Otto Heinrich Warburg (1883–1970; not to be confused with the Zionist of the same name) was a member of an illustrious Jewish family, known for some five centuries. From humble beginnings, the family became prominent in the world for their contributions to all aspects of society. The son of a German mother and a Jewish (converted) father, Otto H. Warburg became a major contributor to medical science in the field of cancer research. Considered for Nobel Prize more than once, he finally received it in 1931 for his discovery of the nature and mode of action of the cellular respiratory enzyme. Warburg’s personality was controversial: he was intolerant of opposing scientific views yet tolerant toward Nazi abuses. Accused of collaboration under the Nazi regime, Otto H. Warburg was nevertheless readmitted to the global scientific community after World War II. His contribution to cancer research remains influential to this day and has been superseded by discoveries that have built upon his work.
Objective: This pilot study was designed to describe changes in spiritual well-being (SWB), spiritual coping, and quality of life (QOL) in patients with brain cancer or other neurodegenerative diseases participating in a chaplain-led spiritual life review interview and development of a spiritual legacy document (SLD).
Methods: Eligible participants were enrolled and completed baseline questionnaires. They were interviewed by a board-certified chaplain about spiritual influences, beliefs, practices, values, and spiritual struggles. An SLD was prepared for each participant, and one month follow-up questionnaires were completed. Two cases are summarized, and spiritual development themes are illustrated within a spiritual development framework.
Results: A total of 27 patients completed baseline questionnaires and the interview; 24 completed the SLD, and 15 completed the follow-up questionnaire. Increases in SWB, religious coping, and QOL were detected. The majority maintained the highest (best) scores of negative religious coping, demonstrating minimal spiritual struggle.
Conclusions: Despite the challenges of brain cancers and other neurodegenerative diseases, participants demonstrated improvements in SWB, positive religious coping, and QOL. Patient comments indicate that benefit is related to the opportunity to reflect on and integrate spiritual experiences and to preserve them for others. Research with a larger, more diverse sample is needed, as well as clinical applications for those too vulnerable to participate in longitudinal follow-up.
Objectives: This study was aimed at establishing an ideal method for performing three-dimensional measurements of the fetus in order to improve the estimation of fetal weight.
Methods: The study consisted of two phases. Phase I was a prospective cross-sectional study performed between 28 and 40 weeks’ gestation. The study population (n=110) comprised low-risk singleton pregnancies who underwent a routine third-trimester sonographic estimation of fetal weight. The purpose of this phase was to establish normal values for the fetal abdominal and head volumes throughout the third trimester. Phase II was a prospective study that included patients admitted for an elective cesarean section or for induction of labor between 38 and 41 weeks’ gestation (n=91). This phase of the study compared the actual birth weight to two- (2D) and three-dimensional (3D) measurements of the fetus. Conventional 2D ultrasound fetal biometry was performed measuring the biparietal diameter (BPD), head circumference (HC), abdominal circumference (AC), and femur diaphysis length (FL). Volume estimates were computed utilizing Virtual Organ Computer-aided AnaLysis (VOCAL), and the correlation between measured volumes and actual neonatal weight was calculated.
Results: Overall, this longitudinal study consisted of 110 patients between 28 and 41 weeks’ gestation. Normal values were computed for the fetal abdomen and head volume throughout the third trimester. Ultrasound examination was performed within three days prior to delivery on 91 patients. A good correlation was found between birth weight and abdominal volume (r=0.77) and between birth weight and head volume (r=0.5). Correlation between bidimensional measurements and actual fetal weights was found to be comparable with previously published correlations.
Conclusion: Volume measurements of the fetus may improve the accuracy of estimating fetal size. Additional studies using different volume measurement of the fetus are necessary.
Surgical Apgar Score is a simple, 10-point scoring system in which a low score reliably identifies those patients at risk for adverse perioperative outcomes. Surgical techniques and anesthesia management should be directed in such a way that the Surgical Apgar Score remains higher to avoid postoperative morbidity and mortality.
Idiopathic hypereosinophilic syndrome (HES) is a rare, heterogeneous disorder characterized by a strikingly high eosinophil count (>1,500 cells/µL), over a long period of time (>6 months), with end organ damage. We present a 60-year-old patient with idiopathic HES with isolated liver involvement, a rare systemic dis¬ease and a rare solid organ involvement. The patient had a thorough investigational work up until HES was established, including liver biopsy. He needed intensive immunosuppressive treatment at first with steroids, then with azathioprine in conjunction with a low dose of steroids. After 16 years of follow-up, the patient showed no evidence of liver dysfunction. To the best of our knowledge, this is the longest follow-up for a patient with HES-associated chronic hepatitis. Our observation suggests that, with appropriate treatment, liver involvement in HES may be well controlled without deterioration to advanced liver failure.
