predictors of success

Cece · Post by **Cece** » Mon May 16, 2011 1:53 pm

CCSVI in Multiple Sclerosis <shortened url>

Don Ponec Efficacy of venoplasty in MS(our study)... He presented the Hubbard Institute data on 265 patients. Clinical improvement at 1 and 6 months after treatment were statistically significant at the p < 0.01 level. 36.1% were markedly improved ,40.5% improved, 13.9%unchanged,8.2 % worse 1.3%markedly worse. Level of disability, MS subcategories, age and gender were not predictors of success.

If all of those are not predictors of success, do we have anything left that could be?

I would've thought lower disability was easier to recover from and/or indicated less spinal cord damage, which is hard to recover from.

I would've thought MS subcategories made a difference, with RR having a bigger effect and SP and/or PP less so.

I would've thought age would've made a difference, with younger patients responding better.

But with all of those out, what's left? I'd have to double-check CureIous's notes, I think he also had # of CCSVI sites treated on the list from Ponec as not a predictor of success.

It's encouraging, really, because it means this procedure could help anyone without regard to EDSS level, MS subcategory or age; there's no way to know until you go for it.

1eye · Post by **1eye** » Mon May 16, 2011 3:20 pm

Perhaps the success of this procedure is not based on any current disease status to a great extent. Maybe it is a modification of circulatory functionality which in many cases has never have been approachable by any other means. We might want to think of it as a physical correction, like fixing a flat tire. If the tire can be fixed at all, it will not matter how long the hole has been there, or whether it is a slow leak or a blowout, once it is fixed.

That would give even more credence to the argument that unhealthy veins need to be treated as just that, and not as a competitor to some theory of neurological disease causation. If the veins can be made healthy, good things may follow.

MegansMom · Post by **MegansMom** » Tue May 17, 2011 4:57 am

I'll bet the more "severe" the blockages are correlates with the degree of disability and progressiveness of the disease course.

The more severe the blocks are ( regardless of the type) the worse the turbulence and the slower the emptying. Thus the more impaired perfusion to brain tissue. And over time the more brain injury.

Also the more blockage ( both in the number of them and the degree of flow interference)the more turbulence.

Turbulence causes a few things, it can cause red blood cells to fracture and the iron to be deposited and it can cause the endothelial wall to trigger production of things that regulate the endothelial function, such as endothelin1, angiotensin, etc.

In the beginning the IRs pretty much saw the most obvious anomalies and treated those. But now we are hearing that many have been missed. Of course not intentionally. But now the IRs are much more thorough and are learning from each other to search better.

The IRs have done are great job in sharing experiences and teaching each other. It can only get better over time.

Cece · Post by **Cece** » Tue May 17, 2011 7:42 am

MegansMom wrote:I'll bet the more "severe" the blockages are correlates with the degree of disability and progressiveness of the disease course.

Mine were 80% and 100%....

The hypoxia was killing me but I barely registered on the EDSS.

possibilities:
1) really bad disability was in my future
2) having severe congenital blockages prompts the body to make better collaterals during childhood
3) MS consists of an interplay between severity of CCSVI and neuroplasticity/neuroprotectiveness and reactivity of the immune system(this puts me with severe jugular CCSVI, but good neuroplasticity and not a particularly reactive immune system as evinced by the years between mild relapses)
4) stenoses in the azygous are more predictive of disabilty than stenoses in the jugulars (and I had no stenoses in the azygous)

I'd agree with you, Cat, except for my personal experience....

MegansMom · Post by **MegansMom** » Tue May 17, 2011 4:34 pm

The Jugulars are only maximally used when lying down (supine) so the vertibrals do most of he draining of the brain when upright, and the Azygos is used 24 /7.
so if you have A profound Azygos problem then this might put you in the worst outcome category.

I think that is key with the Azygos...If the Azygos is blocked severely .

I believe that Zamboni's attempted to quantify the blockages by scoring them this year.

Cece · Post by **Cece** » Tue May 17, 2011 5:16 pm

Oh, how interesting. Can't wait to read what he does for scoring.

jacksonsmommy · Post by **jacksonsmommy** » Thu May 19, 2011 4:25 pm

Spinal lesions vs no spinal lesions??

I had no spinal lesions and I got great results....