mmcc wrote: I am a person willing to take a high level of risk to avoid further disability, but comparing PML to an insicion infection is hardly realistic. The risk of PML so far is estimated at 1 in 1,000, with not all cases fatal. The risk of death from angioplasty (in arteries - don't know for veins) is higher than that.
It is important to realize that neither Tysabri nor Liberation surgery, or any other medical treatment, including aspirin is risk free. The risks from libertation surgery cannot possibly be completely known at this point. I would remind you that a year into Tysabri as a monotherapy there were NO cases of PML. Liberation surgery has not been around long enough to know what the long term risks might be.
That said, I am waiting for my date to have it (and I took Tysabri, too).
I beg to differ. Angioplasty has been a well established, well practiced procedure for more than 3 decades. If this were a brand new, never performed procedure, then you would have a point. BUT, there has never been ANY reason to suggest that improved blood flow would ever have long term negative effects. The risks are early on for the most part. If something adverse were to happen, it would be earlier and not likely to be a year down the road.
This is not the invention of the wheel and it needs to be studied. This is a new use for the wheel, so understanding the benefits seems to be more the case. For that it seems to be overkill to have Drs halted doing this for us.
Angioplasty on arteries definitely has a risk. I agree with you that the risk is probably less when done on veins, but the point I am trying to make is just that libneration surgery DOES have risks - ALL surgery does. Right now there are too few surgeries done to know what that risk is.
For comparison, Tysabri (as a monotherapy) had no PML cases for almost two years after being given to thousands of people. Clearly we now know there is a risk. To me that risk - 1 in 1,000 - makes Tysabri with a very high success rate compared to the ABCRs acceptable.
I am having liberation surgery, but I think it is important to realize that the surgery is never wthout risks, and the level of that risk is not completely known yet.
I totally agree with permitting doctors to do the surgery, assuming they do whatever training is neccessary to be able to do it as safely as possible. But, we are all guinea pigs at the moment - undergoing a new MS treatment - and it is important to realize that.
I also agree that having blocked blood flow doesn't sound like a good thing.
Remember that stents were tried at Stanford and the use of that procedure was stopped because it was considered too risky considering their experience. I am sure they did not think it was as risky as it turned out to be when they started doing them.