• IMA sites
  • IMAJ services
  • IMA journals
  • Follow us
  • Alternate Text Alternate Text
עמוד בית
Tue, 28.05.24

Search results

October 2001
Tuvia Ben-Gal, MD and Nili Zafrir, MD

Background: The evaluation of hospitalized patients with chest pain and non-diagnostic electrocardiogram is problematic and the optimal cost-effective strategy for their management controversial.

Objectives: To determine the utility of myocardial perfusion imaging with thallium-201 for predicting outcome of hospitalized patients with chest pain and a normal or non-diagnostic ECG.

Methods: On pain cessation, 109 hospitalized patients, age 61+14 years (mean+SD), with chest pain and non-diagnostic ECG underwent stress myocardial perfusion SPECT imaging with thallium-201. Costs related to their management were calculated. The occurrence of non-fatal myocardial infarction or cardiac death was recorded at 12+5 months follow-up.

Results: A normal SPECT was found in 84 patients (77%). During one year follow-up, only 1 (1.2%) compared to 7 (28%) cardiac events (6 myocardial infarctions, 1 cardiac death) occurred in patients with normal versus abnormal scans respectively (P < 0.0001). Negative predictive value and accuracy of the method were 99% and 83% respectively. Multivariate regression analysis identified an abnormal SPECT as the only independent predictor of adverse cardiac event (P = 0.0016). Total cost from admission until discharge was 11,193 vs. 31,079 shekels (P < 0.0001) for normal and abnormal scan. Considering its high negative predictive value, shortening the hospital stay from admission until scan performance to 2 days would result in considerably reduced management costs (from NIS 11,193 to 7,243) per patient.

Conclusion: Stress SPECT applied to hospitalized patients with chest pain and a normal or non-diagnostic ECG is safe, highly accurate and potentially cost effective in distinguishing between Iow and high risk patients.

Sergey Lyass, MD, Tamar Sela, MD, Pinchas D. Lebensart, MD and Michael Muggia-Sullam

Background: The exact value of follow-up ultrasonogra­phy and computed tomography in the non-operative manage­ment of blunt splenic injuries is not yet defined. Although follow-up studies have been recommended to detect possible complications of the initial injury, evidence shows that routine follow-up CT scans usually do not affect management of these patients.

Objective: To determine whether follow-up imaging influences the management of patients with blunt splenic injury.

Methods: Between 1995 and 1999, 155 trauma patients were admitted with splenic trauma to a major trauma center. Excluded from the study were trauma patients with penetrating injuries, children, and those who underwent immediate laparotomy due to hemodynamic instability or associated injuries. The remaining trauma patients were managed conservatively. Splenic injury was suspected by focused abdominal sonography for trauma, upon admission, and confirmed by CT scan. The severity of splenic injury was graded from I to V. The clinical outcome was obtained from medical records.

Results: We identified 32 adult patients (27 males and 5 females) with blunt splenic injuries who were managed non-operatively. In two patients it was not successful, and splenectomy was performed because of hemodynamic dete­rioration. The remaining 30 stable patients were divided into two groups: those who had only the initial ultrasound and CT scan with no follow-up studies (n= 8), and those who under­went repeat follow-up ultrasound or CT scan studies (n = 22). The severity of injury was similar in both groups. In the second group follow-up studies showed normal spleens in 2 patients, improvement in 11, no change in 8, and deterioration in one. All patients in both groups were managed successfully with good clinical outcome.

Conclusion: In the present series the follow-up radiologi­cal studies did not affect patient management. Follow-up imaging can be omitted in clinically stable patients with blunt splenic trauma grade I-III.

Dvora Aharoni, MD, Sergey Mekhmandarov, MD, Menachem Itzchaki, MD, Nurith Hiller, MD and Deborah Elstein, PhD
June 2001
Hanna J. Garzozi, MD, Nur Shoham, MD, Hak Sung Chung, MD, PhD, Larry Kagemann, MS and Alon Harris, PhD
May 2001
Sydney Ben-Chetrit, Vidal Barchilon, MD, Ze’ev. Korzets, MD, BS, Joelle Bernheim, MD and Jacques Bernheim, MD
December 2000
Nurith Hiller, MD, Daniel Berelowitz, MD and Irith Hadas-Halpern, MD
 Background: Primary epiploic appendagitis is a relatively rare condition in which torsion and inflammation of an epiploic appendix result in localized abdominal pain. This is a non-surgical situation that clinically mimics other conditions requiring surgery such as acute diverticulitis or appendicitis.

Objective: To investigate the clinical, laboratory and radiological findings of the disease.

Methods: During the years 1995-88 five patients with primary epiploic appendigitis were diagnosed at our institution. The clinical, laboratory and imaging results were summarized and compared to previously reported series. Emphasis was placed on the computed tomography findings, which are the gold standard for diagnosis.

Results: All our patients (two males and three females, mean age 47 years) presented with left lower quadrant abdominal pain. CT proved to be the imaging modality of choice in all patients by showing a pericolic fatty mass with an increased attenuation as compared to normal abdominal fat. In all cases the mass was surrounded by a high attenuation rim, and focal stranding of the fat was observed. In no case was there thickening of the adjacent bowel wall. This serves as an important, and previously unreported, clue for diagnosis.

Conclusion: Primary epiploic appendagitis is a relatively rare condition that may be clinically misdiagnosed, resulting in unnecessary surgical intervention. Judicious interpretation of CT may lead to early diagnosis and ensure proper conservative treatment.

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