Moreover, the absence of Doppler and venographic features of CCSVI in controls suggests that venous obstructions may be causative of MS rather than a coincidental finding.
Interestingly, similar venous stenoses considered to be congenital
malformations have been described in other human diseases, i.e.,
membranous obstruction of the inferior vena cava and a minor group of
chronic venous diseases of the lower limbs.27-28 Such venous obstruction
brings about an insufficient venous drainage, respectively at the level of the liver and of the cutaneous tissue, subsequently causing inflammation,
sclerosis, and degenerative lesions.24-25,36 In contrast with the malformation hypothesis, cases have been reported of white cell infiltration and endophlebohypertrophy in venous valves where
endocarditis is present.37
Even though this correlation has never been studied in MS, reports of
valvulitis in the course of significant inflammatory disease should certainly be taken into consideration since they support the hypothesis that these
malformations are a result of CDMS rather than a cause. However, if vessel abnormalities were due to an inflammatory-autoimmune disease, they would be less frequent in patients treated with immunomodulating/immunosuppressant agents. On the contrary, our analysis in the RR-SP group did not demonstrate an increased number of extracranial venous stenosing lesions in untreated as compared to treated patients.
Dr. Calebresi may be a nice guy, but he didn't read the conclusion thoroughly. Here is the conclusion. Let's read it for ourselves. Zamboni does not agree with your doctor, Marc. On the contrary, he make the point that if the demyelinating lesions were creating the venous obstructions, those patients on immune modulating medicine would NOT have as many stenoses. (Their inflammation and lesions would, having been dampened, create less venous obstruction.) BUT, the opposite is true. Venous obstruction was found in only MS patients, no matter how they were being treated.
Neuros will not consider this as causative. Pure and simple. It creates cognitive dissonance (Thanks for that, Marie) It goes against all they have been taught and learned.
Vascular doctors get this. The head of Stanford (also a nice guy) is excited to look for this. He understands how venous disease has affected his heart and liver patients. Vascular doctors have seem the damage to internal organs wrought by venous varix, stenosis and reflux. I agree, more research needs to be done. My hubby is a willing guinea pig. Anyone else? Arguing the validity of this research on the web will only get us so far.