• IMA sites
  • IMAJ services
  • IMA journals
  • Follow us
  • Alternate Text Alternate Text
עמוד בית
Sun, 26.05.24

Search results


November 2016
Guy Hidas MD, Jacob Ben Chaim MD, Refael Udassin MD, Merry Graeb MD, Ofer N. Gofrit MD, Rachel Yaffa Zisk-Rony PhD, Dov Pode MD, Mordechai Duvdevani M2, Vladimir Yutkin MD, Amos Neheman MD, Amos Fruman MD, Dan Arbel MD, Vadim Kopuler MD, Yaron Armon MD and Ezekiel H. Landau MD

Background: Strong evidence suggests that in order to prevent irreversible testicular damage surgical correction (orchidopexy) for undescended testis (UDT) should be performed before the age of 1 year. 

Objectives: To evaluate whether orchidopexy is delayed in our medical system, and if so, to explore the pattern of referral for orchidopexy as a possible contributing factor in such delays. 

Methods: We conducted a retrospective chart review of all children who underwent orchidopexy for UDT between 2003 and 2013 in our institution. We collected data on the age at surgery and the child's health insurance plan. We also surveyed pediatricians from around the country regarding their pattern of UDT patient referral to a pediatric urologist or surgeon for surgical correction.

Results: A total of 813 children underwent orchidopexy in our institute during the study period. The median age at surgery was 1.49 years (range 0.5–13). Only 11% of the children underwent surgery under the age of 1 year, and 53% between the ages of 1 and 2 years. These findings were consistent throughout the years, with no difference between the four health insurance plans. Sixty-three pediatricians who participated in the survey reported that they referred children to surgery at a median age of 1 year (range 0.5–3 years).

Conclusions: Our results demonstrate delayed orchidopexy in our medical system. There is a need to improve awareness for early specialist consultation in order to facilitate earlier surgery and better care.

 

November 2015
Oren Gordon MD PhD, Sinan Abu-Leil MD, Yotam Almagor MD, Elite Cohen MD, Alexander Margulis MD, Dan Arbell MD, Benjamin Bar-Oz and Smadar Eventov-Friedman MD PhD
May 2013
M. Abu-Gazala, N. Shussman, S. Abu-Gazala, R. Elazary, M. Bala, S. Rozenberg, A. Klimov, A.I. Rivkind, D. Arbell, G. Almogy and A.I. Bloom
 Background: Renal artery injuries are rarely encountered in victims of blunt trauma. However, the rate of early diagnosis of such injuries is increasing due to increased awareness and the liberal use of contrast-enhanced CT. Sporadic case reports have shown the feasibility of endovascular management of blunt renal artery injury. However, no prospective trials or long-term follow-up studies have been reported.

Objectives: To present our experience with endovascular management of blunt renal artery injury, and review the literature.

Methods: We conducted a retrospective study of 18 months at a level 1 trauma center. Search of our electronic database and trauma registry identified three patients with renal artery injury from blunt trauma who were successfully treated endovascularly. Data recorded included the mechanism of injury, time from injury and admission to revascularization, type of endovascular therapy, clinical and imaging outcome, and complications.

Results: Mean time from injury to endovascular revascularization was 193 minutes and mean time from admission to revascularization 154 minutes. Stent-assisted angioplasty was used in two cases, while angioplasty alone was performed in a 4 year old boy. A good immediate angiographic result was achieved in all patients. At a mean follow-up of 13 months the treated renal artery was patent in all patients on duplex ultrasound. The mean percentage renal perfusion of the treated kidney at last follow-up was 36% on DTPA renal scan. No early or late complications were encountered.

Conclusions: Endovascular management for blunt renal artery dissection is safe and feasible if an early diagnosis is made. This approach may be expected to replace surgical revascularization in most cases.

 

December 2007
D. Arbell, E. Gross, A. Preminger, Y Naveh, R. Udassin and I. Gur

Background: Babies born with extreme prematurity and low birth weight (< 1000 g) present a unique treatment challenge. In addition to the complexity of achieving survival, they may require surgical interventions for abdominal emergencies. Usually, these infants are transferred to a referral center for surgery treatment. Since 2000 our approach is bedside abdominal surgery at the referring center.

Objectives: To evaluate whether the approach of bedside abdominal surgery at the referring center is safe and perhaps even beneficial for the baby.

Methods: We retrospectively reviewed our data since 2000 and included only babies weighing < 1000 g who were ventilated, suffered from hemodynamic instability and underwent surgery for perforated bowel at the referring neonatal unit. Results were analyzed according to survival from the acute event (> 1 week), survival from the abdominal disease (> 30 days) and survival to discharge.

Results: Twelve babies met the inclusion criteria. Median weight at operation was 850 g (range 620–1000 g) and median age at birth was 25 weeks (range 23–27). Eleven infants survived the acute event (91.7%), 9 survived more than 30 days (81.8%), and 5 survived to discharge.

Conclusions: Our results show that bedside laparotomy at the referring hospital is safe and feasible. A larger randomized study is indicated to prove the validity of this approach.

 
 

August 2007
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