The First 50 Haacke protocol cases

A forum to discuss Chronic Cerebrospinal Venous Insufficiency and its relationship to Multiple Sclerosis.

The First 50 Haacke protocol cases

Postby cheerleader » Thu Nov 11, 2010 9:57 pm

From the Hubbard IRB---
As Dr. Zamboni has stressed, it's about flow--
Here's what Dr. Haacke found when analyzing the first 50 cases--49 had abnormal flow.

Truncular Venous Malformations --10
One or more stenosis--12
Bulging at lower jugular--3
Abrupt contrast change--3
Jetting and then filling in to normal---1
Missing jugular---1
Pinched jugular--8
Normal anatomy but abnormal circulatory flow--7
Normal anatomy but reflux--3
Normal anatomy but stasis--1
No abnormal flow---1

Here's the whole presentation from October 18th
http://www.ms-mri.com/presentations/was ... al-web.pdf
Husband dx RRMS 3/07
dx dual jugular vein stenosis (CCSVI) 4/09
http://ccsviinms.blogspot.com
User avatar
cheerleader
Family Elder
 
Posts: 5075
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 2:00 pm
Location: southern California

Advertisement

Postby Jugular » Thu Nov 11, 2010 10:22 pm

Haacke needs to put some points up on the board for team CCSVI with a published paper or all we'll ever hear about using MRV's is how the Dutch study used them to prove that these sort of variations are normal and are unrelated to MS.
User avatar
Jugular
Family Elder
 
Posts: 375
Joined: Mon Dec 21, 2009 3:00 pm

Postby marcstck » Thu Nov 11, 2010 11:58 pm

Cheer-has Haacke studied any healthy controls? We really need a control group to compare these findings to. On their own, they appear quite impressive, but what we really need to know is their deviation from whatever is the "norm".
User avatar
marcstck
Family Elder
 
Posts: 560
Joined: Tue Jan 03, 2006 3:00 pm

Postby ikulo » Fri Nov 12, 2010 1:26 am

I would just like to add that the Haacke protocol done through Hubbard was not entirely correct in my situation. The report found reflux in both jugs, but the IR only found one jug stenosed. So while these statistics may provide some interesting data points, the protocol still needs some tweaking to improve its accuracy.
User avatar
ikulo
Family Elder
 
Posts: 444
Joined: Tue Aug 04, 2009 2:00 pm
Location: colorado

Postby fernando » Fri Nov 12, 2010 6:39 am

ok,ok.

They got to the Moon, which is ok, but what about Mars, Venus, Alpha Centaury?

:roll:
User avatar
fernando
Family Elder
 
Posts: 228
Joined: Wed Jul 15, 2009 2:00 pm
Location: Argentina

Postby cheerleader » Fri Nov 12, 2010 7:21 am

marcstck wrote:Cheer-has Haacke studied any healthy controls? We really need a control group to compare these findings to. On their own, they appear quite impressive, but what we really need to know is their deviation from whatever is the "norm".


Dr Haacke is currently testing normals, Marc. He was the first, and is happy to report he has great blood flow. He's now testing students.
cheer
Husband dx RRMS 3/07
dx dual jugular vein stenosis (CCSVI) 4/09
http://ccsviinms.blogspot.com
User avatar
cheerleader
Family Elder
 
Posts: 5075
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 2:00 pm
Location: southern California

Postby cheerleader » Fri Nov 12, 2010 7:24 am

ikulo wrote:I would just like to add that the Haacke protocol done through Hubbard was not entirely correct in my situation. The report found reflux in both jugs, but the IR only found one jug stenosed. So while these statistics may provide some interesting data points, the protocol still needs some tweaking to improve its accuracy.


ikulo---it's not about architecture, it's about flow. Dr. Zamboni said that to me in Bologna (he was worried about Jeff), and he keeps saying it. It's why he wants dopplers done to his protocol. Reflux is not only created by stenosis (note those with "normal anatomy and abnormal flow"--it can be inverted valves and flaps which are not detected on MRV, but only by doppler....The main thing is to make sure that you no longer have reflux when you get a check up.
cheer
Husband dx RRMS 3/07
dx dual jugular vein stenosis (CCSVI) 4/09
http://ccsviinms.blogspot.com
User avatar
cheerleader
Family Elder
 
Posts: 5075
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 2:00 pm
Location: southern California

Brilliant Research With Clinical Practise Advice

Postby MarkW » Fri Nov 12, 2010 11:03 am

This is a ground breaking piece of research, which should be welcomed by pwMS. The cost of before and after MRVs may be an issue for some but 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. :D

