Deformity of the breast and axilla observed in famous paintings is a fascinating field for the medico-artists. The attempt of a retrospective diagnosis of breast tumors is highly challenging. This paper deals with a Rubens painting portraying the heroine Judith with a visible but previously unreported left breast mass. Though speculative, the present medico-artistic diagnosis is of a tumor likely to be of benign nature. It is of interest that the present case is the sixth breast disease discovered in Rubens’s works.
To the Editor,
We read with great interest the retrospective article of Tekin and Engin that investigated the prognostic significance of the ratio of mean platelet volume (MPV) to platelet count ratio (MPVPCR) in patients with Crimean-Congo hemorrhagic fever (CCHF). The authors found that MPVPCR was significantly lower in survivors than in non-survivors, and there-fore they suggested that this ratio could be used as a mortality marker. We think there are other factors that might have affected the results of this study.
Objective: Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation is used to bypass the cardiopulmonary system in a severe heart or/and lung failure, mainly in intractable conditions where all other therapy options fail or are unfeasible. Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is a well-established therapeutic option in such circumstances for neonatal, pediatric, and adult patients. Managing a patient with ECMO requires dedicated and specific management. The importance and necessity of this essential technology in life-threatening cardio-respiratory rescue prompted Rambam Health Care Campus to implement it and make it available as a service to the population in northern Israel. This article includes a brief review of extracorporeal life support and a report of our single-center experience since the establishment of the service.
Methods: The ECMO unit was established in 2014 under the responsibility of the Cardiac Surgery Department. The ECMO service was initiated by a well-planned program with consideration of all aspects including economics, education and training, the specialist team and equipment needed, strategies for medication, and ethical challenges.
Results: Between February 2014 and May 2018, 65 patients were treated with ECMO; 43 patients received veno-arterial ECMO for cardiac support (66%), while 22 received veno-venous ECMO for respiratory support (34%). The in-hospital mortality was 56%.
Conclusions: Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation is an effective therapy that is constantly growing in use and provides a therapy that can replace previous options. To establish such a service requires a planned program and concerted effort. Our single-center experience presented a good learning curve and showed the feasibility as well as the efficacy of the ECMO procedure in life-threatening conditions.
TO THE EDITOR
We read with interest the report by Yeshayahu about four minors who were diagnosed late with non-COVID-19 diseases during the COVID-19 pandemic (Rambam Maimonides Med J 2021;12:e0017. doi: 10.5041/RMMJ.10431 ). We would like to emphasize that, firstly, such delays are not limited to minors, and secondly, that also in minors should we distinguish the administrative and the physiological meanings of the term “child” and hence distinguish administratively defined “chil¬dren” who bodily are already mature from those young patients who bodily are indeed still children.
TO THE EDITOR
I read with interest the letter by Klaus Rose et al. regarding the article about delayed diagnosis of severe medical conditions during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic.1 The author stressed the importance of recognizing that delayed presentation of patients, during the COVID-19 pandemic, was not limited to the pediatric population. I agree with this important point, and the article does not claim otherwise. The presented cases are pediatric, given that they took place in a pediatric department, but it is reasonable to assume that adults have faced the same challenges.
The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were elaborated to allow authors of such papers to identify quality articles for inclusion in their scholarly work. However, we have identified several issues that point to an over-reliance on the PRISMA guidelines. Firstly, we question the rigor of implementation by authors and the rigor of verification by peer reviewers and editors, and whether they have screened papers to ensure adherence to the PRISMA guidelines. Secondly, we have identified cases where the PRISMA criteria led to as much as 99.97% of the published literature being ignored, suggesting that valid publications meeting these criteria might be at risk of being ignored. Thirdly, we have noted that exclusion is not only a quantitative problem—it is also a qualitative one, since the screening procedure groups all non-conforming literature into one basket. Fourthly, we have noted that seven copies of the PRISMA guidelines exist. This being the case, which one should be cited? To replace over-reliance on PRISMA screening, we encourage authors, peer reviewers, and editors to publish systematic reviews and meta-analyses that respect the dual criteria of scientific plausibility and diversity of included papers.
To the Editor:
I have followed, with great interest, the passionate debate held between Lichtman, and Ashkenazi and Olsha in Rambam Maimonides Medical Journal. Lichtman put forward a curious and enlightening proposal to offer a fractional value to each author, depending on the value of their relative contribution, with the total amounting to 1, as a way to reduce authorship abuses, such as gift or guest authorship, which are two very prevalent forms of authorship abuses in academic publishing today.
At the time of writing, in July 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic has already inflicted dramatic international restrictions, including airports closing and limiting international travel. It has been suggested that re-opening of airports should involve and even rely on testing travelers for COVID-19. This paper discusses the methodology of estimating the detection and diagnostic accuracy of COVID-19 tests. It explains the clear distinction between the technical characteristics of the tests, the detection measures, and the diagnostic measures that have clinical and public health implications. It demonstrates the importance of the prevalence of COVID-19 in terms of determining the ability of a test to yield a diagnosis. We explain the methodology of evaluating diagnostic tests, using the predictive summary index (PSI), and the minimum number of tests that need to be performed in order to correctly diagnose one person, which is estimated by 1/PSI. In a population with low prevalence, even a high-sensitivity test may lead to a high percentage of false positive diagnoses, resulting in the need for multiple high-cost tests to achieve a correct diagnosis. Thus, basing a policy for opening airports on diagnostic testing, even with the best test for COVID-19, has some limits.
When patients undergoing ventral or incisional hernia repair are reoperated for recurrence with an incidence rate of 16.0% following open repair and 18.8% following minimally invasive repair, it is time for re-evaluation of the real benefit of laparoscopy in ventral hernia repair.
