Israel Medical Association Journal

Artificial intelligence (AI) has emerged as a powerful technology in medicine, with a potential to revolutionize various aspects of disease management. In recent years, substantial progress has been made in the development and implementation of AI algorithms and models for the diagnosis, screening, and monitoring of retinal diseases. We present a brief update on recent advancements in the implementation of AI in the field of retinal medicine, with a focus on age-related macular degeneration, diabetic retinopathy, and retinopathy of prematurity. AI algorithms have demonstrated remarkable capabilities in automating image analysis tasks, thus enabling accurate segmentation and classification of retinal pathologies. AI-based screening programs hold great promise in cost-effective identification of individuals at risk, thereby facilitating early intervention and prevention. Future integration of multimodal imaging data including optical coherence tomography with additional clinical parameters, will further enhance the diagnostic accuracy and support the development of personalized medicine, thus aiding in treatment selection and optimizing therapeutic outcomes. Further research and collaboration will drive the transformation of AI into an indispensable tool for improving patient outcomes and enhancing the field of retinal medicine.

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.

The management of uncontrolled bleeding in trauma patients is difficult in the prehospital setting, especially when transfer time to a care facility is prolonged. The goal of treatment is to stabilize the patient until surgery can be performed. In modern practice, the major aspects of optimal patient stabilization are the timing and volume of resuscitation and the use of blood products. The main problems are the logistics of handling the blood products as well as achieving the appropriate endpoint or resuscitation, while balancing the need to maintain blood pressure with the need to avoid deleterious coagulopathy. This work reviews current therapeutic modalities for prehospital management of uncontrolled bleeding trauma patients, namely low volume resuscitation, packed red blood cells, hemoglobin solutions, perfluorocarbons, hypertonic saline solutions, and recombinant activated factor VII.

Background:  Physicians’ decisions regarding provision of life-sustaining treatment may be influenced considerably by non-medical variables.

Objectives: To examine physicians’ attitudes towards end-of-life decisions in Israel, comparing them to those found in the United States.

Methods: A survey was conducted among members of the Israel Society of Critical Care Medicine using a questionnaire analogous to that used in a similar study in the USA.       

Results: Forty-three physicians (45%) responded, the majority of whom hold responsibility for withholding or withdrawing life-sustaining treatments. Preservation of life was considered the most important factor by 31 respondents (72%). The quality of life as viewed by the patient was generally considered less important than the quality of life as viewed by the physician. Twenty-one respondents (49%) considered withholding treatment more acceptable than withdrawing it. The main factors for decisions to withhold or withdraw therapy were a very low probability of survival of hospitalization, an irreversible acute disorder, and prior existence of chronic disorders. An almost similar percent of physicians (93% for Israel and 94% for the U.S.) apply Do Not Resuscitate orders in their intensive care units, but much less (28% vs. 95%) actually discuss these orders with the families of their patients.

Conclusions:  Critical care physicians in Israel place similar emphasis on the value of life as do their U.S. counterparts and assign DNR[1] orders with an incidence equaling that of the U.S. They differ from their U.S. counterparts in that they confer less significance to the will of the patient, and do not consult as much with families of patients regarding DNR orders.