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

Search results


January 2025
Isca Hershkowitz MD, Joshua Moss MD PhD, Jacob Sosna MD, Eyal Netser MD, Avivit Cahn MD, Alon Y. Hershko MD PhD

Background: Management of patients with reported iodinated contrast media (ICM) allergy is not supported by sufficient data. It is assumed that these patients are at risk for severe reactions, and that premedication provides protection.

Objective: To examine current practice and prognosis in hospitalized patients with ICM allergy.

Methods: In this retrospective study, we analyzed data of 17,356 patients who were hospitalized between 2018 and 2022 and referred for imaging. No-allergy and allergy groups were matched by age, sex, co-morbidities, and indications for imaging. Statistical analysis compared demographic, clinical, and imaging-related parameters.

Results: Our study included records of 501 patients with ICM allergy and 16,855 with no allergy. Patients with allergy were older (70.92 ± 16.25 vs. 59.02 ± 23.74 years, P < 0.001), female preponderance (male proportion 42.5% vs. 54%, P < 0.001), and those with increased cardiovascular and metabolic co-morbidities. The rate of ICM injection was similar among patients with ICM allergy (34%) and no allergy (36%). Most patients with ICM allergy did not receive premedication. Allergic patients demonstrated increased mortality (25.9% vs. 16.5%, P < 0.001); however, this result was not associated with the diagnosis of allergy, anaphylactic reactions, or premedication.

Conclusions: ICM allergy is mostly reported in patients with advanced age and multiple co-morbidities. Mortality was not increased when compared to matched non-allergic individuals. Among patients with reported allergy who were injected with ICM, anaphylaxis was not a cause of death, although fewer than half received premedication. Prospective trials are warranted to revise the clinical approach to ICM allergy.

December 2005
S. Viskin, M. Berger, M. Ish-Shalom, N. Malov, M. Tamari, M. Golovner, M. Kehati, D. Zeltser A. Roth.

Background: Chlorpromazine is a dopamine-receptor antagonist antipsychotic agent. Because of its strong alpha-blocking and sedative actions, it has also been used as emergency therapy for extreme arterial hypertension. Published reports to date have included very small numbers of patients (i.e., 5–30).

Objectives: To analyze data on almost 500 patients who received intravenous chlorpromazine for the emergency treatment of uncontrolled symptomatic hypertension in the pre-hospital setting.

Methods: We reviewed data from 496 consecutive patients who received intravenous chlorpromazine as emergency therapy for uncontrolled symptomatic hypertension. Chlorpromazine was injected intravenously. The dose was 1 mg every 2–5 minutes until the systolic pressure was -<140 mmHg and the diastolic pressure -<100 mmHg with alleviation of symptoms.

Results: The mean dose of chlorpromazine administered was 4.5 +- 5 mg (range 1–50 mg). Only 33 patients (7%) required >10 mg. Chlorpromazine reduced the systolic blood pressure from 222.82 +- 26.31 to 164.93 +- 22.66 mmHg (P < 0.001) and the diastolic blood pressure from 113.5 +- 16.63 to 85.83 +- 11.61 mmHg (P < 0.001). The sinus rate decreased from 97.9 +- 23.5 to 92.2 +- 19.7 beats per minute (P < 0.001). These results were achieved within the first 37 +- 11 minutes.

Conclusions: Intravenous chlorpromazine is safe and effective when used as emergency treatment for uncontrolled symptomatic hypertension.

 

January 2004
E. Eisenberg and R. Adler

Background: The World Health Organization considers a country's morphine consumption to be an important indicator of progress in pain relief. Despite the strong consensus favoring the use of opioids in many types of pain, limited data are available for gauging the trends in opioid usage in specific medical institutions, such as hospitals

Objectives: To assess the possibility that monitoring opioid consumption can shed light on directions and trends in the treatment of pain in a hospital setting.

Methods: Data on opioid consumption, number of inpatient days, and number of operations performed each year during the period 1990–1999 were obtained from records kept in the hospital’s pharmacy and archives.

Results: During that decade the overall opioid consumption in the hospital increased from the equivalent of 3.7 mg of oral morphine per inpatient day to 7.3 mg, and from 56 mg per surgical procedure to 100 mg. In 1990, injected opioids accounted for 93% of the overall consumption, whereas in 1999 they accounted for only 44%. Yet, the proportion of injected meperidine to injected morphine increased only from 43% to 51%.

Conclusions: These results suggest that the ongoing monitoring of opioid consumption can highlight trends and directions and possibly emphasize strengths and weaknesses in the treatment of pain in hospitals.

August 2002
Wendy Chen, MSW, Ruth Balaban, MA, RN, Varda Stanger, PhD, Ra’aya Haruvi, MSW, Shmuel Zur, MD and Arie Augarten, MD
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