Clinical trials are needed to get this move faster and to get more scientific results.
Our family: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p_QCKxeQAlg
just adding the official page. next one should be Zamboni's.
Roel Beelen MD, wrote a letter last month to the Amsterdam VU-medical centre researchteam, because he has some questions about their research. In this letter he mentions some of his first results. A full report will follow later on.
I tried to translate his letter; here it is; it will give you some information about the research he is doing.
---translation (amateur, but close to the original--------
To: VUmedical centre, Amsterdam
Through a journalist my attention was just drawn to a report in a Dutch current affairs program on CCSVI.
In this report, there are quite a few disturbing elements.
1. They conclude from a very limited group of 20 people that there is no causal link. I wonder, what's the objective "statistical power" of a series of 20 patients.
2. The evaluation of the 20 patients, was it all done by the same team? Were the results independently verified.
Although our series is a long follow-up, I would like to show some results of our series of patients:
107 patients with confirmed MS were screened for CCSVI, in 97 patients CCSVI non-invasive (CT, Duplex) diagnosed (independently diagnosed by vascular surgeon and radiologist).
* 64-balloon dilatation
* 2 Valvulotome
* 8 cutting balloon
* 7 stenting
29 patients are monitored, using Doppler and using an internationally validated questionnaire (MSQOL-54 instrument) and after treatment as reported by every individual of these 29 patients, the quality of life has improved. Statistically, this is even more significant.
When the last patient in this group has reported, (one year follow up) results will be openly published.
Despite these figures both by us and in other centers, how can you, with a much smaller number of patients, go on saying that there is no link between MS and CCSVI? Would't it be logical to consider this theory, because of the spectacular results? Currently I still believe that CCSVI may not be the primary cause of MS, but in certain forms of MS it surely plays a very important role in the development of MS. I therefore call for a comprehensive inter-disciplinary dialogue so that the MS patients by a combination of classical pharmacological treatment and interventional treatment, can get the optimal treatment of the moment.
Roel Beelen, M.D.
It is very positive to hear another doctor speak up and report on what he is seeing now, not waiting until he is published. But pushing for even more research into MS/CCSVI even as he is finishing up on his first study.
Like Dr. Zamboni implored, "Research, research, resarch!"
The avalance is picking up speed. Information is NOT a diversion, INFORMATION is POWER!
- Similar Topics
- Last post