CCSVI and CCVBP

A forum to discuss Chronic Cerebrospinal Venous Insufficiency and its relationship to Multiple Sclerosis.
User avatar
NZer1
Family Elder
Posts: 1624
Joined: Thu Feb 18, 2010 3:00 pm
Location: Rotorua New Zealand

Re: CCSVI and CCVBP

Post by NZer1 » Sat Mar 19, 2016 8:02 pm


User avatar
uprightdoc
Family Elder
Posts: 1995
Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 2:00 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: CCSVI and CCVBP

Post by uprightdoc » Mon Mar 21, 2016 1:27 am

Hello Robert,

Mark does have misalignment of his upper cervical spine and has been treated with specific upper cervical care with little or no improvement in symptoms. Upright and Cine MRI by Dr. Smith showed no significant impact of the upper cervical spine on the brain, cord, vertebral arteries, vertebral veins or craniospinal CSF flow. The upper cervical x-rays, however, did show significant misalignment of the lower spine that suggests a possible scoliosis. Abnormal curvatures strain the dura mater attachments of the cord to the spine, as well as the pia mater attachment of the filum terminale to the tailbone.

User avatar
NZer1
Family Elder
Posts: 1624
Joined: Thu Feb 18, 2010 3:00 pm
Location: Rotorua New Zealand

Re: CCSVI and CCVBP

Post by NZer1 » Thu Mar 24, 2016 11:50 pm

Great to have this languaged in a clear and basic manor to show GP's/Dr's to guide their old models of thinking!!


mdju93
Newbie
Posts: 9
Joined: Fri Oct 09, 2015 12:47 am

Re: CCSVI and CCVBP

Post by mdju93 » Sun Mar 27, 2016 1:23 am

uprightdoc wrote:
mdju93 wrote: ... I was just wondering if you'd received the CD's ok? ... Mark.
Hello Mark,

I have reviewed your Upight and Cine MRI scans, as well as Dr. Smith's report. There is a great deal of difference in the Upright MRI and Dr. Smith's report compared to your upper cervical x-rays. The upright MRI is fairly unremarkable. On the other hand, the upper cervical x-rays show significant misalignment and possible scoliosis. It would be helpful if you had basic x-rays of your lower spine to check for abnormal curvatures.
Hi Doctor,

Sorry for the late reply but i've been feeling a bit poorly of late.

I don't really know what to make of the conflicting MRI and x-ray results. I thought the scoliosis looked a bit better with the spine less compressed in the post atlas adjustment frontal x-ray so perhaps it was effected for a short while but then reverted back to its prior state, although all follow up checks indicated that the adjustment had held, so again I'm not sure what to make of that.

Is it possible to influence the MRI and X-ray results by changing postures slightly while the imaging is taking place to then give a false outcome?

I'd like to get some lower spine x-rays but at the moment it's proving difficult finding somebody that's prepared to carry them out since I don't have any back pain or in their eyes a "justifiable" reason given the radiation dosage. I'll keep searching though.

Thanks for your help

Mark.

User avatar
uprightdoc
Family Elder
Posts: 1995
Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 2:00 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: CCSVI and CCVBP

Post by uprightdoc » Sun Mar 27, 2016 1:53 am

Nigel,

For the last several days I have been racking my brain working on a section in my book on whiplash and traumatic brain and cord injuries, which also includesdiffuse axonal injuries. Somehow I missed the links you posted above on traumatic brain injury from a blow to the head showing the brain bouncing around inside the cranial vault. It's a great visual demonstration of the impact of contact loading on coup and contrecoup injuries, as well as translational and shear stresses that result in tears and diffuse axonal injuries.

User avatar
NZer1
Family Elder
Posts: 1624
Joined: Thu Feb 18, 2010 3:00 pm
Location: Rotorua New Zealand

Re: CCSVI and CCVBP

Post by NZer1 » Sun Mar 27, 2016 6:48 am

http://www.fonar.com/pdf/PCP41_damadian.pdf
In the paper there is comment about normal people and the pathology, which has started a heated debate with Ed (SweakyCat) and I about who they are, and why it isn't clarified or written elsewhere in the paper to make this part understandable or impacting. Because my MRI all show clearly a disc bulge impinging thecal sac I am hot on this issue because not much else I have looked at and tried has made any differences. The finding of vascular flow return isses on one side when upright when considered with the disc bulge interests me IMMENSELY. ;)

Dr F do you know who and where these normals came from?

" The High Percentage of “Normal” Examinees That Did Not Qualify as Normal
Another unexpected finding was the high percentage of “normal” adults that did not qualify
as normal. It was found that a large percentage of normal examinees (as high as 75%)
did not qualify as normal with respect to their cervical spine anatomy, e.g., exhibiting localized
disc herniations (or significant bulges) at C5/6 or elsewhere, or localized interruptions
of CSF flow

There is no further explanation of what a "normal" is in the paper, but speculate all you want. if 75% of a group considered normal exhibit the same anatomy of what you are saying is abnormal, then you haven't discovered anything that is unique to the group you are studying and can't claim that it accounts for anything."

ps hope the Rabbit didn't die ..................... ;)

User avatar
uprightdoc
Family Elder
Posts: 1995
Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 2:00 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: CCSVI and CCVBP

Post by uprightdoc » Mon Mar 28, 2016 2:19 pm

mdju93 wrote:... I don't really know what to make of the conflicting MRI and x-ray results. I thought the scoliosis looked a bit better with the spine less compressed in the post atlas adjustment frontal x-ray so perhaps it was effected for a short while but then reverted back to its prior state, although all follow up checks indicated that the adjustment had held, so again I'm not sure what to make of that.

