Israel Medical Association Journal

Background: Inserting a transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt by means of interventional radiology has become the procedure of choice for decompression of portal hypertension. The indications and criteria for patient selection have been expanded and refined accordingly.

Objectives: To review our experience with TIPS[1] and analyze the results with emphasis on patient selection and indication (conventional vs. atypical).

Methods: In this retrospective analysis in a single center all cases were managed by a multidisciplinary team (comprising liver surgery and transplantation, hepatology, imaging, interventional radiology and intensive care).

Results: Between August 2003 and December 2009, 34 patients (mean age 51, range 27–76 years) were treated with TIPS. The cause of portal hypertension was cirrhosis (23 cases), hypercoagulabilty complicated by Budd-Chiari syndrome (n=6), and acute portal vein thrombosis (n=5). Clinical indications for TIPS included treatment or secondary prevention of variceal bleeding (10 cases), refractory ascites (n=18), mesenteric ischemia due to acute portal vein thrombosis (n=5), and acute liver failure (n=1). TIPS was urgent in 18 cases (53%) and elective in 16. Three deaths occurred following urgent TIPS. The overall related complication rate was 32%: transient encephalopathy (6 cases), ischemic hepatitis (n=2), acute renal failure (n=2) and bleeding (n=1). Long-term results of TIPS were defined as good in 25 cases (73%), fair in 4 (12%) and failure in 5 (15%). In three of five patients with mesenteric ischemia following acute portal vein thrombosis, surgery was obviated. Revision of TIPS due to stenosis or thrombosis was needed in 7 cases (20%).

Conclusions: TIPS is safe and effective. While its benefit for patients with portal hypertension is clear, the role of TIPS in treatment of portal-mesenteric venous thrombosis needs further evaluation. Patient selection, establishing the indication and performing TIPS should be done by a multidisciplinary dedicated team.

Background: On-site cardiac surgery is not widely available in developing countries despite a high prevalence of coronary artery disease.

Objectives: To analyze the safety, feasibility and cost-effectiveness of transradial percutaneous coronary intervention without on-site cardiac surgery in a community hospital in a developing country.

Methods: Of the 174 patients who underwent PCI[1] for the first time in our center, we analyzed two groups: stable coronary disease and acute myocardial infarction. The primary endpoint was the rate of complications during the first 24 hours after PCI. We also analyzed the length of hospital stay and the rate of hospital readmission in the first week after PCI, and compared costs between the radial and femoral approaches.

Results: The study group comprised 131 patients with stable coronary disease and 43 with acute MI[2]. Among the patients with stable coronary disease 8 (6.1%) had pulse loss, 12 (9.16%) had on-site hematoma, and 3 (2.29%) had bleeding at the site of the puncture. Among the patients with acute MI, 3 (6.98) had pulse loss and 5 (11.63%) had bleeding at the site of the puncture. There were no cases of atriovenous fistula or nerve damage. In the stable coronary disease group, 130 patients (99%) were discharged on the same day (2.4 ± 2 hours). In the acute MI group, the length of stay was 6.6 ± 2.5 days with at least 24 hours in the intensive care unit. There were no hospital readmissions in the first week after the procedure. The total cost, which includes equipment related to the specific approach and recovery room stay, was significantly lower with the radial approach compared to the femoral approach (US$ 500 saving per intervention).

Conclusions: The transradial approach was safe and feasible in a community hospital in a developing country without on-site cardiac surgery backup. The radial artery approach is clearly more cost effective than the femoral approach.

