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

Search results


September 2022
Ronny Ben-Avi MD, Alex Sorkin MD, Roy Nadler MD, Avishai M. Tsur MD, Shaul Gelikas MD MBA, Jacob Chen MD MHA, and Avi Benov MD MHA; and Israel Trauma Group

Background: Chest trauma is among the most common types of trauma, corresponding to 10% of trauma patients admitted to hospitals. In the military setting, thoracic trauma was reported as a significant cause of death. With well-timed treatment, chest trauma is regarded as survivable. Emergency thoracotomy (ET) is considered when the patient with trauma to the chest needs immediate resuscitation. Survival rate is reported as low as 1% in some reports and 20% in others. The survival rate depends on injury mechanism, protocols for intervention, and other decompressive procedures.

Objectives: To determine parameters that may impact survival of ET.

Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study to compare prehospital and in-hospital data regarding ET in the emergency department (ED) versus the operating room (OR).

Results: Between 2009 and 2017, 6532 casualties presented to the ED; 1125 with trauma to the chest. Fifty-four of those with chest trauma underwent ET in the hospital (4.8%), 22 (41%) in the ED, and 32 (59%) in the OR. The overall mortality of the ET subgroup was 48%. With regard to thoracotomies, 19/22 of patients (86%) who underwent ET in the ED died compared to 2/28 in the OR (13%).

Conclusions: Utilizing ET after chest trauma with appropriate clinical indications, well-trained personnel, and prompt transportation poses a significant challenge, but may be associated with better survival than that reported previously with military casualties. Adoption of indications and timed allocation to the OR may improve outcomes with chest trauma casualties.

July 2018
Eilon Ram MD, Leonid Sternik MD, Alexander Lipey MD, Sagit Ben Zekry MD, Ronny Ben-Avi MD, Yaron Moshkovitz MD and Ehud Raanani MD

Background: Unicuspid and bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) are congenital cardiac anomalies associated with valvular dysfunction and aortopathies occurring at a young age.

Objectives: To evaluate our experience with aortic valve repair (AVr) in patients with bicuspid or unicuspid aortic valves.

Methods: Eighty patients with BAV or unicuspid aortic valve (UAV) underwent AVr. Mean patient age was 42 ± 14 years and 94% were male. Surgical technique included: aortic root replacement with or without cusp repair in 43 patients (53%), replacement of the ascending aorta at the height of the sino-tubular junction with or without cusp repair in 15 patients (19%), and isolated cusp repair in 22 patients (28%).

Results: The anatomical structure of the aortic valve was bicuspid in 68 (85%) and unicuspid in 12 patients (15%). Survival rate was 100% at 5 years of follow-up. Eleven patients (13.7%) underwent reoperation, 8 of whom presented with recurrent symptomatic aortic insufficiency (AI). Late echocardiography in the remaining 69 patients revealed mild AI in 63 patients, moderate recurrent AI in 4, and severe recurrent AI in 2. Relief from recurrent severe AI or reoperations was significantly lower in patients who underwent cusp repair compared with those who did not (P = 0.05). Furthermore, the use of pericardial patch augmentation for the repair was a predictor for recurrence (P = 0.05).

Conclusions: AVr in patients with BAV or UAV is a safe procedure with low morbidity and mortality rates. The use of a pericardial patch augmentation was associated with higher repair failure.

September 2002
Ronen Durst, MD, Deborah Rund, MD, Daniel Schurr, MD, Osnat Eliav, MSc, Dina Ben-Yehuda, MD, Shoshi Shpizen, BSc, Liat Ben-Avi, BSc, Tova Schaap, MSc, Inna Pelz, BSc and Eran Leitersdorf, MD

Background: Low density lipoprotein apheresis is used as a complementary method for treating hypercholesterolemic patients who cannot reach target LDL[1]-cholesterol levels on conventional dietary and drug treatment. The DALI system (direct absorption of lipoproteins) is the only extracorporeal LDL-removing system compatible with whole blood.

Objective: To describe our one year experience using the DALI[2] system.

Methods: LDL apheresis was used in 13 patients due to inability to reach target LDL-C levels on conventional treatment. They included seven patients with familial hypercholesterolemia, three who had adverse reactions to statins, and three patients with ischemic heart disease who did not reach LDL-C target level on medical treatment.

Results: The average triglyceride, total cholesterol, high density lipoprotein-C and LDL-C levels before and after treatment in all patients were: 170 ± 113 vs. 124 ± 91, 269 ± 74 vs. 132 ± 48, 42 ± 8 vs. 37 ± 7.9, and 196 ± 77 vs. 80 ± 52 mg/dl, respectively. Comparing the results of a subgroup of seven patients who had previously been treated with plasma exchange, it is noteworthy that while the reduction in triglyceride, total cholesterol and LDL-C are comparable, the effect on HDL[3]-C concentration was less apparent: from an average of 39.7 ± 8.7 and 23 ± 5.7 mg/dl before and after plasma exchange to an average of 43.9 ± 8.1 and 38.4 ± 7 mg/dl before and after LDL apheresis, respectively. Five patients developed treatment-related adverse events: three experienced allergic reactions manifested as shortness of breath, urticaria and facial flushing; one patient developed rhabdomyolysis, an adverse reaction that was not reported previously as a result of LDL apheresis; and one patient had myopathy with back pain. All untoward effects occurred during the first few treatment sessions.

Conclusions: LDL apheresis using the DALI system is highly efficacious for the treatment of hypercholesterolemia. It is associated with a significant number of side effects occurring during the first treatment sessions. In patients not experiencing adverse effects in the early treatment period, it is well tolerated, and can provide remarkable clinical benefit even after short-term therapy.

________________


[1] LDL = low density lipoprotein

[2] DALI = direct absorption of lipoproteins

[3] HDL = high density lipoprotein

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