Background: There are very limited data on the prognostic capacity of the neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR) for the systemic inflammatory response in pediatric trauma (PT) patients. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the prognostic ability of NLR and PLR on mortality in pediatric trauma patients.
Methods: This study looked at 358 PT patients who were admitted to the Cumhuriyet University Hos-pital’s Emergency Department between January 2010 and June 2018. The NLR and PLR were calculated by dividing the blood neutrophil count and blood platelet count, respectively, by the lymphocyte count, at the time of admission. After performing a stepwise logistic regression analysis to determine the predictive factors on the mortality risk of post-traumatic systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS), receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was used to define the optimum cut-off values of the NLR and the PLR parameters for survival.
Results: The NLR, and PLR values were significantly higher in survivors than in non-survivors (NLR, 6.2±5.7 versus 2.6±2.5, P<0.001; PLR, 145.3±85.0 versus 46.2±25.2, P<0.001 ). The NLR (odds ratio [OR], 3.21; P=0.048), PLR (OR, 0.90; P=0.032), blood glucose (OR, 1.02; P=0.024), and Injury Severity Score (ISS) (OR, 1.28; P=0.011) were independent predictors of the mortality risk in PT patients. The area under the curve in the ROC curve analysis was 0.764 with a cut-off of 2.77 (sensitivity 70%, specificity 77%) for the NLR; and 0.928 with a cut-off of 61.83 (sensitivity 90%, specificity 85%) for the PLR.
Conclusion: Acquiring the NLR and PLR at the time of admission could be a useful predictor for mortality in PT patients.
Good morning. It is a great pleasure to share my thoughts with you here in Israel. The last day I was here was June 25, 2016, which was the day of the results of the Brexit referendum. My wife and I escaped feeling so depressed, but at least, we thought, we are leaving this behind; but when we came to Israel the only thing people wanted to talk about was the Brexit referendum!
Here I am today, on October 31, 2019, the day that we were meant to be leaving the European Union, so there is something with my connection with Israel and Brexit that I don’t understand! Let me start by saying that we have the privilege of being participants in a biomedical and health science revolution. I don’t think that is overstating it. We are living in an extraordinary, exciting time. Let me remind you of some of these fields that are moving so fast.
To the Editor,
We read with great interest the original research published by Anatoli Stav et al.1 in which they com-pared supraclavicular (SCL), infraclavicular (ICL), and axillary (AX) approaches to the brachial plexus with ultrasonography for upper limb surgeries.1 They concluded that all approaches can be used to provide adequate anesthesia for upper limb sur-geries below the shoulder. Nevertheless, they also experienced some sparing and failed blocks: 3 patients from the SCL group, 3 from the ICL group, and 4 from the AX group had a positive pin-prick test; 2 patients from the AX group received sedation supplementation; and 1 patient in the AX group experienced ulnar sparing which required a general anesthetic. ...
Current leading figures in medical science usually focus on very specific topics and use cutting-edge technologies to broaden our knowledge in the field. The working environment of the 19th century was much different. Medical giants of that time such as Rudolph Virchow and Thomas Hodgkin had a wide-ranging scope of research and humanitarian interests and made enormous contributions to a variety of core areas of medicine and the well-being of mankind. The year 2016 marked the 150th anniversary of the death of Dr. Thomas Hodgkin. Even a brief review of his life and work proves the current relevance of the outstanding deeds of this exceptional physician, medical educator, and defender of human rights for the poor and underprivileged; his vision was far ahead of his time.
To the Editor, Dr Nair’s letter to the editor regarding the failed nerve blocks mentioned in our paper, “Comparison of the supraclavicular, infraclavicular and axillary approaches for ultrasound-guided brachial plexus block for surgical anesthesia”,1 raised several points that I believe are worth looking at in more detail. We are grateful for Dr Nair’s comments which have contributed to the furthering of scholarly discourse.
In general, Dr Nair’s letter relates to the blocks that our research classified as failed. He then discusses various approaches and suggests the reason for the failures of the axillary approach blocks.