The introduction of novel targeted therapies into the clinic in recent years has had a considerable impact on the management of several neoplastic diseases – such as gastrointestinal stromal tumors, hepatocellular carcinomas and renal cell carcinomas – considered until recently refractory to systemic therapies. We describe here two such novel biological agents, sunitinib and sorafenib, as a paradigm of the successful clinical application of new concepts. Sunitinib and sorafenib are small molecule tyrosine kinase inhibitors that target vascular endothelial growth factor receptor, platelet-derived growth factor receptor, C-Kit and others. Both agents are administered orally; sunitinib is typically given in cycles for 4 consecutive weeks with 2 weeks off, while sorafenib is given continually. Side effects occur in most patients, similar for both agents; they may affect several systems and organs but are mostly mild and easily manageable, rarely requiring discontinuation of the drug. However, these toxicities require prompt attention and intervention. The most frequently observed effects are hypertension, nausea, anorexia, asthenia and cutaneous manifestations; cardiac abnormalities may include congestive failure. Sunitinib, and markedly less frequently sorafenib, may cause thyroid gland dysfunction, mainly hypothyroidism. Antitumor activity has been shown for renal cell carcinoma in pivotal trials, for sunitinib as first-line treatment and for sorafenib in previously treated patients as second-line. Sunitinib is now approved as second-line therapy for patients with GIST[1] refractory to imatinib; sorafenib has resulted in a significant prolongation in median survival in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma. Ongoing clinical trials will further define the spectrum of these agents' antitumor activity, their role in combination with other drugs, as well as their optimal dose and schedule of administration.

Background: Most aspects of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder diagnosis rely on subjective judgment. Computerized continuous performance tests are designed to improve the validity of the process but are controversial due to low odds ratios. There is a need to find more definitive measures of assessment.

Objectives: To test the validity and reliability of a new tool, a computerized continuous performance functions test, which includes a multi-task approach designed to achieve a higher odds ratio of assessment.

Methods: We applied this test to 58 children aged 6–12 years: 45 were diagnosed as ADHD[1] and 13 non-ADHD children served as a control group.

Results: The CPF[2] test was able to differentiate between non-ADHD and ADHD children. CPF test results were more accurate than other continuous performance tests. The results were statistically significant in all test parameters, confirming the test's validity and reliability. 

Conclusions: The CPF test includes a combination of tasks based on an algorithm designed to test several domains of attention. In this pilot study the CPF test was found to be a valid and reliable tool for the diagnosis of ADHD in children. This test might increase the diagnostic utility of computerized tests. The research points to the need for developing a more definitive process for ADHD diagnosis.

Background: Trans-aortic pressure gradient in patients with aortic stenosis and left ventricular systolic dysfunction is typically low but occasionally high.

Objectives: To examine the distribution of trans-aortic PG[1] in patients with severe AS[2] and severe LV[3] dysfunction and compare the clinical and echocardiographic characteristics and outcome of patients with high versus low PG.

Methods: Using the echocardiographic laboratory database at our institution, 72 patients with severe AS (aortic valve area ≤ 1.0 cm²) and severe LV dysfunction (LV ejection fraction ≤ 30%) were identified. The characteristics and outcome of these patients were compared.

Results: PG was high (mean PG ≥ 35 mmHg) in 32 patients (44.4%) and low (< 35 mmHg) in 40 (55.6%). Aortic valve area was slightly smaller in patients with high PG (0.63 ± 0.15 vs. 0.75 ± 0.16 cm² in patients with low PG, P = 0.003), and LV ejection fraction was slightly higher in patients with high PG (26 ± 5 vs. 22 ± 5% in patients with low PG, P = 0.005). During a median follow-up period of 9 months 14 patients (19%) underwent aortic valve replacement and 46 patients (64%) died. Aortic valve replacement was associated with lower mortality (age and gender-adjusted hazard ratio 0.19, 95% confidence interval 0.05–0.82), whereas trans-aortic PG was not (P = 0.41).

Conclusions: A large proportion of patients with severe AS have relatively high trans-aortic PG despite severe LV dysfunction, a finding partially related to more severe AS and better LV function. Trans-aortic PG is not related to outcome in these patients.

Background: The existence of "ophthalmoltonic consensual reaction," a contralateral change in intraocular pressure in the fellow eye induced by treatment of the first eye only, was suggested in 1924. Since then, the validity of this mechanism has been controversial.

Objectives: To assess intraocular pressure changes in the contralateral fellow eyes of patients treated with IOP[1]-lowering medication in one eye, and investigate the existence of an ophthalmotonic consensual reaction.

