• IMA sites
  • IMAJ services
  • IMA journals
  • Follow us
  • Alternate Text Alternate Text
עמוד בית
Fri, 22.11.24

Search results


August 2018
Amihai Rottenstreich MD, Adi Schwartz, Yosef Kalish MD, Ela Shai PhD, Liat Appelbaum MD, Tali Bdolah-Abram and Itamar Sagiv MD

Background: Risk factors for bleeding complications after percutaneous kidney biopsy (PKB) and the role of primary hemostasis screening are not well established.

Objectives: To determine the role of primary hemostasis screening and complication outcomes among individuals who underwent PKB.

Methods: We reviewed data of 456 patients who underwent PKB from 2010 to 2016 in a large university hospital. In 2015, bleeding time (BT) testing was replaced by light transmission aggregometry (LTA) as a pre-PKB screening test.

Results: Of the 370 patients who underwent pre-PKB hemostasis screening by BT testing, prolonged BT was observed in 42 (11.3%). Of the 86 who underwent LTA, an abnormal response was observed in 14 (16.3%). Overall, 155 (34.0%) patients experienced bleeding: 145 (31.8%) had minor events (hemoglobin fall of 1–2 g/dl, macroscopic hematuria, perinephric hematoma without the need for transfusion or intervention) and 17 (3.7%) had major events (hemoglobin fall > 2 g/dl, blood transfusion or further intervention). Abnormal LTA response did not correlate with bleeding (P = 0.80). In multivariate analysis, only prolonged BT (P = 0.0001) and larger needle size (P = 0.005) were identified as independent predictors of bleeding.

Conclusions: Bleeding complications following PKB were common and mostly minor, and the risk of major bleeding was low. Larger needle size and prolonged BT were associated with a higher bleeding risk. Due to the relatively low risk of major bleeding and lack of benefit of prophylactic intervention, the use of pre-PKB hemostasis screening remains unestablished.

June 2012
R. Haimov-Kochman, R. Har-Nir, E. Ein-Mor, V. Ben-Shoshan, C. Greenfield, I. Eldar, Y. Bdolah and A. Hurwitz

Background: Studies suggest that global semen quality is declining, but the debate remains open owing to geographic variation.

Objectives: To evaluate temporal trends of sperm parameters – namely concentration, motility and total motile sperm count – in sperm donated during the period 1995–2009.

Methods: In a retrospective longitudinal cohort study we analyzed the sperm count and motility of 2182 semen samples provided on a weekly basis by 58 young, healthy, fertile, university-educated, paid donors.

Results: Despite the lowering of criteria for sperm parameters satisfactory for donation that were implemented in 2004, 38% of applicants for sperm donation are now rejected based on semen quality as compared to a third of applicants 10–15 years ago (P < 0.001). If the old strict criteria were in place 88% of candidates would be rejected today (P < 0.0001). Over the study period, the average sperm parameters dropped from a concentration of 106 ± 25 million spermatozoa/ml with 79% ± 4.3% motility to 68 ± 14 million/ml with 66% ± 4.5% motile sperm (P < 0.0001, P < 0.0001, respectively). The total motile sperm count per ejaculate also decreased, from 66.4 ± 18.2 million to 48.7 ± 12 million (P < 0.005). When the previous criteria were implemented for the analysis of the latest group of sperm donors, only 18% of donors had an acceptable sperm quality, with an average concentration of 87 ± 12 million spermatozoa/ml, 73% ± 2.6% motile sperm and total motile sperm count of 53.1 ± 3.8 million per ejaculate – still significantly lower than 15 years ago (P = 0.01, P = 0.003, P = 0.058 respectively).

Conclusions: The rapid deterioration of sperm quality among fertile semen donors is alarming and may lead to cessation of sperm donation programs.

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