• IMA sites
  • IMAJ services
  • IMA journals
  • Follow us
  • Alternate Text Alternate Text
עמוד בית
Sat, 09.12.23

Search results

November 2023
Ibrahim Osman MD, Alaa Atamna MD, Avishay Elis MD

Background: Low-risk venous thromboembolism (VTE) patients are advised to be discharged from the emergency department (ED) on direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) treatment. There is no data on whether this recommendation is followed in Israel.

Objectives: To characterize newly diagnosed VTE patients who were discharged from the ED, their anticoagulation treatment at the ED, the recommended discharge protocol, and patient adherence.

Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study, which included all newly diagnosed VTE patients who were discharged from the ED. Collected data included demographic and clinical background; anticoagulation treatment at the ED, recommended discharge protocol and its subsequent adherence, patient subsequent, recommended hematological evaluation, and adverse events.

Results: The study group included 443 patients, 89% with deep vein thrombosis (DVT). Approximately three-quarters were treated with anticoagulants in the ED, 98% with enoxaparin. At discharge, anticoagulants were recommended for all; 49% continued enoxaparin, 47% DOACs, and 4% warfarin. After 4 weeks, 67% were treated with DOACs, 22% with enoxaparin, 5% with warfarin. Approximately 6% discontinued all treatment. After 12 weeks, 90% of the patients who were taking DOACs adhered to the protocol, whereas only 70% and 50% among the enoxaparin and warfarin users, respectively, did. Only 56% were referred for hematological evaluation. The 12-week rate of adverse reactions was approximately 2%. The use of DOACs and the recommendation for further hematological evaluation increased over time.

Conclusions: Clinician training regarding discharge of VTE patients from the ED should continue.

September 2023
Alaa Atamna MD, Evgeny Berkov MD, Genady Drozdinsky MD, Tzippy Shochat MD, Haim Ben Zvi MD, Noa Eliakim-Raz MD, Jihad Bishara MD, Avishay Elis MD

Background: Influenza and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) are respiratory diseases with similar modes of transmission. In December 2021, influenza re-emerged after it had been undetected since March 2020 and the Omicron variant replaced the Delta variant. Data directly comparing the two diseases are scarce.

Objectives: To compare the outcomes of patients with both the Omicron variant and influenza during 2021–2022.

Methods: We performed a retrospective study conducted in Beilinson hospital, Israel, from December 2021 to January 2022. We included all hospitalized patients with either laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 or influenza. The primary outcome was 30-day mortality.

Results: We identified 167 patients diagnosed with Omicron and 221 diagnosed with Influenza A. The median age was 71 years for Omicron and 65 years for influenza. Patients with Omicron had a significantly higher Charlson Comorbidity Index score (4 vs. 3, P < 0.001). Patients with Omicron developed more respiratory failure that needed mechanical ventilation (7% vs. 2%, P = 0.05) and vasopressors (14% vs. 2%, P < 0.001) than patients with influenza. In a multivariate model, 30-day mortality was lower in patients diagnosed with influenza than in patients diagnosed with Omicron (19/221 [9%] vs. 44/167 [26%], hazard ratio 0.45, 95% confidence interval 0.25–0.81).

Conclusions: Patients diagnosed with Omicron had higher mortality than patients diagnosed with seasonal influenza. This finding could be due to differences in co-morbidities, the virus pathogenicity, and host responses to infection.

Avishay Elis MD, Ella Giladi MD, Ahmad Raiyan MD, Alaa Atamna MD

Background: Congestive heart failure (CHF) with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) or with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is a common diagnosis in patients hospitalized in the department of internal medicine. Recently, the therapeutic regimens were updated, as the sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitors became an integral part of the therapeutic regimen for either HFrEF or HFpEF.

Objectives: To define the demographic and clinical characteristics of CHF patients hospitalized in the department of medicine.

Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study that included all patients hospitalized in the departments of medicine at the Rabin Medical Center, Israel, between 2016 and 2019. Demographic and clinical background, in-hospital procedures, discharge regimens, and outcome parameters were evaluated according to HFrEF/HFpEF.

