This Is MS Multiple Sclerosis Community: Knowledge & Support

Welcome to the world's leading forum on Multiple Sclerosis research, support, and knowledge. For over 10 years, This is MS has provided an unbiased community dedicated to Multiple Sclerosis patients, caregivers, and affected loved ones.
It is currently Wed May 22, 2013 6:35 pm


All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 50 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: To Dr. Cumming
PostPosted: Mon Apr 25, 2011 8:53 am 
Offline
Family Elder
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 07, 2011 4:00 pm
Posts: 324
DrCumming wrote:

see the images in this thread

http://www.thisisms.com/ftopic-15223-da ... an-75.html

case of the 28 yo male

in short, we do not know the best way to do the procedure. i would rather have a higher restenosis rate rather than cause veins to completely collapse to nothing post plasty.

i have said it again and again, big is not necessarily better.

IVUS allows us to size the balloon to the surrounding normal vein. this way we can balloon the valves as large as possible with minimal damage to the underlying vein wall.


Thank you, Dr Cumming. I agree with you, that it is better to be safe than sorry. So, I am sold on ivus and really look forward to hearing from you and Dr Sclafani about the results with ivus.

Any news on hyperplasia, scarring? That is an issue I worry about the most.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Apr 25, 2011 9:03 am 
Offline
Family Elder

Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2010 4:00 pm
Posts: 8507
CCSVIhusband wrote:
Cece, I went back through, and during your procedure there was a use of oversized balloons (2mm if I did the math properly).

That would be the 10% oversizing that is within normal practice for other procedures too. But with the big balloons, the IRs have gone way beyond 10%. And maybe in CCSVI, not even the 10% is worth risking? These veins are important.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Apr 25, 2011 9:05 am 
Offline
Family Elder
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jun 27, 2010 3:00 pm
Posts: 474
Location: Pittsburgh, PA USA
Cece wrote:
CCSVIhusband wrote:
Cece, I went back through, and during your procedure there was a use of oversized balloons (2mm if I did the math properly).

That would be the 10% oversizing that is within normal practice for other procedures too. But with the big balloons, the IRs have gone way beyond 10%.


I see, I guess I just wasn't understanding ...

The threads go so fast sometimes (and I was away for a good while) that I wasn't understanding I guess.

How big were they going? I guess I might have missed some of that discussion?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: To Dr. Cumming
PostPosted: Thu May 05, 2011 6:53 pm 
Offline
Family Member
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 09, 2011 3:00 pm
Posts: 69
Dr. Cumming,
If you see this post, could you comment on what size balloons you use? What size would be considered too large--or does that depend on what location they are using it on? Thanks.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: To Dr. Cumming
PostPosted: Fri May 06, 2011 4:56 am 
Offline
Family Elder
User avatar

Joined: Sat Dec 25, 2010 4:00 pm
Posts: 209
Location: Minneapolis, MN
carollevin wrote:
Dr. Cumming,
If you see this post, could you comment on what size balloons you use? What size would be considered too large--or does that depend on what location they are using it on? Thanks.


Balloon sizing is in flux. Various operators promote different approaches with no proven outcomes and often no follow up. Don't believe the hype.

In short we don't know the best way to do it.

Both Dr. Scalafini and I have seen complications and severe restenosis post ballooning. This can only be from oversizing the balloon and causing too much intimal injury (damage to the vein wall).

With IVUS we are hoping that by better selecting balloon size, we can reduce intimal injury and maximize durability. Again, unproven. Time will tell.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri May 06, 2011 8:58 am 
Offline
Family Member
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 09, 2011 3:00 pm
Posts: 69
Thanks Dr. Cumming,
Would you be able to venture a guess as to when some of these issues such as balloon sizing and all the other details of the "best" way to do CCSVI are better understood by the IRs?-Are we talking months, years, or will there be disagreement indefinitely?

Now that my insurance isn't covering anyway, I am wondering if it's better to wait a few months or 6 months--if by that time more is known and this restenosis and thrombois rates may be lower by then if the technique is improved?

