Gabriel Izbicki, MD, David Shitrit, MD, Dan Aravot MD, Gershon Fink, MD, Milton Saute, MD, Leonid Idelman, MD, Ilana Bakal, BA, Jaqueline Sulkes, PhD and Mordechai R. Kramer, MD
Background: Historically, donor age above 55 years has been considered to be a relative contraindication for organ transplantation. The shortage of organs for transplantation has led to the expansion of the donor pool by accepting older donors.
Objectives: To compare the 1 year follow-up in patients after lung transplantation from older donors (>50 years old) and in patients after transplantation from younger donors (± 50 years).
Methods: The study group comprised all adult patients who underwent lung transplantation at the Rabin Medical Center between May 1997 and August 2001. Donors were classified into two groups according to their age: ≤ 50 years (n=20) and > 50 years (n=9). Survival, number and total days of hospitalization, development of bronchiolitis obliterans syndrome, and pulmonary function tests, were examined 1 year after transplantation.
Results: We performed 29 lung transplantations in our center during the observed period. Donor age had no statistically significant impact on 1 year survival after lung transplantation. There was no statistically significant effect on lung function parameters, the incidence of hospitalization or the incidence of bronchiolitis obliterans between both donor age groups at 1 year after transplantation.
Conclusions: Donor age did not influence survival or important secondary end-points 1 year after lung transplantation. By liberalizing donor criteria of age up to 65 years, we can expand the donor pool, while assessing other possible mechanisms to increase donor availability.
Shlomo Vinker, MD, Sasson Nakar, MD, Elliot Rosenberg, MD, MPH and Eliezer Kitai, MD
Background: Colorectal cancer is the second leading cause of cancer mortality in Israel. Unfortunately, compliance with annual fecal occult blood testing is very low.
Objective: To assess the effectiveness of interventions to increase FOBT screening in primary care clinics in Israel.
Methods: A prospective, randomized study included all 50–75 year old enrollees of six family physicians in two primary care clinics. The register of two physicians, one from each clinic, was allocated to one of three groups. Two FOBT reminder strategies were tested: a physician reminder (753 patients), and a patient reminder that was either a phone call (312 patients) or a letter (337 patients). The control group (913 patients) of physicians continued administering their regular level of care. The main outcome measure was the percentage of patients undergoing FOBT screening in each study arm at the conclusion of the one year study period.
Results: In the intervention groups 14.3% (201/1,402) were screened using the FOBT over the course of the study year. Using an intent-to-screen analysis, the screening rate in the physician and patient reminder groups was significantly higher than in the control group(16.5 and 11.9%,vs. 1.2% respectively, P < 0.0001). Phone reminders were significantly more efective as compared to letters (14.7 vs. 9.2%, P = 0.01).
Conclusions: Our study has shown the benefit of various FOBT reminder systems, especially those centered around the family physician. Further research should focus on this area, in conjunction with other novel approaches.
__________________________________
FOBT = fecal occult blood testing