Israel Medical Association Journal

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.

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.

Background: Left main coronary artery disease is considered a surgical indication in most centers. However, in some cases prohibited from surgery or in patients with prior bypass grafting, there is a need for percutaneous coronary intervention in LMCA[1] disease scenarios.

Objectives: To assess the clinical outcomes among patients undergoing stent-based LMCA angioplasty.

Methods: We identified 34 consecutive patients who underwent PCI[2] in LMCA at our institution. Procedural data and clinical outcomes were obtained for all patients.

Results: The mean age was 71 ± 12 years. There were 27 elective and 7 emergent procedures performed on 23 “protected” LMCA and 11 “unprotected” LMCA. In emergent procedures, the prevalence of cardiogenic shock (29% vs. 0%, P = 0.04) in patients with prior coronary bypass (29% vs. 8.5%, P = 0.007) was significantly higher compared to elective cases. Procedural success in emergent procedures was significantly lower than in elective procedures (71 vs. 100%, P = 0.04). In emergent versus elective procedures, the in-hospital mortality rate was higher (43 vs. 0%, P = 0.006). The rate of cumulative major adverse cardiac events at 1 and 6 months was 43% and 71% in emergent cases versus 0% and 33% in elective cases (P < 0.05 for both comparisons). In patients with “unprotected” LMCA the overall major cardiac events at 1 month was higher compared to “protected” LMCA patients (27 vs. 0%, P = 0.02). Multivariate analysis revealed emergent procedure as an independent predictor for mortality and adverse cardiac events (odds ratio 6.7; 95% confidence interval 1.2–36; P = 0.02).

Conclusions: Percutaneous interventions in LMCA are feasible and relatively safe in carefully selected cases. Procedural outcomes and clinical prognosis is highly dependent on the nature of disease prior to angioplasty (e.g., elective vs. emergent procedure) as well as on protection of the LMCA by patent grafts.

Background: Various medical centers in Israel have recently incorporated electronic medical record systems. Knowing the EMR[1] systems’ features and pattern of use is an essential step for developing locally and nationally integrated systems.

Objectives: To evaluate the status of EMR systems in all major general hospitals in Israel in terms of the applications used and the patterns of use.

Methods: Structured questionnaires were sent to hospital directors and directors of medical informatics units of 26 general and pediatric hospitals serving the vast majority of the population in Israel. The qheuestionnaire included questions pertaining to the EMR systems, their usage and the attitude of the participants to data security issues.

Results: Of the 26 general hospitals 23 (88.4%) returned the questionnaires. Of these, 21 (91.3%) use EMR systems. Twenty-seven different types of systems are in use in Israeli hospitals, and generally more than one type is used in a hospital. [YD1] Physicians work with EMR systems in over 98% of the departments. Also, the EMR systems are used for clinical admission and discharge in over 90% of the departments and for medical daily follow-up in about 45%.

Conclusions: Most of the hospitals in Israel use EMR systems but there is no standard data model. Physicians are the main users but the amount of data entered is still limited. Adoption of standards is essential for integration of electronic patient records across Israeli healthcare organizations.

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.

Background: Preoperative radiotherapy is standard treatment for rectal cancer and is often combined with 5-fluorouracil-based chemotherapy. UFT, a new oral 5FU[1] derivative, given daily during a course of radiotherapy mimics the effect of continuous-infusion 5FU.

Objectives: To determine the maximum tolerated dose of oral UFT and leucovorin with preoperative pelvic irradiation for rectal cancer, and assess tumor response.

Methods: In this phase 1 trial, 16 patients aged 42–79 years with tumors within 12 cm of the anal verge received radiotherapy, 45 Gy over 5 weeks, an escalating dose of oral UFT, and a fixed dose of 30 mg/day leucovorin. UFT and leucovorin were given for 28 consecutive days concomitant with the first 4 weeks of radiotherapy. Surgery was scheduled for 4–6 weeks after completion of radiotherapy. The surgical procedure was determined by the surgeon at the time of surgery.

Results: No grade III toxicity was seen at 200 mg/m²/day UFT. Of eight patients who received 240 mg/m²/day UFT, one developed grade IV diarrhea; of four patients who received 270 mg/m²/day UFT, one was hospitalized with grade IV diarrhea and leukopenic fever and died during hospitalization. Of the 15 evaluable patients, 9 had pathologic tumor down-staging including 4 patients with complete response. Only one patient required a colostomy.
Conclusions: The MTD[2] of UFT together with leucovorin and preoperative radiotherapy for rectal cancer is 240 mg/m². The major toxicity was diarrhea. Down-staging was noted in 60% of patients, allowing sphincter-preserving surgery even in patients with low tumors.

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.