This is an old thread, but some good information in it, and I was looking for a place to add Arlene Hubbard's notes from the 2012 Hubbard Foundation Conference. (And forgive me if it has already been posted! I hadn't looked at it closely before.)
www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fb ... 9665829860Quote:
David Hubbard discussed the Hubbard Foundation’s clinical outcomes study. 260 Patients pre and post venoplasty statistically significant using the MSIS.
66% overall improvement
The more sites treated the better the outcome
SPMS did less well that PPMS and RRMS
Duration of disease…no difference
Age, no difference
Women did better than men
Diet and lifestyle needs to be evaluated.
We've heard this elsewhere as well. I would have expected duration of disease or age to make a difference, and it did not. I would have expected PP MS to fare the worst, and it was SP MS that did, but these are not stats to dispair over: A majority of people with SP MS still improved. The more sites treated, the better the outcome is an interesting one. It could be that those with fewer sites treated had stenoses that were missed and went untreated, or they had complicated presentations such as hypoplasias, that cannot be easily treated, or that the treatment of more sites freed up more blood flow allowing for more pronounced improvements.
Quote:
fMRI…movie of the brain
BOLD venous test….”tell time” test…looking at the function of several areas of the brain.pre venoplasty MS patients have less brain blood flow.
After venoplasty the brain blood flow normalizes.
Changes in the surging of blood in the brain occur the day after venoplasty.
This cannot be placebo
That last one is worth repeating: This cannot be placebo.
Quote:
Hubbard foundation’s registry has been instrumental in collecting data on pwMS.
Every pt in our study has had abnormal valvular structures.
Every patient. 100%. That's either specificity or sensitivity (ack which one) and it suggests that CCSVI may be causal to MS.
Quote:
Left renal vein has been involved in most patients who did not have a response and when treated the patients got better.
An interesting statement! A good reason to check the left renal vein at the time of the first procedure, and not let patients go out and fail to have improvements and not know why.
Login
Register
FAQ
Search
