so my friends, i will share with you the process as it has evolved so far.
1. I wrote up the proposal
2. i shared it with some colleagues who participate in IRBs to see what they thought
3. they made some recommendations
4. I revised my application, my protocol and my consent form. consent forms are very complicated for a wordsmith like me. I must dumb this down to a fifth grade education
5. Dr. Valsamis, my coinvestigator then reviewed all three documents
6. i mad corrections, addiitons , clarifications,etc
7. irb submitted.
8. tomorrow or monday i could hear the first review.
9 revise and send back
i am confident that the IRB will approved this research project; however i cannot predict how long it will take
Yes, good point - would in the first place be interesting to see if such cases at all exist (and at which frequency). If so, CCSVI in the other genetically identical twin could have been caused by other than genetic basis then eg through injury at birth or by another factor that caused it during body growth. So not excluded that CCSVI in principle (most cases) congenital, but that certain vein issues might also be caused by mechanical injury factors during or after birth+growth.L wrote:Zeureka wrote:And if one identical twin then develops MS, the other not (and there are such cases) wouldn't this confirm that MS is still multifactorial, as additional environmental or other factors must have played an additional role on top of CCSVI to then develop MS.
And there's always the possibility that one twin has CCSVI and the other does not..
Hi Dr. Sclafani,
My wife got a doppler ultrasound done recently. In the supine position, it showed no narrowing, but in the erect (sitting up) position, it showed significant narrowing in the left & right IJV. So when the venography was completed, it showed no narrowing. Because the venography showed no narrowing, no angioplasty was done. After getting the results of the ultrasound, this is not what we expected. Have you ever encountered this before? Is there a chance that something got missed during the venography?
1 eye, I also at first read "psychological" and was wondering what he meant, but Nunzio meant "physiological"1eye wrote:Plus I would take a doctor's advice before I decided anything was psychological.
Nunzio wrote:Hi thirdday,
are you aware that what you are describing could be physiological?
The jugular veins are supposed to be thinner standing up and wider in supine position. Just the fact that they dilated in supine position shows that there were no fixed narrowing and therefore nothing to dilate.
None of what you describe is part of Zamboni criteria.
Have they found any reflux? any azygous problem? Have they used the intracranial transducer?
Best wishes to your wife
Users browsing this forum: DougL