This Is MS Multiple Sclerosis Community: Knowledge & Support

we stopped the space program fafter one accident to assure that the risk was reduced

yes cece
that is why the ideal trial is multicenter randomized prospective blinded

]most of the time we just dont get to that level

i have a faculty member who struggles when our compter data is only 90% accurate. This leads him to go around in circles without accomplishing anything whle he tries to attain 100%.

I am more practical. I want 100% I want to get the job done. I will live with less than perfect to more the agenda

veins do rupture but uncommon. because the pressure in the veins is so low, mild compression over the site of tear is effective. Rupturing an artery is more significant because the pressue is about 1000% greater

also the coronary artery is markedly different from the jugular vein.

again arteries are safe but more reisky than veins

geez, at the rate the this thread is growing and the number of questions increases, i may never sleep again

i wonder whether your azygous had a tight valve that could not be entered.

I might give it another try once you find another liberator

Sorry if I missed it, so everyone feel free to send me back to do my homework. As far as I have seen, you are the only Dr that specifically uses the IVUS. From my quick research (ie the Wiki) I can see how significant a difference it would make with stenosis caused by fatty deposits etc.

Have you found any explicit lesions that you only treated because of the IVUS, that looked perfectly OK by catheter? Most lesions / stenosis discussed in my reading have been physical "deformities" and/or blockages of the veins themselves, and not due to a build-up on the vein wall.

I can certainly see how the IVUS would be invaluable to review a previously placed stent.

PS: who taught you to touch type! you have been prolific.

it is somewhere in the prior 100 pages

ivus simply bounces sound off the wall of the interior of the veins and records the reflections of sound.

its main indication to date is in assessing coronary artery plaque. Those patients have atherosclerosis. . this does not mean that the test is good only for atherosclerosis

My use is not yet described. Getting shut down prevented me from having the number of cases that I felt i needed in order to publish.

Funny, after all the years of competition, i just posted my ideas before publicatoin....

it is extremely useful in
1. detecting particlly duplicated IJV
2. documenting stiff or fused valve leaflets
3. measuring stenosis is most accurate
4. proving that narrowings in the mid and upper jubular veins are physiologic not stenotic
5.

A quick Q Doctor if I may:

Am I correct to assume that the longer the stent is; the more stable it will be in the vein? Is there any constraints to that length?

Thank you for your time (and patience)

Algis

At last... i got what i wanted from you doctor. You ll never hear from me again haha

Just kidding, just kidding... Let's see what happens from now on. I ll keep you updated.
I really think that those veins will be found responsible for more conditions appart from worsening MS. We are all waiting for you and other inquiring minds to get your methods as near to perfection as possible.

This is something I have long advocated; having prospective patients giving their INFORMED CONSENT as a way to break the legal logjam here in the USA.

As the "early adopters" of a new procedure, CCSVI liberation patients should understand that they are assuming some additional risks. It is a personal decision based on the known facts, and the trust they have in their doctor's abilities. If a patient is not comfortable with the existing art of a procedure, they have the option of waiting until the technique is mature.

Donnchadh

_________________
Kitty says, "Take that, you stenosis!"

Got MS?.....Get Liberated!

i am not sure that i made my point correctly. I am saying that there is no way to have a standard INFORMED CONSENT becasue no one, not any of us, is informed about the risks and benefits of Liberation. Because THERE IS NO DATA. informed consent in a research project can be that we do not know, but standard care is different and requires a good faith effort to share those risks and benefits......thus the need for research

yes, that is true BUT

the longer the stent the more surface area that can go wrong, restenose etc

the larger the diameter the more stable,
the greater the lateral pressure on the vein the more stable

Ah-ha! but I note you "accidentally" left number 5 blank. Like the ending of a B-grade horror movie.

[/quote]


Thank you very much Dr. S for your answer. I think that if the Drs suggested waiting, it might be because they are still in the process of sorting out their protocols and getting things going. It seems to me that it is still very early days and that most of the doctors involved are following their own logic ! My only option is to continue pushing onwards with this for now until I get somewhere.
I really appreciate you spending your valuable time to have replied. Thank you !

Hi Dr. S
First I just have to say (and I know you have heard it before!) thank you, thank you, merci beaucoup for being such a dedicated doctor and generous human being !
So, referring to the previous post, I am sadly one liberated patient with no improvements what so ever (end of March). I did get a stent in the right IJV, but as they don't overstent, I was left with a left IJV at about 60% capacity. Do you think that could be related ? I am going back to Poland for a check-up end of June and I wonder if anything more can be done (they said azygous was fine, they must have looked at the vertebral veins as well, right ?).
I know it's tough to say something, but any ideas would be appreciated !! I sooo want to feel positive changes as well (yep! Duh )
Also, if there is anyone like me, contact me so we can do some constructive brainstorming maybe !!!
Thank you very much !!!
Michelle