• IMA sites
  • IMAJ services
  • IMA journals
  • Follow us
  • Alternate Text Alternate Text
עמוד בית
Sat, 20.07.24

Search results


July 2006
A. Leibovitz, M. Lidar, Y,. Baumoehl, A. Livneh and R. Segal

Backgound: Colchicine is widely used for treating gout and familial Mediterranean fever. However, studies in animal models have reported ill effects of colchicine on the central nervous system, including cognitive function.

Objectives: To evaluate the cognitive status of elderly FMF[1] patients on long-term colchicine treatment.

Methods: The study group consisted of 55 FMF patients aged 74 ± 5, attending an FMF outpatient clinic and receiving colchicine treatment for 25.1 ± 8.9 years. The Mini-Mental State Examination was used for cognitive evaluation. Patients' scores were compared with accepted age- and education-adjusted cutoff scores, population-based norms, and scores of a matched control group of 56 subjects.

Results: Individually, all colchicine-treated FMF patients scored well above the age- and education-corrected cutoff scores. Overall, there was a large difference, 5.0 ± 1.6, from the expected cutoff points, in favor of the study group scores (P < 0.001). The individual scores of the control group were also above the cutoff points, however with a lower but still statistically significant difference (3.71 ± 1.15 points, P < 0.001). Compared to population-based norms adjusted by age and education, the study group had significantly higher mean MMSE[2] scores (27.2 ± 2.2 vs. 25.5 ± 2.4, P < 0.001). The control group’s scores were also somewhat higher than expected, but not significantly so.

Conclusions: Our results do not support the view that prolonged colchicine treatment may be associated with cognitive impairment. On the contrary, it is possible that long-term colchicine treatment may even confer protection against cognitive decline in patients with FMF.


 





[1] FMF = familial Mediterranean fever

[2] MMSE = Mini-Mental State Examination


M. Katz Leurer, E. Be'eri and D. Zilbershtein
 Background: There is a growing demand for respiratory rehabilitation services for children dependent on tracheostomy and/or chronic mechanical ventilation. Discharging these patients home following their rehabilitation can be an arduous process.

Objectives: To define the length of time required to rehabilitate and discharge these patients, and to identify predictors of a prolonged or failed discharge process.

Methods: We conducted a retrospective chart review of patients admitted to the Respiratory Rehabilitation Unit at Alyn Hospital, Jerusalem, over a 4 year period.

Results: Of the 48 patients identified, 31 (64.7%) were eventually discharged, 13 (27.1%) remained hospitalized long-term, and 4 (8.3%) died during their hospitalization. The median length of hospitalization was 10 months: 6 months for purposes of rehabilitation therapy, and 4 months thereafter to resolve the logistics of discharge. Specific family characteristics – an unemployed father (odds ratio = 4.6, P = 0.02) and an additional family member with a disability (OR[1] = 5.8, P = 0.03) – as well as ongoing mechanical ventilation at the time of discharge (OR = 5.5, P < 0.01) were found to positively correlate with a prolonged or failed discharge process.

Conclusions:  Hospitalization in a pediatric respiratory rehabilitation unit may be prolonged for both medical and non-medical reasons, with the process of discharge home being particularly difficult in certain subsets of patients. A proactive discharge policy by hospitals, improved community support services, and legislation defining the rights of home-ventilated children may facilitate more efficient discharge home of these patients.


 





[1] OR = odds ratio


I. Arad, M. Baras, B. Bar-Oz and R. Gofin
 Background: Maternal transport, rather than neonatal transport, to tertiary care centers is generally advocated. Since a substantial number of premature deliveries still occur in hospitals with level I and level II nurseries, it is imperative to find means to improve their outcome.

Objectives: To compare the neonatal outcome (survival, intraventricular hemorrhage and bronchopulmonary dysplasia) of inborn and outborn very low birth weight infants, accounting for sociodemographic, obstetric and perinatal variables, with reference to earlier published data.

Methods: We compared 129 premature infants with birth weights of 750–1250 g delivered between 1996 and 2000 in a hospital providing neonatal intensive care to 99 premature babies delivered in a referring hospital. In the statistical analysis, variables with a statistical significant association with the outcome variables and dissimilar distribution in the two hospitals were identified and entered together with the hospital of birth as explanatory variables in a logistic regression.

Results: Accounting for the covariates, the odds ratios (outborns relative to inborns) were 0.31 (95% confidence interval = 0.11–0.86, P = 0.03) for mortality, 1.37 (95%CI[1] = 0.64–2.96, P = 0.42) for severe intraventricular hemorrhage, and 0.86 (95%CI = 0.38–1.97, P = 0.78) for bronchopulmonary dysplasia. The odds ratio for survival without severe intraventricular hemorrhage was 1.10 (95%CI = 0.55–2.20, P = 0.78). Comparing the current results with earlier (1990–94) published data from the same institution showed that mortality decreased in both the outborn and inborn infants (OR[2] = 0.23, 95%CI = 0.09–0.58, P = 0.002 and 0.46; 95%CI = 0.20–1.04, P = 0.06, respectively), but no significant change in the incidence of severe intraventricular hemorrhage or brochopulmonary dysplasia was observed. Increased survival was observed also in these infants receiving surfactant, more so among the outborn. The latter finding could be attributed to the early, pre-transport surfactant administration, implemented only during the current study.

Conclusions: Our data suggest that very low birth weight outborn infants may share an outcome comparable with that of inborn babies, if adequate perinatal care including surfactant administration is provided prior to transportation to a tertiary center.


 





[1] CI = confidence interval

[2] OR = odds ratio


S.W. Moses, M. David, E. Goldhammer, A. Tal and S. Sukenik
T. Hershcovici, T. Chajek-Shaul, T. Hasin, S. Aamar, N. Hiller, D. Prus and H. Peleg
J.A. Gómez-Puerta, G. Espinosa, J.M. Miró, O. Sued, J.M. Llibre, R. Cervera and J. Font
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