• IMA sites
  • IMAJ services
  • IMA journals
  • Follow us
  • Alternate Text Alternate Text
עמוד בית
Thu, 23.05.24

Search results


March 2024
Jill Savren Lotker MD, Ariel Roguin MD PhD, Arthur Kerner MD, Erez Marcusohn MD, Ofer Kobo MD PhD

Background: Patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) are at increased risk after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).

Objectives: To compare the clinical outcomes within 30 days, one year, and five years of undergoing PCI.

Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of adult patients with IBD who underwent PCI in a tertiary care center from January 2009 to December 2019.

Results: We included 44 patients, 26 with Crohn’s disease (CD) and 18 with ulcerative colitis (UC), who underwent PCI. Patients with CD underwent PCI at a younger age compared to UC (57.8 vs. 68.9 years, P < 0.001) and were more likely to be male (88.46% of CD vs. 61.1% of UC, P < 0.03). CD patients had a higher rate of non-steroidal treatment compared to UC patients (50% vs. 5.56%, P < 0.001). Acute coronary syndromes (ACS) and/or the need for revascularization (e.g., PCI) were the most common clinical events to occur following PCI, in both groups. Of patients who experienced ACS and/or unplanned revascularization within 5 years, 25% of UC vs. 40% of CD had target lesion failure (TLF) due to in-stent restenosis and 10% of CD had TLF due to stent thrombosis.

Conclusions: We observed higher rates of TLF in IBD patients compared to the general population as well as differences in clinical outcomes between UC and CD patients. A better understanding of the prognostic factors and pathophysiology of these differences may have clinical importance in tailoring the appropriate treatment or type of revascularization for this high-risk group.

September 2019
Erez Marcusohn MD, Danny Epstein MD, Anees Musallam MD, Zohar Keidar MD PHD and Ariel Roguin MD PHD

Background: With the recent introduction of high-sensitivity troponin (hsTn), the incremental benefit of stress myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI) in the evaluation of patients who present to the emergency department (ED) with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) is unclear.

Objectives: To assess the added value of stress MPI in low-risk ACS patients with normal range hsTnI.

Methods: We analyzed all patients who were hospitalized at our medical center from February 2016 to November 2017, who presented with low-risk ACS and underwent stress MPI, and in whom hsTnI was in the normal range after the introduction of hsTnI.

Results: During the study period, 161 patients were admitted with a diagnosis of unstable angina (i.e., ACS with normal range hsTnI) and underwent stress MPI during index admission. The study population included 52/161 patients (31.7%) with low-risk ACS who had no indication for initial invasive strategy. No patients had positive MPI. One patient underwent coronary angiography due to suggestive history; however, he did not have a significant coronary artery disease and had no indication for percutaneous coronary intervention.

Conclusions: In patients with low-risk ACS and normal range hsTnI without additional high-risk features, stress MPI has little additional value for the correct diagnosis and management. Prospective studies are warranted to confirm whether resting hsTnI could serve as a powerful triage tool in chest pain patients in the ED before diagnostic testing and thus, improve patient management.

June 2019
Ofer M. Kobo MD, Elit Vainer Evgrafov MD, Yuval Cohen MD, Yael Lerner MD, Alaa Khatib MD, Ron Hoffman MD, Ariel Roguin MD PhD and Inna Tzoran MD

Background: Malignancy is a known risk factor for venous thromboembolism; however, the association with arterial thromboembolic events remains unclear.

Objectives: To examine the association between non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) and non-significant coronary artery disease (CAD) and the presence of new or occult malignancy.

Methods: An observational cohort, single-center study was performed 2010–2015. Adult patients with NSTEMI, who underwent coronary angiography and had no significant coronary lesion, were included. Using propensity score matching, we created a 2:1 matched control group of adults with NSTEMI, and significant coronary artery disease. Risk factors for new or occult malignancy were assessed using multivariate backward stepwise logistic regression analysis. The primary outcome was new or occult malignancy, defined as any malignancy diagnosed in the 3 months prior and 6 months following the myocardial infarction (MI).