Thanks again.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri May 06, 2011 9:24 am 
Offline
Family Elder
User avatar

Joined: Sat Dec 25, 2010 4:00 pm
Posts: 209
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Unfortunately, we are many years away from any good scientific data. None of the trials underway are addressing balloon sizing. None are using IVUS. In fact, we do not even know what measurements to use to determine a percent stensosis. Dr. Scalafini and I have talked about all these unknowns. Our concern is we do not even know enough to do a good trial. We are really early in the discovery phase. There is a much to be learned. In fact, we know so little about the venous drainage of the central nervous system, that we don't even know what we don't know - make sense :) ?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri May 06, 2011 9:54 am 
Offline
Family Member
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 09, 2011 3:00 pm
Posts: 69
Thanks Dr. Cummings,
Yes it does make sense. This CCSVI/MS issue/procedure is new and very complicated.

I appreciate your posts and your responses to my questions. You've been very helpful.

Thanks again.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri May 06, 2011 11:06 am 
Offline
Family Elder
User avatar

Joined: Sat Dec 25, 2010 4:00 pm
Posts: 209
Location: Minneapolis, MN
carollevin wrote:
Thanks Dr. Cummings,
Yes it does make sense. This CCSVI/MS issue/procedure is new and very complicated.

I appreciate your posts and your responses to my questions. You've been very helpful.

Thanks again.


You're welcome!

I wish we had some good answers. Its tiring to always be saying we don't know...


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri May 06, 2011 11:51 am 
Offline
Family Elder
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2010 4:00 pm
Posts: 169
DrCumming wrote:
I wish we had some good answers. Its tiring to always be saying we don't know...


Don't worry. We can handle the truth that we're in the early stages of figuring out how to best treat this plumbing problem called CCSVI.

I know that I definitely appreciate a doctor admitting that he/she doesn't know something about the human body, especially as it relates to a new discovery as this. As opposed to, oh say certain neurologists saying something as crazy as "Well folks, we've now determined that CCSVI doesn't cause MS".

WeWillBeatMS


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri May 06, 2011 1:51 pm 
Offline
Family Member
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 09, 2011 3:00 pm
Posts: 69
I agree. I'd rather have a doctor say "we don't know" as opposed to an arrogant doctor or a doctor who tries to exaggerate the success rates in order to increase business. Thanks for your integrity Dr. Cummings and please keep helping us figure this out!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri May 06, 2011 3:21 pm 
Offline
Family Elder

Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2010 4:00 pm
Posts: 8507
I always take it as that we don't know...yet.
Time is our enemy and our friend. :)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri May 06, 2011 6:37 pm 
Offline
Family Elder
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 07, 2010 4:00 pm
Posts: 341
DrCumming wrote:
Unfortunately, we are many years away from any good scientific data. None of the trials underway are addressing balloon sizing. None are using IVUS. In fact, we do not even know what measurements to use to determine a percent stensosis. Dr. Scalafini and I have talked about all these unknowns. Our concern is we do not even know enough to do a good trial. We are really early in the discovery phase. There is a much to be learned. In fact, we know so little about the venous drainage of the central nervous system, that we don't even know what we don't know - make sense :) ?


This is quite depressing to read. :(


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri May 06, 2011 7:26 pm 
Offline
Family Elder

Joined: Thu Apr 17, 2008 3:00 pm
Posts: 253
Location: Michigan
And here's another opinion from an IR: a completely blocked/occluded ijv is better than a partially blocked or "pancake" jugular vein. When I asked him to explain, he stated that if the IJV is completely blocked, then the collaterals will handle all of the flow rather than sharing the flow with the IJV....

Not sure I agree, but more food for thought.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri May 06, 2011 7:38 pm 
Offline
Family Member
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 09, 2011 3:00 pm
Posts: 69
Interesting. I wonder if that could explain why occasionally someone feels worse after restenosis than they did before treatment? That is the kind of thing that worries me as I step forward toward this procedure, but I am trying to stay positive as I know the odds are on our side for benefits versus risk.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 50 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]


Related topics
 Topics   Author   Replies   Views   Last post 
There are no new unread posts for this topic. CCSVI improvements - what and when?

Rosegirl

6

1711

Sun Jul 25, 2010 11:45 am

Rosegirl View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. personal changes made based on discovery of CCSVI

Cece

7

1241

Mon Feb 15, 2010 3:44 pm

shye View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. What exactly have been the improvements that you have seen

Squibbles

1

1084

Wed Feb 03, 2010 6:42 am

Salvatore24 View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. How soon have you seen improvements?

suzq77

14

2183

Sun Aug 01, 2010 6:16 pm

Cece View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. 'improvements never seen before'

Cece

3

424

Wed May 30, 2012 4:45 am

Cece View the latest post

 


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to: