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

Search results


September 2024
Raneen Abu Shqara MD, Maya Frank Wolf MD, Jawad Karram MD, Inshirah Sgayer MD, Ala Aiob MD, Lior Lowenstein MD, Susana Mustafa Mikhae MD

Background: Pelvic organ prolapse in pregnancy is rare. Consequent complications include cervical infection, spontaneous abortion, and premature birth. Conservative management by means of a pessary have been described as improving maternal symptomatology and minimizing gestational risk. The delivery mode is controversial.

Objective: To describe the clinical courses of patients diagnosed with pelvic organ prolapse during pregnancy, and to present our multidisciplinary approach.

Methods: In this retrospective case series, we summarized the obstetrical outcomes of women diagnosed with pelvic organ prolapse during pregnancy in a single university-affiliated hospital.

Results: We identified eight women with advanced uterine prolapse at a mean age of 30.3 years. Seven were diagnosed with advanced uterine prolapse (Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification [POPQ] stage ≥ 3). All were treated by pessary placement, which was tolerable and provided symptomatic relief. The pessary type was chosen according to the prolapse stage. In women with cervical prolapse POPQ stage > 2 and cervical edema, a support pessary was less beneficial. However, the prolapse was well-controlled with a space-filling Gellhorn pessary. Low complication rates were associated with vaginal deliveries. The few complications that were reported included minor cervical laceration, postpartum hemorrhage, and retained placenta.

Conclusions: Treatment of pelvic organ prolapse during pregnancy must be individualized and requires a multidisciplinary approach of urogynecologists, obstetricians, dietitians, pelvic floor physiotherapists, and social workers. Conservative management, consisting of insertion of a vaginal pessary when prolapse symptoms appeared, provided adequate support for the pelvic floor, improved symptomatology, and minimized pregnancy complications. Vaginal delivery was feasible for most of the women.

March 2004
S.S. Nitecki, A. Ofer, T. Karram, H. Schwartz, A. Engel and A. Hoffman

Background: Arterial involvement in Behçet's syndrome is rare. Aneurysms are common among the arterial lesions, affecting various arteries but mostly the abdominal aorta. Surgical interposition graft insertion is the treatment of choice for large aneurysms. However, vasculitis in these patients is the reason for the notorious surgical complications that result in up to 50% false aneurysms in anastomotic sites. Recently, endovascular repair for abdominal aortic aneurysms has been established.

Objectives: To learn more about vascular Behçet and, specifically, to compare the results of surgical treatment and endovascular repair of AAA[1] in patients with Behçet's syndrome.

Methods: We retrieved the medical records of all 53 patients with Behçet disease admitted to Rambam Medical Center during the years 1985 and 2001 and analysed the results and follow-up of open surgery versus endovascular repair of AAA in patients with known Behçet's syndrome.

Results: Of the 53 patients with Behçet's disease 18 had vascular manifestations (34%). AAAs were encountered in 8 patients (15%) and 5 were treated. Open surgery (group 1), under general anesthesia, lasted less than 3 hours with an average aortic clamping time of 34 minutes (range 26–41 min) after which the patients were transferred to the intensive care unit for 24–48 hours. Endovascular treatment (group 2), although lasting about the same time without the need for intensive care, necessitated contrast media and fluoroscopy. The length of hospital stay was considerably shorter for patients after endovascular repair compared to open surgery (3 days vs. 6 days). Combined mortality and morbidity was higher in patients who underwent open surgery compared to endovascular repair (one death, one major amputation and three anastomotic pseudoaneurysms compared to one temporary contrast-induced nephropathy).

Conclusions: Vasculo-Behçet patients with AAA are better candidates for endovascular treatment than atherosclerotic patients. Combined morbidity (especially anastomotic pseudoaneurysms) and mortality of Behçet patients after endovascular repair is considerably lower than after open surgery.






[1] AAA = abdominal aortic aneurysm


August 2003
H.A. Schwarz, S. Nitecki, T. Karram and A. Hoffman
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