Is it possible to influence the MRI and X-ray results by changing postures slightly while the imaging is taking place to then give a false outcome?

I'd like to get some lower spine x-rays but at the moment it's proving difficult finding somebody that's prepared to carry them out since I don't have any back pain or in their eyes a "justifiable" reason given the radiation dosage. I'll keep searching though...
Hello Mark,

Upper cervical adjustments don't correct scoliosis and abnormal curvatures in the lower spine. Moreover, abnormal curvatures in the lower spine can cause chronic strains and misalignments in the upper cervical spine.

It is possible to influence curves in the lower spine as seen on x-ray and MRI to a certain degree by changing positioning but not enough to eliminate evidence of scoliosis. The difference isn't due to a false outcome. The images were taken in different ways for different reasons. Good upper cervical x-rays if done properly are better at determing misalignment of the upper cervical spine at this time.

The reason for x-rays of the lower spine, especially the lumbopelvic and pelvic spine, is to determine if you have a curvature in the lower spine, that may be contributing to a chronic strain of the upper cervical spine. A tilt in the foundation affects the roof.

User avatar
uprightdoc
Family Elder
Posts: 1995
Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 2:00 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: CCSVI and CCVBP

Post by uprightdoc » Tue Mar 29, 2016 1:54 pm

NZer1 wrote: ... do you know who and where these normals came from?

"...Another unexpected finding was the high percentage of “normal” adults that did not qualify
as normal. It was found that a large percentage of normal examinees (as high as 75%)
did not qualify as normal with respect to their cervical spine anatomy, e.g., exhibiting localized
disc herniations (or significant bulges) at C5/6 or elsewhere, or localized interruptions
of CSF flow."

There is no further explanation of what a "normal" is in the paper, but speculate all you want. if 75% of a group considered normal exhibit the same anatomy of what you are saying is abnormal, then you haven't discovered anything that is unique to the group you are studying and can't claim that it accounts for anything."
Nigel,

I don't know where the normals came from. The 75% normal people, however, didn't exhibit the same anatomy. Nothing was mentioned about their anatomy. They could have been male and female with very different anatomy. What the cohorts exhibited was high incidence of the same pathology. Pathology isn't normal. The study showed that so called "normal" people have a high incidence of degenerative conditions in the cervical spine. In certain cases, spondylosis (degeneration) and stenosis (narrowing of the spinal canal) can obstruct and decrease blood and CSF flow. Obstruction to blood and CSF flow in the spinal canal and cranial vault may play a causative or contributory role in neurodegenerative and neurological conditions of the brain and cord.

User avatar
NZer1
Family Elder
Posts: 1624
Joined: Thu Feb 18, 2010 3:00 pm
Location: Rotorua New Zealand

Re: CCSVI and CCVBP

Post by NZer1 » Tue Mar 29, 2016 3:24 pm

Thanks Dr.

This is very important for my situation and to get a GP or Specialist of any kind to read this is going to be a challenge, especially if they take time to assess the paper and compare my disc bilges with the insight that CSF flow is potentially an issue for people with lesions in the CNS.

The comment that 'normals' were considered has a huge impact on the content of the paper. Not saying how the normals were became a consideration, who they were, and even what normal means, such as with MS but no disc bulge or not with MS and disc bulge, and especially any link to MS.

Dr F do you have access to Dr Damadian to clarify this? Or Dr Rosa having any insights?

Thanks,
Nigel

User avatar
NZer1
Family Elder
Posts: 1624
Joined: Thu Feb 18, 2010 3:00 pm
Location: Rotorua New Zealand

Re: CCSVI and CCVBP

Post by NZer1 » Tue Mar 29, 2016 3:45 pm

Hi Dr,
I need to add more about my thinking.

My situation as I understand it is that a lumbar punch done about 9 years ago showed a breach of BBB had occurred and at the same time an MRI showed a disc bulge and disc degeneration, but no lesions at that time. When these things occurred is a lottery but it opens the mind to thinking about the Damadian paper from the point of view because something like 2 years later lesions were found on brain and cord at C2. The disc bulge could have been from a rugby injury about 25-30 years earlier or other more recent injuries through life.

If the CSF is challenged for flow and the lesions were caused by blood reflux or by CSF reflux then the CSF flow is twice as important from the flushing aspect of the breach and immune action in the healing process of any damage from the breach, plus if there is decreased blood flow across the brain anyway which the doppler tests (Paul Thibault) found of my neck then as a package it is food for thought that I have disability, mobility, vision, cognitive issues and sensory problems.

