Why MSS Policy on CCSVI is Terribly Wrong & Failing Pati
Posted: Wed Aug 11, 2010 10:21 am
Have been reading all the posts and not weighing in. Here is how I feel.
Why the MS Society policy on CCSVI is terribly wrong and failing patients:
There is global medical activity taking place that has already demonstrated that clearing constricted veins in MS patients will halt symptom progression for most and improve symptoms for many.
Patients are reporting great improvement and because this is the case enlightened jurisdictions are treating more by the hundreds. Although not planned or coordinated, a global Meta study is nonetheless taking place.
Although leading edge Vascular Surgeons and Interventional Radiologists have been refining techniques vascular medical intervention has been established practice for over twenty years.
The risks in performing CCSVI procedures are known and they are low.
In the face of this evidence the MS Society is saying the current medical understanding of CCSVI and its relationship to MS does not support immediate treatment. They and the Neurologists advising them are saying NO to patients in horrific decline.
Instead they are only funding Canadian studies that researchers say will take years.
They are warning against the terrible risks of CCSVI treatment while not providing the very low odds of those risks.
They are advising that patients do not get involved in any CCSVI procedure outside of an established study when were a patient to be in a study they might be a placebo control and get no treatment. Studies will just do exactly the same procedure a patient would get in any proper medical facility otherwise.
There was one serious study in 2001 that reported the placebo effect was largely an illusion. The placebo effect itself has never been fully studied.
The MS Society could advocate that Canada approve CCSVI treatment and that attending neurologists continue to track the progress of patient symptoms as they already do. This could become it’s own very important Meta study.
They could advocate that Canada take a lead role and join the Global Meta study.
Instead they seem to think it is up to Canadian researchers to duplicate work that has already taken years. These will be years of terrible decline and early death for thousands.
The MS Society is failing MS patients and letting them deteriorate when there is a chance to help them here at hand.
1. CMSS site 07/06/2010. Below is how the MS Society describes the potential complications of a procedure known to have a low risk. Note the bolded operative words
What are the potential complications for this procedure?
Endovascular intervention for CCSVI is an invasive procedure and as such, does carry a risk for significant complication. Two cases have been described in the January Issue of the Annals of Neurology. In August of 2009, a 51-year-old woman died from a cerebral hemorrhage attributed to the blood thinner she was taking to minimize the risk of clot formation post endovascular intervention for CCSVI. In November a second event was documented when a stent, inserted in the jugular vein to maintain vein flow, dislodged itself and travelled to the heart. Open heart surgery was needed to retrieve the stent. Other possible complications of this endovascular intervention may include, but are not limited to:
a. Bleeding and / or bruising at the at the insertion site.
b. Perforation and hemorrhage along the path of the vascular catheter as it is advanced.
c. Dislodgement of blood clots along the path of catheter, resulting in heart attack or stroke.
d. Formation and dislodgement of clots from the tip of the catheter.
e. Infection.
Regards,
CharlieC
Why the MS Society policy on CCSVI is terribly wrong and failing patients:
There is global medical activity taking place that has already demonstrated that clearing constricted veins in MS patients will halt symptom progression for most and improve symptoms for many.
Patients are reporting great improvement and because this is the case enlightened jurisdictions are treating more by the hundreds. Although not planned or coordinated, a global Meta study is nonetheless taking place.
Although leading edge Vascular Surgeons and Interventional Radiologists have been refining techniques vascular medical intervention has been established practice for over twenty years.
The risks in performing CCSVI procedures are known and they are low.
In the face of this evidence the MS Society is saying the current medical understanding of CCSVI and its relationship to MS does not support immediate treatment. They and the Neurologists advising them are saying NO to patients in horrific decline.
Instead they are only funding Canadian studies that researchers say will take years.
They are warning against the terrible risks of CCSVI treatment while not providing the very low odds of those risks.
They are advising that patients do not get involved in any CCSVI procedure outside of an established study when were a patient to be in a study they might be a placebo control and get no treatment. Studies will just do exactly the same procedure a patient would get in any proper medical facility otherwise.
There was one serious study in 2001 that reported the placebo effect was largely an illusion. The placebo effect itself has never been fully studied.
The MS Society could advocate that Canada approve CCSVI treatment and that attending neurologists continue to track the progress of patient symptoms as they already do. This could become it’s own very important Meta study.
They could advocate that Canada take a lead role and join the Global Meta study.
Instead they seem to think it is up to Canadian researchers to duplicate work that has already taken years. These will be years of terrible decline and early death for thousands.
The MS Society is failing MS patients and letting them deteriorate when there is a chance to help them here at hand.
1. CMSS site 07/06/2010. Below is how the MS Society describes the potential complications of a procedure known to have a low risk. Note the bolded operative words
What are the potential complications for this procedure?
Endovascular intervention for CCSVI is an invasive procedure and as such, does carry a risk for significant complication. Two cases have been described in the January Issue of the Annals of Neurology. In August of 2009, a 51-year-old woman died from a cerebral hemorrhage attributed to the blood thinner she was taking to minimize the risk of clot formation post endovascular intervention for CCSVI. In November a second event was documented when a stent, inserted in the jugular vein to maintain vein flow, dislodged itself and travelled to the heart. Open heart surgery was needed to retrieve the stent. Other possible complications of this endovascular intervention may include, but are not limited to:
a. Bleeding and / or bruising at the at the insertion site.
b. Perforation and hemorrhage along the path of the vascular catheter as it is advanced.
c. Dislodgement of blood clots along the path of catheter, resulting in heart attack or stroke.
d. Formation and dislodgement of clots from the tip of the catheter.
e. Infection.
Regards,
CharlieC