Results: During the study period, 174 patients who presented with MI with non-obstructive coronary arteries were identified. The matched control group included 348 patients. There was no significant difference in the group demographics, past medical history, or clinical presentation. The incidence of new or occult malignancy in the study group was significantly higher (7/174, 4% vs. 3/348, 0.9%, P = 0.019). NSTEMI with non-significant CAD was an independent risk factor for occult malignancy (odds ratio [OR] 4.6, 95% confidence interval [95%CI] 1.1–18.7). Other risk factors included active smoking (OR 11.2, 95%CI 2.5–49.1) and age (OR 1.1, 95%CI 1.03–1.17).

Conclusions: NSTEMI with non-significant CAD may be a presenting or early marker of malignancy and warrants further investigation.

October 2008
A. Roguin, S. Abadi, E. Ghersin, A. Engel, R. Beyar and S. Rispler

Background: Multi-detector computed tomography has advanced enormously and now enables non-invasive evaluation of coronary arteries as well as cardiac anatomy, function and perfusion. However, the role of cardiac MDCT[1] is not yet determined in the medical community and, consequently, many clinically unnecessary scans are performed solely on a self-referral basis.

Objectives: To prospectively evaluate the role of a cardiologist consultation and recommendation prior to the scan, and the influence on the diagnostic yield of cardiac MDCT.

Methods: In our center, a CT service was initiated, but with the prerequisite approval of a cardiologist before performance of the CT. Each individual who wanted and was willing to pay for a cardiac CT was interviewed by an experienced cardiologist who determined whether cardiac MDCT was the most appropriate next test in the cardiovascular evaluation. Subjects were classified into three groups: a) those with a normal or no prior stress test, no typical symptoms and no significant risk factors of coronary artery disease were recommended to perform a stress test or to remain under close clinical follow-up without MDCT; b) those with an equivocal stress test, atypical symptoms and/or significant risk factors were allowed to have cardiac MDCT; and c) those with positive stress test or clinically highly suspected CAD[2] were advised to go directly to invasive coronary angiography. CT findings were categorized as normal CAD (normal calcium score and no narrowings), < 50% and > 50% CAD.

Results: A total of 254 people were interviewed, and in only 39 cases did the cardiologist approve the CT. However, 61 of the 215, despite our recommendation not to undergo CT, decided to have the scan. Assessment of the 100 cases that underwent MDCT showed a statistically significant better discrimination of significant CAD, according to the cardiologist’s recommendation: MDCT not recommended in 3/54 (6%) vs. MDCT recommended in 12/39 (31%) vs. recommended invasive coronary angiography in 4/7 (57%) (P < 0.001).

Conclusions: Detection of coronary calcification, as well as MDCT angiography can provide clinically useful information if applied to suitable patient groups. It is foreseeable that MDCT angiography will become part of the routine workup in some subsets of patients with suspected CAD. Selection of patients undergoing MDCT scans by a cardiologist improves the ability of the test to stratify patients, preventing unnecessary scans in both high and low risk patients






[1] MDCT = multi-detector computed tomography

[2] CAD = coronary artery disease


April 2007
E. Markusohn, A. Roguin, A. Sebbag, D. Aronson, R. Dragu, S. Amikam, M. Boulus, E. Grenadier, A. Kerner, E. Nikolsky, W. Markiewicz, H. Hammerman and M. Kapeliovich

Background: The decision to perform primary percutaneous coronary intervention in unconscious patients resuscitated after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest is challenging because of uncertainty regarding the prognosis of recovery of anoxic brain damage and difficulties in interpretation of ST segment deviations. In ST elevation myocardial infarction patients after OHCA[1], primary PCI[2] is generally considered the only option for reperfusion. There are few published studies and no randomized trial has yet been performed in this specific group of patients.

Objectives: To define the demographic, clinical and angiographic characteristics, and the prognosis of STEMI[3] patients undergoing primary PCI after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest.

Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis of medical records and used the prospectively acquired information from the Rambam Primary Angioplasty Registry (PARR) and the Rambam Intensive Cardiac Care (RICCa) databases.