The Neuros that have reviewed my MRI's and symptom lists over time are challenged to label me as PwMS, they have, but I think it was to shut me up from asking so many questions about the relevance of each finding and clinical test. The more I ask the shaky the defining process of ANY PwMS, imo.

So I am wanting to learn more about the Damadian paper as it appears to be very important/pivotal in planning what next eg is treatment a reality?

Regards,
Nigel ;)

User avatar
Robnl
Family Elder
Posts: 668
Joined: Sun Nov 08, 2009 3:00 pm
Contact:

Re: CCSVI and CCVBP

Post by Robnl » Tue Mar 29, 2016 10:35 pm

Hi doc and Nigel,

Doc, do i see similarities between Nigel and myself?

Nigel, my csf flow is ok, but dr harshfield mentioned that there is little flow in the straight sinus. Dont know the impact of that...
My c0, c1 and c2 are not straight, axial and sideways there is a twist. I'm trying to get this corrected, probably via Blair technique.

Regards,

Robert

User avatar
uprightdoc
Family Elder
Posts: 1995
Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 2:00 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: CCSVI and CCVBP

Post by uprightdoc » Wed Mar 30, 2016 10:52 am

Nigel,

The fact that you had a rugby injury and now have a lesion at C2, a degenerated disc in your lower cervial spine and possible MS requires further investigation. The type of trauma to the head and neck is relevant. Was it a blow to the head or a whiplash type injury? Was it a neck flexion strain? Did you lose consciousness? The lesion in your neck may not be the fault of obstructed CSF flow. You may have sustained a condition called a "stinger" (neurapraxia) resulting in temporary loss of circulation to the area of the cord involved and possibly some permanent damage.

User avatar
uprightdoc
Family Elder
Posts: 1995
Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 2:00 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: CCSVI and CCVBP

Post by uprightdoc » Wed Mar 30, 2016 11:00 am

Robert,

The straight sinus drains the core of the brain. The straight sinus joins with the superior sagittal sinus and transverse sinuses at the sinus confluens (torcula). The transverse sinuses drain into the sigmoid sinuses which then drain into the internal jugular veins. Decreased flow in the straight sinus suggests possible compression of the sinus or increased venous pressure in the transverse sinuses resisting outflow from the straight sinus. You definitely have compression the epidural vertebral veins in your lower cervical spine in which the Modic degenration, spondylosis and spurs are contacting the cord.

User avatar
NZer1
Family Elder
Posts: 1624
Joined: Thu Feb 18, 2010 3:00 pm
Location: Rotorua New Zealand

Re: CCSVI and CCVBP

Post by NZer1 » Wed Mar 30, 2016 12:43 pm

Morning all,
Dr F the neck injury was from a collapsed scrum and the injury was from having my neck forced forward and down with the weight from behind and in front of me. I remained conscious but was in pain and frightened to move. The Ambulance staff at the game assumed broken neck so I was laid out flat on a door and taken to hospital, checked over and released after they had thoroughly checked me over, no xrays though. Since then I have had neck problems with alignment and muscular strain issues plus lower back problems and what was said to be a slipped disc at L4-5 many years later from Jet boat driving and the thumping in a fixed seat. Other strains from lifting during Life.
The onset of the MS tingling was after another lifting injury where I was lifting flooring beams, I my mind carefully but they were very heavy and the lifts were incremental and using blocks as steps so to say to lift in stages. Some months later the torn rotators and alignment was found and the foot tingling started during treatment for neck alignment and rotator cuff exercise routine training. The lesions on brain and spine weren't found for aprox 2 years after a second MRI. The C2 cord lesion appeared then 2 years later was not seen.

So the cord lesion is an unknown but there are at 4-6 brain lesions that remain and haven't changed.
The disc bulge was seen from the first MRI and hasn't changed. When that began or occurred is unknown of course.

The way forward in respect of getting a Specialist to understand this Damadian insight balances on the paper he wrote and who the normals are. If that can't be clarified then I doubt I can get a Specialist or GP interested and have more tests.

One other point is that the lumber punch that was done about 1 year or 18 months after the foot symptoms began I had an MRI with the Neuro commenting that a breach had occurred and the opening pressure was 17mm H2O. My reading tells me that 17mm is on the high side and possibly NPH range.

If there is high CSF pressure then I assume that CSF flow is an important aspect and the lesions may be from many issues, such as hydraulicing or pulsation due to vascular issues.

The findings of slow vascualar flow by Paul Thibault in the upright position also add to the whole picture.

Very easy for me to assume and assume some more.

The key point as I said before is clarifying the paper by Damadian and if Dr Rosa was able to help find answers that would be fantastic.

Regards,
Nigel

User avatar
NZer1
Family Elder
Posts: 1624
Joined: Thu Feb 18, 2010 3:00 pm
Location: Rotorua New Zealand

Re: CCSVI and CCVBP

Post by NZer1 » Wed Mar 30, 2016 2:03 pm

Hi,
Dr F are you able to ask Dr Rosa or Dr Damadian for me?

Regards,
Nigel

Post Reply
  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post