Methods: The study population included 38 patients with newly diagnosed bilateral ocular hypertension or early open angle glaucoma. One eye of each patient was randomly treated with one of five compounds: prostaglandin analogues, beta-blockers, alpha-2 agonists, carbonic anhidrase inhibitors and a combination therapy: dorzolamide hydrochloride–timolol maleate (Cosopt®, Sharpe & Dohme). The eye with the higher baseline IOP was selected to be the treated eye. After 3 weeks a masked examiner measured the IOP in both the treated and untreated eye.

Results: Mean IOP of the treated eyes at baseline was 26.1 ± 4.2 mmHg and at follow-up 20.2 ±2.9 mmHg, a reduction of IOP from baseline of -6 ± 3.8 mmHg, a mean percent reduction of -22 ± 10.1%. In the contralateral eyes, the mean IOP at baseline was 24.2 ± 3 mmHg and 23.1 ± 3.1 mmHg at follow-up; IOP reduction from baseline was -1.2 ± 1.8 mmHg, or mean percent reduction -4.7 ± 7.1%. A major contralateral IOP decrease was seen only in the beta-blockers and the combination (Cosopt®) treatment groups (-6.1 ± 8.3% and -12.3 ± 8.3% mean percent reduction, respectively, P < 0.05). The contralateral eyes in the prostaglandin analogues, CAI[2] or α2-agonist groups showed only a small change in IOP (-2.6 ± 4.6%, -3.2 ± 2.6%, +0.7 ± 3.3%, mean percent reduction, respectively, P < 0.05).

Conclusions: The existence of an ophthalmoltonic consensual reaction was not supported.

Background: Guidelines are frequently under-implemented in older patients with heart failure. Octogenerians are often excluded from clinical trials.

Objectives: To characterize the clinical profile of the oldest-old (age ≥ 80 years) heart failure patients hospitalized in a subacute geriatric hospital and to evaluate their management and 1 year outcome.

Methods: Patient characteristics and in-hospital course were retrospectively collected. Diagnosis of heart failure was based mainly on clinical evaluation in addition to chest X-ray results and echocardiographic findings when available.

Results: The study population comprised 96 consecutive unselected heart failure patients hospitalized from January to June 2003. The patients were predominantly women (67%), aged 85 ± 5 years, fully dependent or frail with a high rate of comorbidities. Adherence to guidelines and recommended heart failure medications was poor. Their 1 year mortality was 57%. According to logistic regression analysis, predictors of 1 year mortality were lower body mass index (odds ratio 0.86, 95% confidence interval 0.78–0.96) and high urea levels (OR[1] 1.04, 95% CI[2] 1.02–1.06).

Conclusions: Our study confirms that the management of oldest-old heart failure patients hospitalized in a subacute geriatric hospital was suboptimal and their mortality was exceptionally high.

Background: There is controversy as to which is the preferred treatment for distal radius intra-articular fractures – anatomic reduction or external fixation.

Objectives: To evaluate the radiologic and functional outcome following external fixation of these fractures.

Methods: Between January 2003 and March 2005, 43 patients with distal radius intra-articular fractures were treated using a mini-external AO device. Follow-up of 38 of the patients included X-rays at 1 week, 6 weeks and 6 months postoperatively. The Visual Analogue Scale was used to assess pain levels, and the Lidstrom criteria scale to evaluate functional outcome and wrist motion. Clinical and radiographic results were correlated.

Results: According to the Lidstrom criteria, the results were excellent in 31%, good in 61% and fair in 5.5%; 2.5% had a poor outcome. The results of the VAS[1] were good. Thirty-five patients gained a good range of wrist movement, but 3 had a markedly reduced range. We found statistical correlation between the radiographic and clinical results, emphasizing the value of good reduction. There was no correlation between fracture type (Frykman score) and radiologic results or clinical results.

Conclusions: External fixation seems to be the preferred method of treatment for distal radius intra-articular fractures, assuming that good reduction can be achieved. The procedure is also quick, the risk of infection is small, and there is little damage to the surrounding tissues.