Results: During the period March1998 to June 2006, 25 STEMI patients (21 men and 4 women, mean age 56 ± 11years) after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest were treated with primary PCI. The location of myocardial infarction was anterior in 13 patients (52%) and non-anterior in 12 (48%). Cardiac arrest was witnessed in 23 patients (92%), but bystander resuscitation was performed in only 2 patients (8%). Eighteen patients (72%) were unconscious on admission, and Glasgow Coma Scale > 5 was noted in 2 patients (8%). Cardiogenic shock on admission was diagnosed in 4 patients (16%). PCI procedure was successful in 22 patients (88%). In-hospital, 30 day, 6 month and 1 year survival was 76%, 76%, 76% and 72%, respectively. In-hospital, 30 day, 6 month and 1 year survival without severe neurological disability was 68%, 68%, 68% and 64%, respectively.

Conclusions: In a selected group of STEMI patients after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, primary PCI can be performed with a high success rate and provides reasonably good results in terms of short and longer term survival.

 







[1] OHCA = out-of-hospital cardiac arrest

[2] PCI = percutaneous coronary intervention

[3] STEMI = ST elevation myocardial infarction


M. Suleiman, L. Gepstein, A. Roguin, R. Beyar and M. Boulos

Background: Catheter ablation is assuming a larger role in the management of patients with cardiac arrhythmias. Conventional fluoroscopic catheter mapping has limited spatial resolution and involves prolonged fluoroscopy. The non-fluoroscopic electroanatomic mapping technique (CARTO) has been developed to overcome these drawbacks.

Objectives: To report the early and late outcome in patients with different arrhythmias treated with radiofrequency ablation combined with the CARTO mapping and navigation system.

Methods: The study cohort comprised 125 consecutive patients with different cardiac arrhythmia referred to our center from January 1999 to July 2005 for mapping and/or ablation procedures using the CARTO system. Forty patients (32%) had previous failed conventional ablation or mapping procedures and were referred by other centers. The arrhythmia included atrial fibrillation (n=13), atrial flutter (n=38), atrial tachycardia (n=25), ventricular tachycardia (n=24), arrhythmogenic right ventricular dysplasia (n=9), and supraventricular tachycardia (n=16).

Results: During the study period, a total of 125 patients (mean age 49 ± 19 years, 59% males) underwent electrophysiological study and electroanatomic mapping of the heart chambers. Supraventricular arrhythmias were identified in 92 patients (73 %) and ventricular arrhythmias in 33 (27%). Acute and late success rates, defined as termination of the arrhythmia without anti-arrhythmic drugs, were 87% and 76% respectively. One patient (0.8%) developed a clinically significant complication.

Conclusions: The CARTO system advances our understanding of arrhythmias, and increases the safety, efficacy and efficiency of radiofrequency ablation.

 
 

February 2006
D. Goldsher, S. Amikam, M. Boulos, M. Suleiman, R. Shreiber, A. Eran, Y. Goldshmid, R. Mazbar and A. Roguin

Background: Magnetic resonance imaging is a diagnostic tool of growing importance. Since its introduction, certain medical implants, e.g., pacemakers, were considered an absolute contraindication, mainly due to the presence of ferromagnetic components and the potential for electromagnetic interference. Patients with such implants were therefore prevented from entering MRI systems and not studied by this modality. These devices are now smaller and have improved electromechanical interference protection. Recently in vitro and in vivo data showed that these devices may be scanned safely in the MRI.

Objectives: To report our initial experience with three patients with pacemakers who underwent cerebral MRI studies.

Methods: The study included patients with clear clinical indications for MRI examination and who had implanted devices shown to be safe by in vitro and in vivo animal testing. In each patient the pacemaker was programmed to pacing-off. During the scan, continuous electrocardiographic telemetry, breathing rate, pulse oximetry and symptoms were monitored. Specific absorption rate was limited to 4.0 W/kg for all sequences. Device parameters were assessed before, immediately after MRI, and 1 week later.

Results: None of the patients was pacemaker dependent. During the MRI study, no device movement was felt by the patients and no episodes of inappropriate inhibition or rapid activation of pacing were observed during the scan. At device interrogation here were no significant differences in device parameters pre-, post-, and 1 week after MRI. Image quality was unremarkable in all imaging sequences used and was not influenced by the presence of the pacemaker.

Conclusion: Given appropriate precautions, MRI can be safely performed in patients with a selected permanent pacemaker. This may have significant implications for current MRI contraindications. 
 

May 2001
Yehuda Edoute, MD, PhD, Yuval Karmon, MD, Ariel Roguin, MD and Haim Ben-Ami, MD
November 1999
October 1999
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