• IMA sites
  • IMAJ services
  • IMA journals
  • Follow us
  • Alternate Text Alternate Text
עמוד בית
Mon, 25.11.24

Search results


December 2004
November 2004
M. Leitman, V. Shir, E. Peleg, S. Rosenblatt, E. Sucher, R. Krakover, E. Kaluski and Z. Vered

Background: Cardiac rupture is a rare but ominous complication of myocardial infarction.

Objectives: To study the clinical presentation, medical course, outcome and echocardiographic predictors of patients with myocardial rupture.

Methods: We evaluated 15 consecutive patients with cardiac rupture during a 4 year period in our department. The current report explores the presence of potential risk factors, timing, relation to the thrombolysis, coronary interventions and outcome.

Results: The index event in all patients was first ST elevation myocardial infarction. In seven patients rupture occurred in the first 24 hours. Pericardial effusion on admission with a clot was present in three patients. Five patients received thrombolytic therapy. Only three patients underwent coronary angioplasty, but in one case it was performed late and in two patients the culprit artery could not be opened. Six patients reached the operating room, of whom three survived.

Conclusions: The lack of early mechanical reperfusion in acute myocardial infarction and thrombolytic therapy are risk factors for cardiac rupture. Pericardial effusion on admission and evidence of a clot are echocardiographic indicators of cardiac rupture and should alert the medical team to further assess the possibility of cardiac rupture.
 

J. Levy, M. Puterman, T. Lifshitz, M. Marcus, A. Segal and T. Monos

Background: In patients with Graves’ ophthalmopathy, orbital decompression surgery is indicated for compressive optic neuropathy, severe corneal exposure, or for cosmetic deformity due to proptosis. Traditionally this has been performed through a transantral approach, but the associated complication rate is high. More recently, endoscopic orbital decompression has been performed successfully with significantly fewer postoperative complications.

Objective: To report our experience of endoscopic orbital decompression in patients with severe Graves’ ophthalmopathy.

Methods: Three patients (five eyes) underwent endoscopic orbital decompression for Graves’ ophthalmopathy at Soroka Medical Center between the years 2000 and 2002. The indications for surgery were compressive optic neuropathy in three eyes, severe corneal exposure in one eye, and severe proptosis not cosmetically acceptable for the patient in one case. An intranasal endoscopic approach with the removal of the medial orbital wall and medial part of the floor was performed.

Results: In all five eyes an average reduction of 5 mm in proptosis was achieved. Soon after surgery, visual acuity improved in the three cases with compressive optic neuropathy, and exposure keratopathy and cosmetic appearance improved. The diplopia remained unchanged. No complications were observed postoperatively.

Conclusions: Endoscopic orbital decompression with removal of the medial orbital wall and medial part of the floor in the five reported eyes was an effective and safe procedure for treatment of severe Graves’ ophthalmopathy. A close collaboration between ophthalmologists and otorhinolaryngologists skilled in endoscopic sinus surgery is crucial for the correct management of these patients.

O. Zimmerman and P. Halpern

Background: The long-standing and ongoing controversy regarding administration of analgesia to patients with acute abdominal pain prior to final diagnosis has not yet been resolved, despite considerable research. Consequently, wide variations in clinical practice exist.

Objectives: To determine the motives, attitudes and practices of emergency physicians, internists and surgeons in Israeli emergency departments regarding the administration of analgesia before diagnosis in patients with acute abdominal pain.

Methods: Questionnaires were completed by 122 physicians in 21 EDs[1] throughout Israel and the replies were analyzed.

Results: Most EDs did not have a clear policy on analgesia for undifferentiated abdominal pain, according to 65% of the responders. More internists (75%) than surgeons (54%) (P = 0.02) and more emergency physicians (81%) than all other physicians (60%) (P = 0.05) held this opinion. Most respondents (64%) supported administration of analgesia pre-diagnostically. Support for analgesia was significantly stronger among internists (75%) compared to surgeons (52%) (P = 0.03). Despite this wide support, most respondents (68%) indicated that analgesia was rarely or never given pre‑diagnostically and, when it was, more surgeons (58%) than other physicians made that decision. Most internists (73%) and all surgeons reported that patients receive analgesia only after being examined by surgeons. Time allocated to the ED (part‑ or full‑time) significantly (P = 0.02) influenced decision-making, with 51% of part-time physicians vs. 25% of full-time opposing prompt administration of analgesia. Opinions on who should decide were divided according to medical specialty, with surgeons and internists almost opposed, as well as by physician age and percent of his/her time spent working in the ED. More surgeons than internists (P = 0.0005) reported that analgesia sometimes interfered with making a diagnosis. Most physicians (90%) stated that opiates impede diagnosis, to some extent. However, 58% of them supported the administration of opiates, more or less frequently. Intramuscular diclofenac was the most preferred analgesic, followed by intravenous morphine and pethidine; individual preferences extended beyond the list of actually administered drugs.