Results: The cohort included 4458 patients. The majority (97%) presented with a preexisting diagnosis, whereas HF was an active condition in only half of them. The rates of HFrEF/HFpEF were equal. In most cases, the trigger of the exacerbation could not be determined; however, infection was the most common cause. There were basic differences in the demography, clinical aspects, and therapeutic regimens at discharge between HFrEF and HFpEF. Both conditions were associated with high in hospital mortality (8%) and re-admissions rates (30 days [20%], 90 days [35%]) without any difference between them.

Conclusions: HFrEF/HFpEF patients differed by demographics and co-morbidities. They were equally represented among patients admitted to medical wards and had similar prognosis. For both diagnoses, hospitalization should be considered for updating therapeutic regimens, especially with SGLT2 inhibitors.

November 2022
Howard Amital MD MHA and Avishay Elis MD

Internal medicine is no doubt one of the main pillars of modern medicine. For years it has been considered to be the basis and foundation of medical education and proper clinical service. During the recent coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, internal medicine departments were recognized worldwide, and clearly in Israel, to be the true Corona Warriors that provided medical care to patients as well as support and comfort to families. Around the globe, the public applauded and appreciated the bravery of our medical staff, who without hesitation and under direct personal danger provided the best medical care possible despite the hardships of the time. The high personal price and even the heavy cost of staff member lives lost in offering medical care to the pubic did not stop our quest for ongoing medical research.

Avishay Elis MD, Wassim Daud MD, Gal Cohen MD, Ela Giladi MD, Alaa Atamna MD

Background: There is an increasing use of anti-protein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) monoclonal antibodies (mAbs); however, real-world data is lacking.

Objectives: To define the demographic and clinical characteristics of patients treated with anti-PCSK9 mAbs. To evaluate efficacy, tolerability, and differences between the approved agents.

Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted of patients treated at the lipid clinic at Rabin Medical Center (Beilinson Campus), Israel, from January 2016 to December 2019. Data from electronic records were evaluated for demographic and clinical characteristics, indication for use, response of lowering low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C)/non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (non-HDL-C) levels and reaching target levels, side effects, tolerability, differences between the agents, and doses.

Results: The study cohort included 115 patients. Two-thirds (n=75) were at high cardiovascular risk, the rest at very high risk (n=40). The major indication for treatment was statin intolerance (n=97, 84%). Most patients (n=102, 88%) were treated by anti-PCSK9 mAbs agents only. LDL-C and non-HDL-C levels were decreased by 47% and 39%, respectively (156 + 49 to 81 + 39 and 192 + 53 to 116 + 42 mg/dl), within 6 months and remained stable. Two-thirds (n=76) of the patients reached their lipid target levels. No clinically significant differences were observed between the agents in efficacy or tolerability.

Conclusions: In a real-world setting, anti-PCSK9 mAbs are used primarily as a single agent in high-risk and very high-risk cardiovascular populations with statin intolerance. They are well tolerated and effective in reduction of LDL-C levels. Further studies are needed to clarify comparisons between agents and doses.

Ela Giladi MD, Adi Rotkopf MD, Avishay Elis MD

Myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) is frequently associated with clinical manifestations of autoimmune disorders (AD) and inflammatory responses of the immune system. The biological linkage between MDS clones and the occurrence of autoimmune manifestations is mirrored by the response of the latter to MDS modifying therapeutic approaches [1]. We encountered a rare case of MDS coexisting with antiphospholipid syndrome (APS), which was effectively treated with a hypomethylating agent followed by allogenic bone marrow transplantation.

June 2021
Avishay Elis MD, Robert Klempfner MD, Chen Gurevitz MD, Ela Gilady MD, and Ilan Goldenberg MD

Background: Real-world information regarding the use of direct oral anticoagulants therapy and the outcome in patients with renal dysfunction is limited.

Objectives: To evaluate the clinical characteristics and outcomes of patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and severe renal dysfunction who are treated with apixaban.

Methods: A sub-analysis was conducted within a multicenter prospective cohort study. The study included consecutive eligible apixaban- or warfarin-treated patients with non-valvular AF and renal impairment (estimated glomerular filtration rate [eGFR] modification of diet in renal disease [MDRD] < 60 ml/min/BSA) were registered. All patients were prospectively followed for clinical events and over a mean period of 1 year. Our sub-analysis included the patients with 15 < eGFR MDRD < 30 ml/min/BSA. The primary outcomes at 1 year were recorded. They included mortality, stroke or systemic embolism, major bleeding, and myocardial infarction as well as their composite occurrence.

