This Is MS Multiple Sclerosis Knowledge & Support Community

I think a lot of people with mobility issues have one side worse than the other, at least it starts that way. My right is worse than my left. It seems Dr Dake has been treating jugulars that are worse on one side than the other. So for those with diagnosed jugular occlusion, is your occlusion bad on your bad mobility side, or would it be the other way around, or does it even matter?

I have right sided weakness and my lesions are on the left side of my brain. This is as it should be as the brain controls the opposite side of the body.

My left jug was worse. It was very stenosed and had a complete spider web of collaterals. The other side was stenosed too but it was bigger overall to begin with. I have a 8mm stent in the left and a 12 in the right.

All that having been said disability has not that much do to with lesions so it wuld be interesting to see with susceptibility weighted MRI if all my iron deposits are on the left too.....

Jeff's left jug was gone...his left side (leg and foot) is where the numbness and pain showed up at his first flare. His lesions are all over the brain. Not sure if there is a correlation or not-
cheer

Let me add I only have 4 lesions where Jeff had, was it 21 Cheer?

Mine are large the biggest one is 4 cm, that is in the left periventricular area kind if parietal.

Sorry for being nit-picky, but I believe when comparing number of lesions we should make sure that the definition is the same. Oftentimes in MS articles a diameter of >3 mm and ovoid shape is given.

For example I have more "punctuate white matter foci" than an average healthy person my age, however as far as I can tell from the radiologists reports and my own inspection only 2-3 lesions larger than 3 mm.

Anyway, back to topic, which is which lesions controls what.

One thing I was thinking with regard to cheer's and marie's comments...from seeing Haacke's SWI images I got the impression that lesions were not completely uncorrelated with iron deposits, and if the latter correlate with disability, the former should as well.

Mel had left sided issues, eye, foot drop, clonus, weak hand and constant numbness in fingertips and she had blockages in both sides but I think it was more severe in her left side (twisted veins and an extra, smaller left side jug).

I think that's right I'll have to check back but I've been relaxing too much clearly and, well, there's this real life 'Top Gun' thing on TV and I really can't be arsed!

radeck wrote:Anyway, back to topic, which is which lesions controls what.

Just so we don't get too far off track, I think that the topic was does the side that the stenosis occurs on correlate to lesions and does this also correlate to disability. It's a damn fine question and one that I hope that Dr. Dake and Zamboni are looking into. The answer to this question could potentially be one of the stones in the path that links stenosis to MS.

NHE

waaaaaait a sec, while we are in the CCSVI threads / research etc etc I think the better discussion may be about SWI, CCSVI locations and disability; especially since its commonly accepted lesions and disability don't align so well, and CCSVI may be the cause of iron deposits that SWI measures / maps.

What is SWI?

Rokkit wrote:I think a lot of people with mobility issues have one side worse than the other, at least it starts that way. My right is worse than my left. It seems Dr Dake has been treating jugulars that are worse on one side than the other. So for those with diagnosed jugular occlusion, is your occlusion bad on your bad mobility side, or would it be the other way around, or does it even matter?

When I taught Sunday school, I had a 10 year old kid who would always take the Bible lesson OT by trying to draw comparisons to Star Wars... (Jesus was like Luke Skywalker, Yoda was the holy spirit, Darth Vadar was the devil, etc, etc.) Once he got going, it was tough to get the kids back....

SWI is susceptability weighted imaging. There's a whole thread on what SWI sees- iron deposition in gray matter- and how that correlates to MS disability in contrast to regular MRI....hyperintense MRI lesions do not correlate to MS disability.
http://www.thisisms.com/ftopict-8185-swi.html

Back to the original question, which is very interesting. So far, we've seen correlation of side to stenosis in Mel and Jeff (both left) Marie has right sided issues and a worse left jug, although her right wasn't so great. Any other stento-teer want to play?
cheer

My data point is going to make it murkier, perhaps: stent in left jug, and my MS issues like tingling always have been on both sides. But fortunately those kinds of issues were pretty minimal for me, and I hope will not progress. If they were to, it would be interesting if the left side problems dominated. (And am quite happy that the HD experience is full-body, multi-dimensional
)

EDIT: the lesions are spread out throughout brain and spine, but perhaps someone with greater understanding/expertise would say that the ones located on the right are more dominant or critical. I realy don't know enough to say.

NHE, thanks for bringing us back to topic, i.e. (as you put it) the CCSVI-lesion-disability connection. Note that I had already confessed in my post that my lesion size comment was off-topic. I wanted to bring it up anyway since newly diagnosed people (like myself) might get confused by others bringing up lesions numbers without clear definitions.

Cheer, I disagree with you that the lesions-iron deposition connection is off-topic. The negative correlation of T2 and SWI does not entail that the lesions are on *opposite sides* of the brain from the iron deposits. It would be very surprising if they were on opposite sides I think, as this would suggest that immune-system activation and iron deposition have separate origins. Marie's case suggests that lesions are in fact on the same side as the predominant IJV problem.

Once more CCSVI patients have posted their situation (side of main IJV problem, side of highest lesion load, side of most symptoms), we might get a better idea of each correlation.