Conclusions: There is no consensus on the administration of analgesia for undiagnosed acute abdominal pain in EDs in Israel. Physicians’ attitudes are influenced by training, experience, and percent of personal time allocated to work in the ED.






[1] ED = emergency department


D. Silverberg, A.S. Paramesh, S. Roayaie and M.E. Schwartz
October 2004
N.R. Kahan, E. Kahan, D-A. Waitman and D.P. Chinitz

Background: Until recently trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole was the drug recommended in the Leumit Health Fund for the empiric treatment of uncomplicated urinary tract infection in women. However, due to increased uropathogen resistance to this drug, the fund has designated nitrofurantoin as its new drug of choice.

Objectives: To evaluate the potential economic impact of implementing this new pharmaco-policy.

Methods: Using data derived from the electronic patient records of the Leumit Health Fund we identified all non-recurrent cases of women aged 18–49 with a diagnosis of acute cystitis or UTI[1] without risk factors for complicated UTI and empirically treated with antibiotics throughout 2003. The final sample comprised 5,489 physician-patient encounters. The proportion of cases treated with each individual drug was calculated, and the excess expenditure due to non-adherence to the new guideline from the perspective of the health fund was evaluated using 5 days of therapy with nitrofurantoin as the reference treatment.

Results: Ofloxacin was the most frequently prescribed drug (30.24%), followed by TMP-SMX[2] (22.43%), cephalexin (15.08%), and nitrofurantoin (12.59%). The observed net aggregate drug expenditure was 2.3 times greater than expected had all cases been treated with nitrofurantoin according to the guideline duration of 5 days. The cost of treatment in 53% of the cases exceeded the expected cost of the guideline therapy.

Conclusions: Successful implementation of the new drug policy will likely improve quality of care and reduce costs to the health fund.






[1] UTI = urinary tract infection

[2] TMP-SMX = trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole


Y. Levy, O. Shovman, C. Granit, D. Luria, O. Gurevitz, D. Bar-Lev, M. Eldar, Y. Shoenfeld and M. Glikson

Background: The appearance of pericarditis following insertion of a permanent pacemaker is not widely acknowledged in the literature.

Objectives: To describe our experience with pericarditis following 395 permanent pacemaker implantations over 2 years.

Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 395 consecutive patients in whom new pacing systems or pacemaker leads had been implanted over a 2 year period. We searched the records for pericarditis that developed within 1 month after pacemaker implantation according to the ICD-9 code. The incidence, clinical picture, response to treatment and relationship to lead design and location were studied.

Results: Eight cases (2%) of pericarditis following implantation were detected. Clinical manifestations in all patients were similar to those of post-pericardiotomy syndrome and included chest pain (n=7), friction rub (n=1), fever (n=2), fatigue (n=2), pleural effusion (n=2), new atrial fibrillation (n=2), elevated erythrocyte sedimentation rate (n=4) and echcardiographic evidence of pericardial effusion (n=8). All affected patients had undergone active fixation (screw-in) lead implantation in the atrial position. The incidence of pericarditis with screw-in atrial leads was 3% compared to 0% in other cases (P < 0.05).

Conclusions: Pericarditis is not uncommon following pacemaker implantation with active fixation atrial leads. Special attention should be paid to identifying pericardial complications following pacemaker implantation, especially when anticoagulant therapy is resumed or initiated. The use of passive fixation leads is likely to reduce the incidence of pericarditis but this issue should be further investigated.

M. Korem, Z. Ackerman, Y. Sciaki-Tamir, G. Gino, S. Salameh-Giryes, S. Perlberg and S.N. Heyman
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