• IMA sites
  • IMAJ services
  • IMA journals
  • Follow us
  • Alternate Text Alternate Text
עמוד בית
Sat, 11.05.24

Search results


June 2015
Idit F. Liberty MD, Naim Abu Freha MD, Yael Baumfeld MD, Shlomi Codish MD MPH, Fransisc Schlaeffer MD and Victor Novack MD PhD

Abstract

Background: The impact of admission glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) on hospital outcome is controversial.

Objectives: To evaluate the association between admission glucose and HbA1c levels and mortality 1 year after hospitalization in the internal medicine ward.

Methods: HbA1c level of consecutive patients was measured during the first 24 hours of admission to the internal medicine ward and divided at the cutoff point of 6.5%. Three groups of patients were prospectively identified: patients with preexisting diabetes mellitus (DM), patients with glucose > 140 mg/dl (hyperglycemia) on admission and no known diabetes (H), and patients without diabetes or hyperglycemia (NDM). The primary end-point was 1 year all-cause mortality.

Results: A total of 1024 patients were enrolled, 592 (57.8%) belonged to the DM group, 119 (11.6%) to the H group and 313 (30.6%) to the NDM group. At 1 year, death occurred in 70 (11.9%) in the DM group, 12 (10.0%) in the H group and 15 (4.8%) in the NDM group (P = 0.002). Elevated admission glucose levels did not influence outcome in any of the groups. HbA1c levels were similar for survivors and non-survivors (P = 0.60). Within-group multivariate analysis adjusted for comorbidities and age showed that in the H group HbA1C levels of 6.5% or above were associated with increased mortality risk [hazard ratio (HR) 8.25, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.93–35.21). In the DM group, HbA1c levels below 6.5% were associated with increased mortality risk (HR = 2.05, 95%CI 1.25–3.36).

Conclusions: Glucose levels upon admission did not affect mortality. However, HbA1c levels below 6.5% had opposite effects on 1 year mortality in diabetes patients and patients with hyperglycemia.

March 2015
Maya Paryente Wiessman MD, Idit F. Liberty MD, Renana Wilkof Segev BSc, Tiberiu Katz MD, Muhammad Abu Tailakh RN MPH and Victor Novack MD PhD

Abstract

Background: Diabetes mellitus-related lower extremity amputation is a major complication severely affecting patient survival and quality of life.

Objectives: To analyze epidemiological and clinical trends in the incidence and survival of lower extremity amputations among diabetes patients.

Methods: We conducted a retrospective observational cohort study of 565 consecutive diabetes patients who underwent their first non-traumatic lower extremity amputation between January 2002 and December 2009.

Results: Major amputations were performed in 316 (55.9%) patients: 142 above the knee (25.1%) and 174 below (30.8%); 249 (44.1%) had a minor amputation. The incidence rates of amputations decreased from 2.9 to 2.1 per 1000 diabetes patients. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis showed that first year mortality rates were lower among patients with minor amputations (31.7% vs. 39.6%, P = 0.569). First year mortality rates following below-knee amputation were somewhat lower than above-knee amputation (33.1 vs.45.1%, respectively). Cox regression model of survival at 1 year after the procedure found that age (HR 1.06 per year, 95% CI 1.04–1.07, P < 0.001), above-knee amputation (HR 1.36, 95% CI 1.01–1.83, P = 0.045) and ischemic heart disease (HR 1.68, 95% CI 1.26–2.24, P < 0.001) significantly increased one year mortality risk.

Conclusions: In this population-based study the incidence rate of non-traumatic amputations in diabetes patients between January 2002 and December 2009 decreased slightly. However, one year mortality rates after the surgery did not decline and remained high, stressing the need for a multidisciplinary effort to prevent amputations in diabetes patients.

January 2013
A.J. Jacobs
 Infant circumcision has recently attracted controversy, with professional groups recommending it and various individuals trying to criminalize it. Circumcision is beneficial in the prevention of certain diseases, causing minimal tangible harm to those circumcised. This article argues that government should affirmatively adopt policies tolerating minority practices. Such activities should be banned only if they cause substantial damage to society or its members, or if they engender risks or injuries to which no reasonable person would consent. The benefits and risks of circumcision are outlined. Circumcision of male infants does not trigger cause for government to abolish it, and should be permitted if parents desire it. This article also summarizes common arguments against circumcision and attempts to refute them. These arguments are based on a desire for gender equality as well as a belief that minors should not undergo elective bodily alteration. If there are no unusual risks, parents can ethically authorize, and physicians ethically perform, elective infant circumcision for prophylaxis of disease, ritual purposes, or aesthetic reasons. Furthermore, the state should permit this.

 

May 2004
I. Furstenberg Liberty, D. Todder, R. Umansky and I. Harman-Boehm
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