Results: The sub-analysis included 155 warfarin-treated patients and 97 apixaban-treated ones. All had 15 < eGFR MDRD < 30 ml/min/BSA. When comparing outcomes for propensity matched groups (n=76 per group) of patients treated by reduced dose apixaban or warfarin, the rates of the 1-year composite endpoint as well as mortality alone were higher among the warfarin group (30 [39.5%] vs. 14 [18.4%], P = 0.007 and 28 [36.8%] vs.12 [15.8%], P = 0.006), respectively. There was no significant difference in the rates of stroke, systemic embolism, or major bleeding.

Conclusions: Apixaban might be a reasonable alternative to warfarin in patients with severe renal impairment.

May 2020
Gad Segal MD, Dror Mevorach MD, Avishay Elis MD and Dror Dicker MD and COVID-19 Task Force on behalf of the Israeli Society of Internal Medicine
July 2018
Avishay Elis MD, David Pereg MD, Zaza Iakobishvili MD, Dikla Geva PhD and Ilan Goldenberg MD

Background: A patient`s individual chance of being diagnosed with cardiovascular disease can be determined by risk scores.

Objectives: To determine the risk score profiles of patients presenting with a first acute coronary event according to pre-admission risk factors and to evaluate its association with long-term mortality.

Methods: The research was based on a retrospective study of a cohort from the 2010 and 2013 Acute Coronary Syndrome Israeli Surveys (ACSIS). Inclusion criteria included first event and no history of coronary heart disease or cardiovascular disease risk equivalent. The Framingham Risk Score, the European Systematic COronary Risk Evaluation (SCORE), and the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association/ (ACC/AHA) risk calculator were computed for each patient. The risk profile of each patients was determined by the three scores. The prognostic value of each score for 5 year survival was evaluated.

Results: The study population comprised 1338 patients enrolled in the prospective ACSIS survey. The ACC/AHA score was the most accurate in identifying patients as high risk based on pre-admission risk factors (73% of the subjects). The Framingham algorithm identified 53%, whereas SCORE recognized only 4%. After multivariate adjustment for clinical factors at presentation, we found that no scores were independently associated with 5 year mortality following the first acute coronary event.

Conclusions: Patients with first acute coronary event had a higher pre-admission risk scores according to the ACC/AHA risk algorithm. No risk scores were independently associated with 5 year survival after an event.

March 2010
O. Jarchowsky Dolberg, A. Elis and M. Lishner
November 2009
A. Elis, A. Shacham-Abulafia and M. Lishner

Background: Tight glucose control has been shown to improve the outcome of patients with severe acute illnesses who are hospitalized in intensive care units and on intravenous insulin-based regimens.

Objectives: To clarify the attitudes of internists towards tight control of glucose levels in acutely ill patients hospitalized in general medical wards.

Methods: A questionnaire on intensive glucose control in acutely ill patients hospitalized in medical wards was mailed to each of the 100 heads of internal medicine departments in Israel.

Results: Fifty physicians responded. Of these, 80% considered tight glucose control to be a major treatment target, but only two-thirds had defined it as a goal in their ward. Furthermore, only about half had a defined protocol for such an intervention. Most physicians considered patients with acute coronary syndrome, stroke and infectious diseases as candidates for a tight glucose control protocol. The most frequently used modalities were multiple blood glucose measurements and repeated injections of short-acting subcutaneous insulin. The main reasons given for not having a defined protocol were lack of guidelines, no evidence of a clear benefit during hospitalization on a medical ward, and a shortage of adequately trained staff.

Conclusions: Inconsistencies in physicians’ attitudes and in treatment protocols regarding tight control of glucose levels in acutely ill patients hospitalized on a medical ward need to be addressed. Evaluation of the feasibility, effectiveness and side effects of a defined protocol is needed before any regimen can be approved by the heads of the internal medicine departments.

July 2009
S. Reisfeld-Zadok, A. Elis, M. Szyper-Kravitz, M. Chowers and M. Lishner
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