End-of-life decisions are made daily in intensive care units worldwide. There are numerous factors affecting these decisions, including geographical location as well as religion and attitudes of caregivers, patients, and families. There is a spectrum of end-of-life care options from full continued care, withholding treatment, withdrawing treatment, and active life-ending procedures.
Objectives: There are only sporadic reports on the clinical behavior and appropriate treatment of anaplastic seminoma. This retrospective study summarizes our experience with the anaplastic variant of classical (typical) seminoma.
Methods: Between 1986 and 2006, seven anaplastic seminoma patients were staged and treated at the Northern Israel Oncology Center. Staging procedures included meticulous physical and neurological examinations, complete blood count, full biochemistry profile, specific tumor markers, testicular ultrasound, and other radiological measures. All patients underwent inguinal orchiectomy and were staged properly. Six patients had stage I disease, and one patient had stage IIA disease. Patients were irradiated with doses ranging from 2,500 to 3,000 cGy, and the stage IIA patient received an additional 1,000 cGy boost to radiographically involved lymph nodes.
Results: After a mean follow-up of 11 years, six patients are alive with no evidence of disease. One patient died due to an unknown, non-oncological, cause, unrelated to his previous testicular tumor, while in complete remission.
Conclusions: Despite the low patient numbers and the retrospective nature of our study, it can be concluded that radiotherapy treatment for early-stage anaplastic seminoma patients might achieve the same excellent survival as for classical seminoma. However, the general consensus achieved through large-scale studies suggests that active surveillance should be offered to all stage I seminoma patients, regardless of the pathologic variant.
This paper describes the rapid evolution of modern liver surgery, starting in the middle of the twentieth century. Claude Couinaud studied and described the segmental anatomy of the liver, Thomas Starzl performed the first liver transplantations, and Henri Bismuth introduced the concept of anatomical resections. Hepatic surgery has developed significantly since those early days. To date, innovative techniques are applied, using cutting-edge technologies: Intraoperative ultrasound, techniques of vascular exclusion of the liver, new devices for performing homeostasis and dissection, laparoscopy for resections, and new drugs that allow the resection of previously unresectable tumors. The next stage in liver surgery will probably be the implementation of a multidisciplinary holistic approach to the liver-diseased patient that will ensure the best and most efficient treatments in the future.
I present a realistic view of what Darwinian evolution is in its current form and what it is not. I argue that the Torah is not a source of scientific knowledge and all attempts to reconcile its plain text with the data of science are an exercise in futility. The article argues the position that science and the Torah are incommensurable. I argue against using the Torah for attaining knowledge about the nature of the world, or using science for enhancing or denying the truth of the Torah.
Although Maimonides stated that perfection in the medical art, both in theoretical and in practical expertise, is very difficult to achieve, he did not accept Galen's opinion, i.e. that perfection is beyond human capability.
Any person seeking intellectual perfection should, according to Maimonides' view, be fully trained in logic, in the natural sciences, and in theology.
A physician is moreover requested to study and memorize basic medical literature; he must consider each patient as a sick individual, without neglecting the patient's psychological disposition; and he should aim at inspiring confidence and trust, not only to his patient, but also to the latter's environment.
Even when feeling competent and trustworthy, the physician should not be conceited; here Maimonides insists on offering his personal experience, in a quite impressive way.
This approach of Maimonides to the practice of medicine should be considered, even today, as a valuable incentive for patient-oriented medical education, as already expressed in the late eleventh century.
