This Is MS Multiple Sclerosis Community: Knowledge & Support

I was more interested in the flow quantitative analysis. The methodology in the Dutch study looked at flow in the deep cerebral veins and straight sinus, whereas the Haacke methodology looks at flow through all the cerebral draining veins at two locations - upper and lower neck.

Why? There is no discussion as to why this methodology was employed vs. Haacke's, of which I presume the authors were aware.

Of uncertain import as well is that 19 of the MS volunteers were RR and 1 PP. I wonder why they didn't use an even distribution of all three types? They do not comment on any differences with their one PP patient.

I try to point that methodology and tools used in the flow quantitative analysis are the same. Different is that in Haacke material he analyses a lot of veins and arteries in many locations when he quantify the flow. Dutch study restrict they attention to flow in the deep cerebral veins and straight sinus only. That's because they are trying to find not any reflux, but "reflux in the brain". And only reflux eventual founded in deep cerebral veins and straight sinus can prove "reflux in the brain" theory, because only those veins are draining just a brain directly.