I am concerned that some people are reading too much into this piece of research.
It is not a question of MRVs being good or bad, rather what we can learn from them. Standard MRV is of limited use because it does not give information on flow (see Cheer's post). The cost of before and after MRVs may be an issue for some people (they are not cheap), plus you need an expert to interpret the data (see Normb's post).
I still am trying to discover if Dr Haacke's MRV will detect scepta and webs in the trunk. Anyone know for sure, with evidence ?
If Dr Haacke's MRV can give a diagnosis of stenoses (all types) in all major veins in the neck and trunk it is a major step forward as MRV is non invasive. (Selective Venography is invasive and Doppler only scans neck veins).
I repost - for me the key recommendation from Mark Haacke is:
A consensus or white paper on how to do the PTA should be prepared.
This should mean that pwMS receive the best therapy.
MarkW
PS This is all about flow cos flow of blood and CSF moves oxygen into and waste products out of the CNS. Differences from 'normal' may not be significant for pwMS as reduced flow could be the straw that broke the camels back and gave us MS.
Login
Register
FAQ
Search
