• IMA sites
  • IMAJ services
  • IMA journals
  • Follow us
  • Alternate Text Alternate Text
עמוד בית
Sat, 23.11.24

Search results


May 2022
Raymond Farah MD, Alaa Sawaed MD, and Kasem Shalata MD
January 2022
Nardin Elias MD, Roman Rysin MD, Samuel Kwartin MD, and Yoram Wolf MD

Background: The purpose of mastectomy for the transgender patient is to produce a masculine appearance of the chest. A number of algorithms have been proposed for selecting the surgical technique. A holistic and surgical approach to transgender men includes our experience-based classification system for selecting the correct surgical technique.

Objectives: To present and discuss the Transgender Standard of Care and our personal experience.

Methods: Data were collected from the files of female-to-male transgender persons who underwent surgery during 2003–2019. Pictures of the patients were also analyzed.

Results: Until May 2021, 342 mastectomies were performed by the senior author on 171 patients. The 220 mastectomies performed on 110 patients until November 2019 were included in our cohort. Patient age was 13.5 to 50 years (mean 22.5 ± 6.1). The excision averaged 443 grams per breast (range 85–2550). A periareolar approach was performed in 14 (12.7%), omega-shaped resection (nipple-areola complex on scar) in 2 (1.8%), spindle-shaped mastectomy with a dermal nipple-areola complex flap approach in 38 (34.5%), and a complete mastectomy with a free nipple-areola complex graft in 56 (50.9%). Complications included two hypertrophic scars, six hematomas requiring revision surgery, three wound dehiscences, and three cases of partial nipple necrosis.

Conclusions: A holistic approach to transgender healthcare is presented based on the World Professional Association for Transgender Health standard of care. Analysis of the data led to Wolf's classification for female-to-male transgender mastectomy based on skin excess and the distance between the original and the planned position of the nipple-areola complex

September 2021
Ariel Kerpel MD, Edith Michelle Marom MD, Michael Green PhD, Michal Eifer MD, Eli Konen MD, Arnaldo Mayer PhD, and Sonia L. Betancourt Cuellar MD

Background: Medical imaging and the resultant ionizing radiation exposure is a public concern due to the possible risk of cancer induction.

Objectives: To assess the accuracy of ultra-low-dose (ULD) chest computed tomography (CT) with denoising versus normal dose (ND) chest CT using the Lung CT Screening Reporting and Data System (Lung-RADS).

Methods: This prospective single-arm study comprised 52 patients who underwent both ND and ULD scans. Subsequently AI-based denoising methods were applied to produce a denoised ULD scan. Two chest radiologists independently and blindly assessed all scans. Each scan was assigned a Lung-RADS score and grouped as 1 + 2 and 3 + 4.

Results: The study included 30 men (58%) and 22 women (42%); mean age 69.9 ± 9 years (range 54–88). ULD scan radiation exposure was comparable on average to 3.6–4.8% of the radiation depending on patient BMI. Denoising increased signal-to-noise ratio by 27.7%. We found substantial inter-observer agreement in all scans for Lung-RADS grouping. Denoised scans performed better than ULD scans when negative likelihood ratio (LR-) was calculated (0.04–-0.08 vs. 0.08–0.12). Other than radiation changes, diameter measurement differences and part-solid nodules misclassification as a ground-glass nodule caused most Lung-RADS miscategorization.

Conclusions: When assessing asymptomatic patients for pulmonary nodules, finding a negative screen using ULD CT with denoising makes it highly unlikely for a patient to have a pulmonary nodule that requires aggressive investigation. Future studies of this technique should include larger cohorts and be considered for lung cancer screening as radiation exposure is radically reduced.

April 2021
Berko Sikirov MD, Bernard Werner MD, Oren Kaufman MD, Anton Steinberg MD, Victor Gershuni MD, Fredrich Maizlin MD, Yitzhak Yochilis MD, Eliahu Soleiman MD, Bruno Ostfeld MD, Gideon Shapira MD, and Michail Chester MD
December 2020
Oren Elyah MD and Sumit Chatterji MD FRCP

Background: Our 1600-bed teaching hospital opened the first physician-led specialist pleural service in Israel in November 2016. Thoracentesis is one of the frequently performed procedures in clinic.

Objectives: To review the incidence of thoracentesis-related symptoms, complications, and risk factors in a specialist pleural clinic.

Methods: Prospective analysis was conducted of 658 ultrasound-assisted thoracenteses between November 2016 and November 2019. Data were collected on patient demographics, clinical characteristics, procedural aspects, symptoms, complications, and additional interventions required.

