Re: DrSclafani answers some questions
Posted: Sun Sep 25, 2011 1:57 am
B+ to FHappyPoet wrote:Thank you, Cece.
Okay, I'll stick with my original answer (second-guessing myself is second-nature to me).
Welcome to This is MS, the leading forum for Multiple Sclerosis research and support. Join our friendly community of patients, caregivers, and researchers celebrating over 20 years of delivering hope through knowledge.
https://www.thisisms.com/forum/
B+ to FHappyPoet wrote:Thank you, Cece.
Okay, I'll stick with my original answer (second-guessing myself is second-nature to me).
F to B+HappyPoet wrote:The more I think about this case and look at this image, the more questions I have about my original answer...
My original answer doesn't explain why an IR would use a machine with that exact 'dark vertical line' problem being right where the R-IJV would be? I don't think an IR would use such a defective machine for the purpose of investigating the R-IJV. So this would mean that Pam's and Cece's original answers are correct, that the catheter traversed the sinuses which would mean that the wire did go through the heart and SVC which must be lower than this image shows? So if the 'dark vertical line" really is a catheter, I'm surprised at how stiff and straight it appears in this image... "peculiar" is the right word, Cece.
My original answer also doesn't explain the absence of the guidewire below the uninflated balloon in the L-IJV which means the balloon had to have been threaded down from the sinuses, correct? Where else could the wire and balloon have come from? Unless the wire broke at the bottom of the balloon after it had been threaded up high in the L-IJV or even into the dural sinuses?
Cece, what say you?
Yespelopidas wrote:..is it inside the patient' s body?
It would be great to get the IVUS probe to do that but it often is not possible to get the probe to go up one jugular canal and down the other side.CD wrote:I think the L IJV had a lower blockage, perhaps at the junction, so this was the only way to enter the L IJV was by going up the R IJV then across and down to the L IJV to clear a blockage that way. JMO
The dye was not released, so maybe IVUS was looking around the L IJV first.
What say you teacher?
Perhaps due to a completely blocked and impenetrable LIJV that was inaccessible from the proximal side (taking proximal to mean from the heart side)?drsclafani wrote:Correct. Why would i do that?pklittle wrote:The catheter advanced through the sheath, up the right jugular, across the transverse sinus, and down the left jugular?
Lest the CCSVI world now spread a story that DrSclafani uses the Liberation Procedure as a recreational tool, let me end the rumor that the procedure room in Brooklyn, New York is my personal Disneyworld. I love m y work, but it ain't a game.MarkW wrote:HappyPoet wrote: I am not comfortable with the idea of having anything in my dural sinuses if my dural sinuses cannot be visualized the entire time. Period.
DrS accessed my dural sinuses in June 2011. A little painful at the time but no after affects. Depends if you want a full diagnosis or not and approach to risk, personal choice.
To answer DrS's 'why would I do that ?' Do you suspect a web and this is to help diagnosis ?
Of course it could be to develop your skills/because you can/because its fun.............
MarkW
correctomundo!NHE wrote:Perhaps due to a completely blocked and impenetrable LIJV that was inaccessible from the proximal side (taking proximal to mean from the heart side)?drsclafani wrote:Correct. Why would i do that?pklittle wrote:The catheter advanced through the sheath, up the right jugular, across the transverse sinus, and down the left jugular?
NHE
MarkMarkW wrote:DrS,
I am sorry about my post:
"Of course it could be to develop your skills/because you can/because its fun............"
I travelled from Oxford, England to Brooklyn, New York because you are cautious in your diagnostic and treatment methods for CCSVI syndrome. I trust the patient mentioned is happy that you detected two occlusions, which most IRs would have missed.
MarkW
correctomundo!NHE wrote:Perhaps due to a completely blocked and impenetrable LIJV that was inaccessible from the proximal side (taking proximal to mean from the heart side)?drsclafani wrote:Correct. Why would i do that?pklittle wrote:The catheter advanced through the sheath, up the right jugular, across the transverse sinus, and down the left jugular?
NHE
If the thrombus was just one week old and it was caught, what options were there at that time?drsclafani wrote:
these are images of the two venograms performed in January. The initial study is on the left three panels and shows an angioplasty of a lesion that is not well seen. A week later there is extensive thrombus in the LIJV.
1. anticoagulationCece wrote:If the thrombus was just one week old and it was caught, what options were there at that time?drsclafani wrote:
these are images of the two venograms performed in January. The initial study is on the left three panels and shows an angioplasty of a lesion that is not well seen. A week later there is extensive thrombus in the LIJV.