Bone structural integrity and shape are maintained by removal of old matrix by osteoclasts and in-situ synthesis of new bone by osteoblasts. These cells comprise the basic multicellular unit (BMU). Bone mass maintenance is determined by the net anabolic activity of the BMU, when the matrix elaboration of the osteoblasts equals or exceeds the bone resorption by the osteoclasts. The normal function of the BMU causes a continuous remodeling process of the bone, with deposition of bony matrix (osteoid) along the vectors of the generated force by gravity and attached muscle activity. The osteoblasts are derived from mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs). Circulating hormones and locally produced cytokines and growth factors modulate the replication and differentiation of osteoclast and osteoblast progenitors. The appropriate number of the osteoblasts in the BMU is determined by the differentiation of the precursor bone-marrow stem cells into mature osteoblasts, their proliferation with subsequent maturation into metabolically active osteocytes, and osteoblast degradation by apoptosis. Thus, the two crucial points to target when planning to control the osteoblast population are the processes of cell proliferation and apoptosis, which are regulated by cellular hedgehog and Wnt pathways that involve humoral and mechanical stimulations. Osteoblasts regulate both bone matrix synthesis and mineralization directly by their own synthetic activities, and bone resorption indirectly by its paracrinic effects on osteoclasts. The overall synthetic and regulatory activities of osteoblasts govern bone tissue integrity and shape.
The randomized controlled trial is the fundamental study design to evaluate the effectiveness of medications and receive regulatory approval. Observational studies, on the other hand, are essential to address post-marketing drug safety issues but have also been used to uncover new indications or new benefits for already marketed drugs. For example, hormone replacement therapy (HRT), effective for menopausal symptoms, was reported in several observational studies during the 1980s and 1990s to also significantly reduce the incidence of coronary heart disease. This hypothesis was disproved in 2002 by the large-scale Women’s Health Initiative randomized trial. An example of a new indication for an old drug is that of metformin, an anti-diabetic medication, which is being hailed as a potential anti-cancer agent, primarily on the basis of several recent observational studies that reported impressive reductions in cancer incidence and mortality. These observational studies have also sparked the conduct of large-scale randomized controlled trials in cancer. We show in this paper that the spectacular effects on new indications or new outcomes reported in many observational studies in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), HRT, and cancer are the result of time-related biases, such as immortal time bias, that tend to seriously exaggerate the benefits of a drug and that eventually disappear with the proper statistical analysis.
In all, while observational studies are central to assess the effects of drugs, their proper design and analysis are essential to avoid bias. The scientific evidence on the potential beneficial effects in new indications of existing drugs will need to be more carefully assessed before embarking on long and expensive unsubstantiated trials.
Patient–physician interactions are increasingly influenced by the extraordinary diversification of populations and rapid expansion of medical knowledge that characterize our modern era. By contrast, the patient-physician interaction models currently used to teach medical trainees have little capacity to address these twin challenges. We developed a new model of patient-physician interaction to explicitly address these problems. Historically, models of patient–physician interaction viewed patient autonomy and the manifestation of clearly defined health care-related values as tightly linked, and it was assumed that patients’ medical knowledge was low. Unfortunately, this does not adequately represent patients such as 1) the highly educated non-medical specialist who possesses little familiarity with health-related values but is highly autonomous, and 2) the patient from a non-Western background who may have well-established health care-related values but a low sense of personal independence. In addition, it is evident to us that the assumption that all patients possess little medical knowledge can create alienation between patient and physician, e.g. the well-informed patient with a rare disease. We propose a para¬digm that models autonomy, health care-related values formation, and medical knowledge as varying from patient to patient. Four examples of patient types are described within the context of the model based on clinical experience. We believe that adopting this model will have implications for optimizing patient–physician interactions and teaching about patient-centered care. Further research is needed to identify relevant patient types within this framework and to assess the impact on health care outcomes.
Venous thromboembolic event after traumatic brain injury represents a unique clinical challenge. Physicians must balance appropriate timing of chemoprophylaxis with risk of increased cerebral hemorrhage. Despite an increase in the literature since the 1990s, there are clear disparities in treatment strategies. This review discusses the prominent studies and subsequent findings regarding the topic with an attempt to establish recommendations using the existing evidence-based literature.
The physician-scientist represents the medical-scientific version of the “triple threat” athlete. Yet, in medicine as in sports, specialization and business are ever more in the forefront. As the field of medicine evolves, it is likely that the role of the physician, the scientist, and the physician-scientist will continue to change. Whether this is for the good or bad will only be known in hindsight.
