• IMA sites
  • IMAJ services
  • IMA journals
  • Follow us
  • Alternate Text Alternate Text
עמוד בית
Sat, 20.07.24

Search results


November 2019
Nir Horesh MD, Aviad Hoffman MD, Yaniv Zager MD, Mordechai Cordoba MD, Marat Haikin MD, Danny Rosin MD, Mordechai Gutman MD and Alexander Lebedeyev MD

Background: Evaluation of low rectal anastomosis is often recommended prior to ostomy closure, but the efficacy of such evaluations is uncertain.

Objectives: To assess whether routine colonic preoperative evaluation has an effect on postoperative ileostomy closure results.

Methods: We performed a retrospective study evaluating all patients who underwent ileostomy closure over 9 years. Patient demographics, clinical, surgical details, and surgical outcomes were recorded and analyzed.

Results: The study comprised 116 patients who underwent ileostomy closure, of them 65 were male (56%) with a mean age of 61 years (range 20–91). Overall, 98 patients (84.4%) underwent colonic preoperative evaluation prior to ileostomy closure. A contrast enema was performed on 61 patients (62.2%). Abnormal preoperative results were observed in 12 patients (12.2%). The overall complication rate was 35.3% (41 patients). No differences in postoperative outcome was observed in patient gender (P = 1), age (P = 0.96), body mass index (P = 0.24), American Society of Anesthesiologists score (P = 0.21), and the Charlson Comorbidity Index score (P = 0.93). Among patients who had postoperative complications, we did not observe a difference between patients who underwent preoperative evaluation compared to those who did not (P = 0.42). No differences were observed among patients with preoperative findings interpreted as normal or abnormal (P = 1). The time difference between ileostomy creation and closure had no effect on the ileostomy closure outcome (P = 0.34).

Conclusions: Abnormal findings in preoperative colonic evaluation prior to ileostomy closure were not associated with worse postoperative outcome.

June 2005
A. Kessler, H. Gavriel, S. Zahav, M. Vaiman, N. Shlamkovitch, S. Segal and E. Eviatar
 Background: Fine-needle aspiration biopsy has been well established as a diagnostic technique for selecting patients with thyroid nodules for surgical treatment, thereby reducing the number of unnecessary surgical procedures performed in cases of non-malignant tumors.

Objectives: To evaluate the sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and positive and negative predictive values of FNAB[1] in cases of a solitary thyroid nodule.

Methods: The preoperative FNAB results of 170 patients who underwent thyroidectomy due to a solitary thyroid nodule were compared retrospectively with the final postoperative pathologic diagnoses.

Results: In cases of a solitary thyroid nodule, FNAB had a sensitivity of 79%, specificity of 98.5%, accuracy of 87%, and positive and negative predictive values of 98.75% and 76.6% respectively. All cases of papillary carcinoma diagnosed by FNAB proved to be malignant on final histology, while 8 of 27 cases of follicular adenoma detected by preoperative FNAB were shown to be malignant on final evaluation of the surgical specimen.

Conclusions: FNAB cytology reduces the incidence of thyroidectomy since this method has excellent specificity and sensitivity and a low rate of false-negative results. It proved to be cost-effective and is recommended as the first tool in the diagnostic workup in patients with thyroid nodules.


 





[1] FNAB = fine-needle aspiration biopsy


September 2002
Michael Lurie, MD, Ines Misselevitch, MD and Milo Fradis, MD

Background: Fine-needle aspiration is a widely accepted method in the preoperative evaluation of head and neck tumors. However, its effectiveness in the interpretation of salivary gland disorders is controversial.

Objectives: To evaluate the effectiveness of FNA[1] as a preoperative diagnostic tool of parotid lesions.

Methods: Reports of 52 FNA from various parotid gland lesions were compared with the final pathologic diagnoses.

Results: We noted 31 true-positive, 5 true-negative and 16 false-negative results. There were no false-positive FNA reports. The calculated sensitivity, specificity and accuracy of FNA diagnosis in this study were 66%, 100%, and 69.2% respectively.

Conclusions: The high rate (30.8%) of false-negative FNA results was partly explained by sampling errors, therefore specificity of the procedure could be improved by the precise selection of a representative aspiration site.

______________________________


[1] FNA = fine-needle aspiration



 
June 2001
Alex Kessler, MD, Ephraim Eviatar, MD, Judith Lapinsky, MD, Tifha Horne, MD, Nathan Shlamkovitch, MD and Shmuel Segal, 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