Posted: Sat Jul 03, 2010 9:24 pm
I think it's important for people to make the decision whether they're prepared for stents and the risks before they ever have a catheter inserted into their vein. They need to understand what exactly the risks are and weigh whether they're prepared to take those risks. If they can discuss this with a doctor familiar with stents and their risks beforehand, all the better. Even a gp would be something as opposed to making a blind decision. If someone decides on stents, it is crucial to have someone close by who can monitor vein health. This plan should be put in place BEFORE ever undertaking the procedure.
Alternatively, I think it's important for those people who decide they do not want stents at all to appreciate that a significant # of people re-stenose following angioplasty. They have to understand and be willing to accept that possibility. Zamboni's people were at 50% restenosis rate, I don't know about Dr. Simka's. But if you're putting your money into this at a place far away and you choose not to have stents, then you need to be prepared for the possibility that your vein(s) may close up again. And you need to know what you'll do in the event that this happens BEFORE you undertake the procedure. It's a significant possibility and I hope people have accepted that this might be one of the scenarios that transpires.
Because it seems to me after reading the posts of people who return home and lose initial benefits and then wonder what to do and what has happened that the emotional toll this is taking on people is tremendous. If you have a stent put in and this happens, I can only imagine the stress and worry this would put a person under. For those without stents, I can also imagine how frustrating it must be to not know what's happened and what to do, especially if you've spent a lot of money and you can't be easily or cheaply checked in any kind of timely manner.
These are all factors that people need to put into their initial evaluation of what they want to do. You should put more critical and cautious evaluation into this than you do in deciding what kind of car to buy or what school your children will attend.
I fear many many people are in an even worse position having flown halfway around the world, having spent thousands of dollars, only to return home feeling no better, and a lot worse emotionally because they have no one to turn to for answers. They feel invisible in the sea of positive, overwhelming stories of improvements, wondering what went wrong for them.
It's so easy to get swept up in the emotional hype that's going on with the "amazing" stories of improvements when making the decision that it is vital to remain grounded, evaluate the situation realistically, the risks, the possibility that it won't work or that one won't see benefits, the risks of stents, even the possibility that you could worsen (according to some anecdotal reports), and put some time and effort into local follow up care so that you at least have a professional ear to turn to with questions or concerns.
Please don't get swept up in the hype to the point of abandoning common sense and a realistic understanding of all the potential results that could transpire, and ensure that you have weighed and are prepared to take both the financial as well as the health risks involved with ballooning or stents, and have tried to mitigate potential problems afterwards by setting up the necessary professional support close to home in advance of the procedure.
I hope people are taking just as seriously the reports of those who have not seen sustained improvements or have worsened as they do the reports of tremendous benefits. Both are just as important, the negative reports possibly even more important when making the decision for oneself.
There is still a lot to learn about this. It may well be worth some people's while to wait it out for a bit until more is known and answers to some important questions have been identified rather than rushing in too quickly where much remains largely unknown and the results may be impacted by that lack of knowledge. This decision needs to be thought out calmly, logically and completely divorced from the hype of "best case scenarios".
Alternatively, I think it's important for those people who decide they do not want stents at all to appreciate that a significant # of people re-stenose following angioplasty. They have to understand and be willing to accept that possibility. Zamboni's people were at 50% restenosis rate, I don't know about Dr. Simka's. But if you're putting your money into this at a place far away and you choose not to have stents, then you need to be prepared for the possibility that your vein(s) may close up again. And you need to know what you'll do in the event that this happens BEFORE you undertake the procedure. It's a significant possibility and I hope people have accepted that this might be one of the scenarios that transpires.
Because it seems to me after reading the posts of people who return home and lose initial benefits and then wonder what to do and what has happened that the emotional toll this is taking on people is tremendous. If you have a stent put in and this happens, I can only imagine the stress and worry this would put a person under. For those without stents, I can also imagine how frustrating it must be to not know what's happened and what to do, especially if you've spent a lot of money and you can't be easily or cheaply checked in any kind of timely manner.
These are all factors that people need to put into their initial evaluation of what they want to do. You should put more critical and cautious evaluation into this than you do in deciding what kind of car to buy or what school your children will attend.
I fear many many people are in an even worse position having flown halfway around the world, having spent thousands of dollars, only to return home feeling no better, and a lot worse emotionally because they have no one to turn to for answers. They feel invisible in the sea of positive, overwhelming stories of improvements, wondering what went wrong for them.
It's so easy to get swept up in the emotional hype that's going on with the "amazing" stories of improvements when making the decision that it is vital to remain grounded, evaluate the situation realistically, the risks, the possibility that it won't work or that one won't see benefits, the risks of stents, even the possibility that you could worsen (according to some anecdotal reports), and put some time and effort into local follow up care so that you at least have a professional ear to turn to with questions or concerns.
Please don't get swept up in the hype to the point of abandoning common sense and a realistic understanding of all the potential results that could transpire, and ensure that you have weighed and are prepared to take both the financial as well as the health risks involved with ballooning or stents, and have tried to mitigate potential problems afterwards by setting up the necessary professional support close to home in advance of the procedure.
I hope people are taking just as seriously the reports of those who have not seen sustained improvements or have worsened as they do the reports of tremendous benefits. Both are just as important, the negative reports possibly even more important when making the decision for oneself.
There is still a lot to learn about this. It may well be worth some people's while to wait it out for a bit until more is known and answers to some important questions have been identified rather than rushing in too quickly where much remains largely unknown and the results may be impacted by that lack of knowledge. This decision needs to be thought out calmly, logically and completely divorced from the hype of "best case scenarios".