MarkW
Mark Walker - Oxfordshire, England. Registered Pharmacist (UK). 11 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
User avatar
MarkW
Family Elder
 
Posts: 1151
Joined: Thu Oct 19, 2006 2:00 pm
Location: Oxfordshire, England

Postby Billmeik » Fri Nov 12, 2010 11:18 am

I liked Zivandof's thing at ectrims where he said MRV was bad. Dont know how to put it beisde this Haake stuff that says mrv is good.
User avatar
Billmeik
Family Elder
 
Posts: 694
Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 3:00 pm

Postby cheerleader » Fri Nov 12, 2010 11:40 am

Billmeik wrote:I liked Zivandof's thing at ectrims where he said MRV was bad. Dont know how to put it beisde this Haake stuff that says mrv is good.


MRV without flow quantification is bad. That's your standard MRV. Haacke's protocol is good and includes flow--- You need to know flow, not just architecture. We know SO much more than when Jeff was tested.
cheer
Husband dx RRMS 3/07
dx dual jugular vein stenosis (CCSVI) 4/09
http://ccsviinms.blogspot.com
User avatar
cheerleader
Family Elder
 
Posts: 5075
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 2:00 pm
Location: southern California

Re: The First 50 Haacke protocol cases

Postby Cece » Fri Nov 12, 2010 11:55 am

cheerleader wrote:Jetting and then filling in to normal---1
From the report, an explanation for what jetting and filling in to normal could be:
Stuck or malfunctioning valves (seen as jetting/refilling)
Cece
Family Elder
 
Posts: 9040
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2010 3:00 pm

Postby Billmeik » Fri Nov 12, 2010 4:06 pm

My question is: I 10 out of 50 are truncular malformations, are the other 40 still trucular?
User avatar
Billmeik
Family Elder
 
Posts: 694
Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 3:00 pm

Postby thornyrose76 » Fri Nov 12, 2010 5:05 pm

cheerleader wrote:
ikulo wrote:I would just like to add that the Haacke protocol done through Hubbard was not entirely correct in my situation. The report found reflux in both jugs, but the IR only found one jug stenosed. So while these statistics may provide some interesting data points, the protocol still needs some tweaking to improve its accuracy.


ikulo---it's not about architecture, it's about flow. Dr. Zamboni said that to me in Bologna (he was worried about Jeff), and he keeps saying it. It's why he wants dopplers done to his protocol. Reflux is not only created by stenosis (note those with "normal anatomy and abnormal flow"--it can be inverted valves and flaps which are not detected on MRV, but only by doppler....The main thing is to make sure that you no longer have reflux when you get a check up.
cheer


I'm confused, as I thought it was better to have an MRV... Is it or is a doppler ultra sound best?
User avatar
thornyrose76
Family Elder
 
Posts: 462
Joined: Mon Nov 23, 2009 3:00 pm

Flow and flow

Postby NormB » Fri Nov 12, 2010 5:51 pm

I will try my hand to explain to you Thornyrose what Cheers was explaining with the MRVs. Before with a regular MRV, it would show the vein only (architecture) or as a bird's eye view of the vein structure. With Dr Haackes MRV, he can also show the blood flow which is similar to Zamboni's ultrasound doppler where it also shows flow and direction of it.
The doppler ultrasound is very good but only with a well trained tech and
as per Dr Zamboni's strict protocol. As of now there are only few that are well trained to follow these protocols.
Friends feel free to correct me if my assumptions are misguided.

Take Care All

Normb
'92 diag RR - '05 SP
On LDN since Sept. 2012 with better quality of life.
User avatar
NormB
Family Elder
 
Posts: 115
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 3:00 pm
Location: Near Ottawa Canada

Postby cheerleader » Fri Nov 12, 2010 6:32 pm

Billmeik wrote:My question is: I 10 out of 50 are truncular malformations, are the other 40 still trucular?


Good question....these "truncular malformations" Dr. Haacke mentions are webs, missing veins, inverted valves and very specific things that develop in utero. We just don't know yet if things like "pinched jugulars" like Jeff has form in utero, or as the body grows and muscles impinge the veins later. All of CCSVI lesions may not be formed in utero...I think the jury's still out on this one.

Norm--that was a terrific explanation. The Haacke protocol isn't your average MRV....it shows flow (like doppler)
cheer
Husband dx RRMS 3/07
dx dual jugular vein stenosis (CCSVI) 4/09
http://ccsviinms.blogspot.com
User avatar
cheerleader
Family Elder
 
Posts: 5075
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 2:00 pm
Location: southern California

Next

Return to Chronic Cerebrospinal Venous Insufficiency (CCSVI)

 


  • Related topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users


Contact us | Terms of Service