What are benefits of multiple tests before venogram?

A forum to discuss Chronic Cerebrospinal Venous Insufficiency and its relationship to Multiple Sclerosis.

What are benefits of multiple tests before venogram?

Postby lucky125 » Tue Feb 02, 2010 8:06 am

I had Doppler ultrasound yesterday which showed obvious reflux in both IJVs.

According to the tech, that is enough info to qualify me for venogram w/angioplasty. Procedure will be done by a vascular surgeon familiar with CCSVI research. I don't know yet if stents are being considered, or if I am willing to consider them at this time.

Do doctors REALLY need to know from MRV exactly where every problem is before they go in?

Thanks for your thoughts!
User avatar
lucky125
Family Elder
 
Posts: 173
Joined: Wed Dec 02, 2009 4:00 pm
Location: USA

Advertisement

Postby mshusband » Tue Feb 02, 2010 8:11 am

Lucky, can you give us more information?

Where are you located?

How did you go about getting the ultrasound in the first place (i.e. what doctors did you talk to to get that done, what were those conversations, etc.)?

Where are you going to have the procedure done?

Do you know how long it will be before you have it done?

It seems there are doctors out there willing to do this outside a clinical trial ... we just need to find them!!!
User avatar
mshusband
Family Elder
 
Posts: 249
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2010 4:00 pm
Location: Pittsburgh, PA, USA

Postby ozarkcanoer » Tue Feb 02, 2010 8:14 am

Hi lucky,

I just checked Zamboni's 2008 paper and he only did sonography and then venography and NO MRV. So your doctors are following Dr Zamboni's protocol. If sonography shows problems then use venography to look at the veins directly.

ozarkcanoer
User avatar
ozarkcanoer
Family Elder
 
Posts: 1273
Joined: Thu Oct 15, 2009 3:00 pm
Location: St. Louis, Missouri

Postby Algis » Tue Feb 02, 2010 8:16 am

Always good to have a map; and an idea of cross roads...?

Best would be to have all: XRays, MRI/MRV fMRI too; why not; Dopplers; Iron; blood analysis, whatever... Anything, and document it. The problem is testing devices/technicians/competencies availability, and of course; depreciation calculations of devices... And time :)
User avatar
Algis
Family Elder
 
Posts: 783
Joined: Sat Nov 21, 2009 4:00 pm
Location: XinDian, Taiwan

Postby sou » Tue Feb 02, 2010 8:55 am

Hi.

The venography X-Ray machine is enough to lead the surgeon to the exact location of the stenosis. Actually, there is no other way for him to know the exact location of the catheters. It gives a real time picture of the blood flow and the vascular structure and detecting a stenosis is a piece of cake. Well, almost... :-)

Happy liberation!!!!!!

sou
Shortest joke: "We may not be able to cure MS but we can manage its symptoms."
User avatar
sou
Family Elder
 
Posts: 582
Joined: Sat Dec 20, 2008 4:00 pm
Location: Greece

Postby tzootsi » Tue Feb 02, 2010 11:45 am

My wife is in the same situation - she had a quick doppler, which picked up some turbulence in the left jugular. The IR felt that this was enough to justify a venogram with possible angiogram. He felt that an MRV wasn't really necessary, and was a very expensive procedure to boot.
User avatar
tzootsi
Family Elder
 
Posts: 369
Joined: Sun Nov 22, 2009 4:00 pm

Postby lucky125 » Tue Feb 02, 2010 4:13 pm

Thank you for all of your replies.

Algis, it would be wonderful to go into this with as many tests as possible. However, I may end up paying for my ultrasound if ins doesn't cover it. If I don't have to rack up unnecessary charges for other tests, that is fine with me.

Sou, OC and tzootsi your thoughts give me piece of mind.

It is so nice to be a part of such a well informed, supportive network here!

Thanks again,
Lucky125
User avatar
lucky125
Family Elder
 
Posts: 173
Joined: Wed Dec 02, 2009 4:00 pm
Location: USA

Postby CureIous » Tue Feb 02, 2010 4:55 pm

This gets tossed around so much, it needs it's own sticky. It depends on the situation, always. On the patient, the testing protocol, the tech, the insurance and a raft of other issues. Maybe they catch the reflux on UT, maybe not, maybe on MRV they can identify stenosis, maybe not, but I highly doubt any of us can just get a venogram on demand, I think one person did it, the rest need to explore MRV or CT or UT first. If one can get a UT, and the tech can easily identify the reflux, then no, an MRV at that point would be redundant and unnecessary.

If however, the UT is negative, that may, or may not mean much of anything if the proper protocols are not followed, or if the stenosis and resultant reflux is inaccessible to that imaging method. In that case, the few options left are MRV, or the CT version of that, or a venogram, but a venogram is invasive and usually accomplished in an operative setting with some anticipation of a surgical intervention.

It cannot be stressed enough, that just because one method works for one person, doesn't mean it automatically holds true for everyone else. I think anyone that can get the Dx and surgical intervention based solely on UT, has just leapfrogged over a lot of headache and expense!

I think some stenosis and reflux is right there in the middle of the neck or a bit lower and easy to detect, and others are not so easy.

Well done anyways!

Mark
RRMS Dx'd 2007, first episode 2004. Bilateral stent placement, 3 on left, 1 stent on right, at Stanford August 2009. Watch my operation video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cwc6QlLVtko, Virtually symptom free since, no relap
User avatar
CureIous
Family Elder
 
Posts: 1204
Joined: Tue Jul 14, 2009 3:00 pm
Location: Riverside, CA


Return to Chronic Cerebrospinal Venous Insufficiency (CCSVI)

 


  • Related topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users


Contact us | Terms of Service