Results: Of the procedures, 24% were accompanied by a reported symptom of any intensity or duration. Cough and chest discomfort were noted in 56.4% and 52% of these cases, respectively. Large-volume drainage was associated with symptoms (P = 0.002). Ultrasound-estimated effusion volume before drainage predicted pain (P = 0.001) and pneumothorax (P = 0.021). Of 8 cases of pneumothorax, 6 were due to non-expandable lung. Two patients were hospitalized (0.3%), and one required a chest drain.

Conclusions: Symptoms are a common feature of thoracentesis even when performed by experienced operators in ideal settings. Complications, however, are rare when the procedure is performed with bedside ultrasound and attention is paid to patient-reported symptoms and volume drained. Specialist pleural clinics provide a good model for a standardized approach to safe performance of this common procedure.

September 2020
Ory Wiesel MD, Heath Walden MD, Alexa Nasti FNP and Krishan Patel MD
April 2020
Ariel Kerpel MD, Noam Nissan MD, Maximiliano Klug MD, Sharon Amit MD PhD, Eli Konen MD and Edith M Marom MD
September 2019
February 2019
Ana R. Nogueira MD, Sumit Chatterji MD, Tiberiu Shulimzon MD, Yehuda Shoenfeld MD FRCP (Hon) MaACR
November 2018
Igor Snast MD, Iris Ostfeld MD, Lev Pavlovsky MD PhD, Emmilia Hodak MD and Anat Gafter-Gvili MD
May 2018
Yehudit Eden Friedman MD, Gabriela Gayer MD, Moran Livne Margolin MD, Abraham Kneller MD and Meir Mouallem MD
January 2018
Michalle Soudack MD, Semion Plotkin MD, Aviva Ben-Shlush MD, Lisa Raviv-Zilka MD, Jeffrey M. Jacobson MD, Michael Benacon MD and Arie Augarten MD

Background: Opinions differ as to the need of a lateral radiograph for diagnosing community acquired pneumonia in children referred to the emergency department. A lateral radiograph increases the ionizing radiation burden but at the same time may improve specificity and sensitivity in this population.

Objectives: To determine the value of the frontal and lateral chest radiographs compared to frontal view stand-alone images for the management of children with suspected community acquired pneumonia seen in a pediatric emergency department.

Methods: Chest radiographs from 451 children with clinically suspected pneumonia were retrospectively reviewed. Interpretation of frontal views was compared to interpretation of combined frontal and lateral view, the latter being the gold standard.

Results: Findings consistent with bacterial pneumonia were diagnosed in 94 (20.8%) of the frontal stand-alone radiographs and in 109 (24.2%) of the combined frontal and lateral radiographs. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of the frontal radiograph alone were 86.2%, 93.9%, 81.7%, and 95.5%, respectively. False positive and false negative rates were 15% and 21%, respectively, for the frontal view alone. The number of lateral radiographs needed to diagnose one community acquired pneumonia was 29.

Conclusions: The lateral chest radiograph improves the diagnosis of pediatric community acquired pneumonia to a certain degree and may prevent overtreatment with antibiotics.

June 2017
Ronen Goldkorn MD, Alexey Naimushin MD, Roy Beigel MD, Ekaterina Naimushin, Michael Narodetski MD and Shlomi Matetzky MD

Background: While patients presenting to emergency departments (ER) with chest pain are increasingly managed in chest pain units (CPU) that utilize accelerated diagnostic protocols for risk stratification, such as single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI), data are lacking regarding the prognostic implications of mildly abnormal scans in this population.

Objectives: To evaluate the prognostic implications of mildly abnormal SPECT MPI results in patients with acute chest pain.

Methods: Of the 3753 chest pain patients admitted to the CPU at the Leviev Heart Center, Sheba Medical Center 1593 were further evaluated by SPECT MPI. Scans were scored by extent and severity of stress-induced perfusion defects, with 1221 patients classified as normal, 82 with myocardial infarction without ischemia, 236 with mild ischemia, and 54 with more than mild ischemia. Mild ischemia patients were further classified to those who did and did not undergo coronary angiography within 7 days.

Results: Mild ischemia patients who underwent coronary angiography were more likely to be male (92% vs. 81%, P = 0.01) and to have left anterior descending ischemia (67% vs. 42%, P = 0.004). After 50 months, these patients returned less often to the ER with chest pain (53% vs. 87%, P < 0.001) and had a lower combined endpoint of acute coronary syndrome and death (8% vs. 16%, P < 0.001).

Conclusions: Compared to patients with chronic stable angina, patients presenting with acute chest pain exhibiting mildly abnormal SPECT MPI findings should perhaps undergo a more aggressive diagnostic and therapeutic approach.

June 2015
Haim Shmilovich MD, Itzhak Herz MD and Gad Keren MD
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