This Is MS Multiple Sclerosis Community: Knowledge & Support

I have severe coronary artery disease and MS. I have had stents placed in my coronary. kidneys, and leg arteries. I have also had angioplasty of the same and different arteries. Do we know which is better for the jugular veins (angioplasty or stents)?

My interventional cardiololigist has aggreed to look at my juggular veins, but not to do anything else. (I think he will come around, he is pretty cool).

Thanks!

Hi,
I am new to CCSVI so sorry cant give you a confident answer

what i do know is having stents in the jugular veins can be dangeriys, but the risk is slim but its still a risk

whereas angioplasty of the jugular veins is not dangerous but carries the problem of restenosis, which would mean having the procedure done again.

Was just wondering are you from the UK?
If so where is the radiologist who is happy to scan you?

thanks

Sorry I'm from Central Texas and the Cardiologist was having a Carotid Artery Scan done anyway. I think he is just humoring me, he doesn't really think CCSVI even causes a problem in MS patients. I've been bugging him for a year now. The problem is going to be if I test positive, he says he will not stent a vein. Thanks!

Angioplasty says Prof Zamboni on 14 April 2010. PTA to be precise.

MarkW

_________________
Mark Walker - Oxfordshire, England. Registered Pharmacist (UK). 10 years of study around MS.
Mark's CCSVI Report 7-Mar-11:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/8359854/MS-experts-in-Britain-have-to-open-their-minds.html

Zamboni says ONLY angioplasty (really, venoplasty) at this point.
Check out a number of threads that discuss this--re: veins not similar to arteries, so can't extrapolate info re arteries to veins.

Hello Shye.
Prof Zamboni said repeat the venography (PTA) if re-stenosis occurs on 14 April 2010, I agree. Then right at the end of the answer he mentioned surgery if the veins remain stenosed. I need to see the transcript to be clear. Did you note terms he used ?
Kind regards,
MarkW

_________________
Mark Walker - Oxfordshire, England. Registered Pharmacist (UK). 10 years of study around MS.
Mark's CCSVI Report 7-Mar-11:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/8359854/MS-experts-in-Britain-have-to-open-their-minds.html

My understanding of it all:

the link between ms and ccsvi has not been proven, so it is unknown what benefit treating ccsvi has. the greater the benefit, the greater risk can be allowed. as long as no benefit is known, NO risk should be allowed

when it comes to risk assessment, it is both a question of how likely it is that problems will occur, and it is a question of how big a problem can occur

my understanding of it is that with ballooning, it is just a very slim chance of relatively small problems occurring, but with stenting it is a very slim chance of more severe problems occurring. because of the risks involved with stenting.

for my own sake, i would prefer ballooning, as i don't know the risks involved with stenting. but we also know that ballooning the veins is not effective long term, the veins will restenose. we also know that the chances of restenosis is smaller with stents if they are successfully done. i am paying for it myself, and i do not have the finances to go abroad every six or eight months to have new examinations and new procedures done. it is not an option for me. i can not only look at the risk of stenting versus ballooning, i also have to look at the risk of my ms progressing, compared to the options i have.

i have decided that the best option for me is to try this procedure, even if it has not been scientifically proven, my decision is only based on other patients testimonies.
i have decided that i will go for stents if that is what the doc thinks is the best available treatment for me. as i can not wait for any future treatments, i need to choose from what is available to me now.
there is alot of unknowns, but i know the risk involved if i do not do anything at all, as i am going downhill, and going downhill very quickly.

i would wish for my neurologist believing in this treatment, and referring me to the cardiovascular department of the hospital for examination and angioplasty treatment. payed for by the national health insurance. i would wish i could have a local follow up consultation and re-examination. i do wish that the would reballoon me, if stenosis reoccurred, all free of charge, all relatively harmless, all relatively cheap, at least for me. but i will just have to expect that it will not happen until it has been scientifically proven, and approved by the authorities, and i will probably be beyond repair by then.

with going to bulgaria, it will cost me 5000 euros, plus some cheap flights and accommodation, i will have a treatment that i will most probably benefit from (judging by the reports from patients), it will be preformed by a highly qualified and experienced team of doctors, in a modern state of the art medical facility. ill take my chances.
they can offer me angioplasty, that i can not afford in the long run, and they can offer me today's relatively low risk stents. they can not offer me the stent of the future, especially made for veins.
i have decided ill take my chances

goodness me that turned into a long post, sorry about that

_________________
<div>I have lived with ms for 8 years. The last year has been hell, I've gone from shite to even worse every single month, until my liberation in May. </div>

sofia-

Don't doubt your decision to seek open label treatment. You did a great job in your personal risk/reward assessment.

I'm disappointed in Dr. Zamboni's recommendation to avoid open label treatment. The CCSVI trials that are being proposed are "dirty science". Everyone is recommending a costly, long term trial testing the risks and benefits of CCSVI treatment AND telling everyone to stay on their current ms drugs. How will we ever know whether any potential improvement is from opening the veins or the drugs?

Good luck in Bulgaria. We are all pulling for you.