MD

Background: Non-mobilized peripheral blood contains mostly committed cells with limited numbers of early progenitors. Objectives: To enrich functional progenitor cells from healthy donors and ischemic heart disease patients by short-term culture of mononuclear cells with defined culture conditions.

Methods: Mononuclear cells obtained from healthy donors and ischemic heart disease patients were cultured for 7 days in a cytokine cocktail. We tested the multilineage differentiation capacities and phenotype of cultured cells.

Results: The short-term culture (7 days) of all study groups with a defined cytokine cocktail resulted in two distinct cell populations (adherent and non-adherent) that differed in their differentiation capacities as well as their cell surface markers. Cultured adherent cells showed higher differentiation potential and expressed endothelial and mesenchymal fibroblast-like surface markers as compared to fresh non-cultured mononuclear cells. The non-adherent cell fraction demonstrated high numbers of colony-forming units, indicating a higher differentiation potential of hematopoietic lineage.

Conclusions: This study proved the feasibility of increasing limited numbers of multipotent progenitor cells obtained from the non-mobilized peripheral blood of healthy donors and ischemic patients. Moreover, we found that each of the two enriched subpopulations (adherent and non-adherent) has a different differentiation potential (mesenchymal, endothelial and hematopoietic).

Legal Disclaimer: The information contained in this website is provided for informational purposes only, and should not be construed as legal or medical advice on any matter.
The IMA is not responsible for and expressly disclaims liability for damages of any kind arising from the use of or reliance on information contained within the site.
© All rights to information on this site are reserved and are the property of the Israeli Medical Association. Privacy policy

2 Twin Towers, 35 Jabotinsky, POB 4292, Ramat Gan 5251108 Israel