I wish it would separate out the 25% who had blockages due to either clots or closures. A closure is unfortunate but can be retreated; a clot is a more serious outcome.
It would also be useful to know if the patients had more advanced MS, as determined by EDSS or duration of disease or progressive vs relapsing remitting disease course.
As fiddler has mentioned, in the self-reported questionnaires, patients reported improvements in balance and energy that lasted for three months, then dropped off. The objective measurements did not directly measure balance and energy. This would suggest that a future study should include objective measurements at least of balance, which should be measurable.
The study done by Pryse-Phillips did find there were subjective psychological and physical benefits, but he described those as “meagre” compared to the costs and the risks.
Well, there you go...self-reported improvements in energy and balance and warm hands (which may be evidence of an improved autonomic nervous system) are dismissed as meagre.
In MS, we are used to paying a high cost in risk and money for seemingly meagre results, every time we take a disease-modifying drug.
And as someone who previously suffered from severe MS- and CCSVI-related fatigue, any reduction in fatigue is NOT meagre.