• IMA sites
  • IMAJ services
  • IMA journals
  • Follow us
  • Alternate Text Alternate Text
עמוד בית
Fri, 05.12.25

Search results


January 2013
M. Weyl Ben-Arush, A. Ben Barak, R. Bar-Deroma, S. Ash, G. Goldstein, H. Golan, H. Houri, D. Waldman, N. Nevo, R. Bar Shalom, A. Berniger, A. Nevelsky, A. Toren, I. Yaniv and A. Kuten
 Background: Palliative treatment of refractory neuroblastoma remains a significant clinical problem.

Objectives: To retrospectively determine the clinical response to 131I-MIBG therapy at low doses in patients with refractory neuroblastoma.

Methods: We performed a retrospective chart review of 10 patients with neuroblastoma treated with 131I-MIBG at Rambam Health Care Campus from 1994 to 2012. Clinical data, number of 131I-MIBG courses delivered, toxicities, and clinical responses were reviewed. MIBG scan was performed after each course.

Results: Twenty-one courses of 131I-MIBG were delivered to 10 patients (3 girls, 7 boys). Their mean age was 3.8 years (range 1.5–6 years). All patients received several protocols of chemotherapy including the high dose form. Three patients received three courses of 131I-MIBG with a minimum of 6 weeks between each course, five patients received two courses, and two patients received only one course. An objective response to the first course was obtained in nine patients and to the second course in six of eight, and in three children who underwent the third course the pain decreased. One patient has no evidence of disease, four are alive with disease, and five died of the disease. No unanticipated toxicities were observed.

Conclusions: Low dose 131I-MIBG is an effective and relatively non-toxic treatment in neuroblastoma disease palliation. Rapid and reproducible pain relief with 131I-MIBG was obtained in most of the children. Treatment with systemic radiotherapy in the form of low dose 131I-MIBG was easy to perform and effective in cases of disseminated neuroblastoma, demonstrating that this primary therapy can be used for palliative purposes.

July 2012
R. Nevzorov, T. Ben-Gal, B. Strasberg and M. Haim
G. Twig, A. Furer, G. Yaniv, L. Michael, R. Karplus and H. Amital
June 2012
I. Zvidi, A. Geller, E. Gal, S. Morgenstern, Y. Niv and R. Dickman
March 2010
M. Sofer, G. Lidawi, G. Keren-Paz, R. Yehiely, A. Beri and H. Matzkin

Background: Tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy is defined as PCNL[1] without postoperative nephrostomy tubes. It is reported to reduce postoperative pain, hospital stay and recovery time. To date the procedure has been reserved for selected patients.

Objectives: To assess our initial experience in extending the implementation of tubeless PCNL without preoperative patient selection.

Methods: All consecutive PCNLs performed during 2004–2008 were evaluated. Tubeless PCNL was performed when residual stones, bleeding and extravasation were excluded intraoperatively. Staghorn stones, stone burden, supracostal and multiple accesses, anatomic anomalies, solitary kidneys and operative time were not considered contraindications. We analyzed the clinical data and the choice of tubeless PCNL over time.

Results: Of 281 PCNLs performed during the study period, 200 (71%) were tubeless. The patients' average age was 53 years (range 28–82 years), the stone burden was 924 mm2 (400–3150 mm2), operative time was 99 minutes (45–210 min), complication rate was 14% and immediate stone-free rate 91%. There were 81 conversions to standard PCNL (29%) due to expected second-look (n=47, 58%), impression of bleeding (n=21, 26%), suspected hydrothorax (n=7, 9%) and extravasation (n=6, 7%). The transfusion rate was 1%. The median hospital stay was 1 day (1–15 days) and recovery time 7 days (5–20 days). The rate of implementing the tubeless procedure increased steadily along time from 46% to 83% (P = 0.0001). 

Conclusions: Tubeless PCNL can be safely and effectively performed based on intraoperative decisions, without preoperative contraindications. They are easily accommodated by experienced endourologists and provide real advantages.

 






[1] PCNL = percutaneous nephrolithotomy

 



September 2009
G. Gal and R. Gross; G. Chodiak and Y. Senecky; D. Lakstein; G. Volpin
November 2008
G. Markel, A. Krivoy, E. Rotman, O. Schein, S. Shrot, T. Brosh-Nissimov, T. Dushnitsky, A. Eisenkraft
The relative accessibility to various chemical agents, including chemical warfare agents and toxic industrial compounds, places a toxicological mass casualty event, including chemical terrorism, among the major threats to homeland security. TMCE[1] represents a medical and logistic challenge with potential hazardous exposure of first-response teams. In addition, TMCE poses substantial psychological and economical impact. We have created a simple response algorithm that provides practical guidelines for participating forces in TMCE. Emphasis is placed on the role of first responders, highlighting the importance of early recognition of the event as a TMCE, informing the command and control centers, and application of appropriate self-protection. The medical identification of the toxidrome is of utmost importance as it may dictate radically different approaches and life-saving modalities. Our proposed emergency management of TMCE values the “Scoop & Run” approach orchestrated by an organized evacuation plan rather than on-site decontamination. Finally, continuous preparedness of health systems – exemplified by periodic CBRN (Chemical, Biological, Radio-Nuclear) medical training of both first responders and hospital staff, mandatory placement of antidotal auto-injectors in all ambulances and CBRN[2] emergency kits in the emergency departments – would considerably improve the emergency medical response to TMCE.

 


[1] TMCE = toxicological mass casualty event

[2] CBRN = chemical, biological, radio-nuclear 
July 2008
I. Makarovsky, G. Markel, T. Dushnitsky and A. Eisenkraft
May 2008
I. Makarovsky, G. Markel, T. Dushnitsky and A. Eisenkraft
April 2008
I. Makarovsky, G. Markel, T. Dushnitsky and A. Eisenkraft
February 2008
I. Makarovsky, G. Markel, A. Hoffman, O. Schein, T. Brosh-Nissimov, Z. Tashma, T. Dushnitsky and A. Eisenkraft
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