This Is MS Multiple Sclerosis Knowledge & Support Community

I would have two questions regarding Dr. Simkas new paper:
1) He found 97% RELEVANT obstruction - how did he define relevant (ie did he use the Zamboni criteria for CCSVI?)

2)
a) Did he find relevant obstruction in 97% of ALL PRESENTED MS patients, w
without further selection, this would point to a very high correlation with MS?

b)Or did he first screen the patients by doppler and MRV and if the outcomes of the preliminary investigations where suspicious - THEN he does a venogram and THESE patients then show 97% relevant obstruction, this would point to a high reliability of the preliminary investigations (doppler and MRV)?
In this case it would be interesting to see how many of the presented MS Patients where positive in the preliminary exams.

Thanks!
--Frank

Frank wrote:I would have two questions regarding Dr. Simkas new paper:
1) He found 97% RELEVANT obstruction - how did he define relevant (ie did he use the Zamboni criteria for CCSVI?)

2)
a) Did he find relevant obstruction in 97% of ALL PRESENTED MS patients, w
without further selection, this would point to a very high correlation with MS?

b)Or did he first screen the patients by doppler and MRV and if the outcomes of the preliminary investigations where suspicious - THEN he does a venogram and THESE patients then show 97% relevant obstruction, this would point to a high reliability of the preliminary investigations (doppler and MRV)?
In this case it would be interesting to see how many of the presented MS Patients where positive in the preliminary exams.

Thanks!
--Frank

Hi Frank!
I do not feel competent to answer your questions as I am only Dr. Simka´s patient. I will meet him and ask him when is he going to publish his full paper and where.
It might be at the Symposium in Slovakia or at the Symposium in Frankfurt.

My point: Doctors must follow certain protocol (Doppler and MRV as well) to be able to find CCSVI problem!
Erika