'improvements never seen before'

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

'improvements never seen before'

Postby Cece » Tue May 22, 2012 11:04 am

http://ccsvi-ms.ning.com/profiles/blogs ... g-for-high
I have to say that the operators at The Clinics of the Heart are Interventional Cardiologists and this is our most extreme experience looking improvements never seen before with any previous endovascular treatment for cardiovascular diseases, including the coronary intervention.

The interventionalists at this Mexican clinic have not seen the degree of improvements that we show, in their patients for other diseases.

The reason for symptom improvement is logical in that outflow obstructions of blood flow from any organ are damaging to that organ. It will take time and money and efforts for our researchers to prove this but it would be shocking for the outcome not to be in our favor. The hard part is waiting and knowing that our researchers are underfunded in a somewhat hostile environment and that there are established financial interests in the MS market.

The name 'liberation procedure' and 'liberation therapy' are used in the media and in the FDA alert. This makes it seem very alternative but it is garden-variety angioplasty. Angioplasty of outflow obstructions in the major veins that drain the brain and spinal cord. And it is not the veins themselves that are narrowed, but outflow obstructions within the veins, most commonly the valves at the base of the jugular near the collarbone.

We all know this, but I like to repeat it from time to time, because every day there must be someone who has newly heard about CCSVI, and I would like everyone to know the most accurate truth as we can establish it through research and personal experiences of our own and others.

One of my major objections to the FDA alert is that it labels angioplasty of the jugulars to be experimental. Angioplasty of the jugulars is done commonly for central venous stenoses such as thrombosis, in particular in dialysis patients. This is not as rare or as unsafe or as alternative as might be believed.
Cece
Family Elder
 
Posts: 8956
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2010 4:00 pm

Advertisement

Re: 'improvements never seen before'

Postby Tracker » Tue May 29, 2012 11:20 pm

Why have stents never been needed in Thrombosis cases of the jugular veins?
Tracker
Family Member
 
Posts: 30
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2011 3:02 am

Re: 'improvements never seen before'

Postby jean-la-grenouille » Wed May 30, 2012 3:02 am

Hi Tracker ! I think stents are still not very safe to be used in the IJV. Risk of thrombosis, clotting, migation...it depends of the venous obstruction and the physicians....

Thank you Cece for reminding us in a synthetic way, what we know about MS and CCSVI.
Business applied to science, leads to conflicts of interest and nonsense.
User avatar
jean-la-grenouille
Family Member
 
Posts: 58
Joined: Sun Nov 01, 2009 4:00 pm

Re: 'improvements never seen before'

Postby Cece » Wed May 30, 2012 4:45 am

We're talking about stents in dialysis-related jugular thrombosis or non-CCSVI related cases of central venous stenosis?
I don't know if they are or aren't ever used. Let's see...
http://www.uptodate.com/contents/use-of ... lar-access

The role of the endoluminal stent in the management of venous stenosis of dialysis access is unclear. Although stents can help manage some access difficulties, they are sometimes inappropriately utilized. Stents are not permanent solutions. With the exception of the Flair™ Endovascular Stent Graft (C. R. Bard, Inc.; Tempe, AZ), they are not FDA approved for dialysis vascular access use. In addition, they add significant cost and a new set of possible complications.

The clinician should therefore be very selective in the use of stents for the treatment of stenotic dialysis access. Stent placement is justified only when its use will clearly result in one or more of the following benefits:

•Extends access life
•Saves an otherwise failed access
•Avoids surgery

Although a stent can improve the appearance of a lesion, it is unclear if these devices provide benefits and long-term outcomes that justify their increased cost and potential complications. Angioplasty alone should therefore be used as the primary treatment modality for all venous lesions. (See "Percutaneous angioplasty for the treatment of venous stenosis affecting hemodialysis access grafts".)

Primary patency rates following the venous use of stents have been relatively poor, being approximately 20 percent at one year [1-3]. However, with aggressive reintervention, the cumulative patency rate is approximately 70 percent at one year.
Cece
Family Elder
 
Posts: 8956
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2010 4:00 pm


Return to Chronic Cerebrospinal Venous Insufficiency (CCSVI)

 


  • Related topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users