Studies dismiss narrowed neck veins as cause of MS - Macleans.ca
 

Studies dismiss narrowed neck veins as cause of MS

New research calls into question “breakthrough” treatment for multiple sclerosis


 

A handful of new studies are suggesting narrowed neck veins—a condition called chronic cerebrospinal venous insufficiency, or CCSVI—are not the primary cause of multiple sclerosis, the Canadian Press is reporting. This condition has been a focus after Italian Dr. Paolo Zamboni theorized it could be behind MS, suggesting that reduced blood flow leaves iron deposits in the brain and leads to neural lesions that characterize MS. Zamboni has tried reversing the condition by unblocking neck veins using balloon angioplasty to relieve symptoms, a treatment that many Canadians have sought abroad since it isn’t available here. One new U.S. study took Doppler ultrasounds of 499 subjects, and found the prevalence of CCSVI was 56 per cent for patients with MS, 42 for those with other neurologic diseases, and 23 per cent in healthy controls, which suggest it isn’t a primary cause of MS. Other, smaller studies have also been presented, including one from a Calgary resaercher looking at 67 people who underwent magnetic resonance venography of neck veins and found vein abnormalities of 20 per cent of people with MS, and 20 per cent of those without.

Canadian Press


 
Filed under:

Studies dismiss narrowed neck veins as cause of MS

  1. Allot of desperate people are spending serious money on a procedure that has not been proven. The clinics that perform the procedures are rushing to cash in before they get shut down.

  2. Allot of desperate people are spending serious money on a procedure that has not been proven. The clinics that perform the procedures are rushing to cash in before they get shut down.

  3. I look forward to a little analysis from Mr. Cosh on this.

  4. I look forward to a little analysis from Mr. Cosh on this.

  5. The revelation of CCSVI as not causing MS if correct is a sad turn. However, it does not mean that CCSVI is not a result of the disease itself. IT is clearly one of the symptoms that help to exacerbate the comfort and well being of those afflicted with MS, We do angioplasty on other arteries to relieve the symptom of angina. I would argue strongly that the problems of neck blockages in veins is a serious factor and should be fully covered by health system. Different provinces are using studies like this to deny suffers relief and that is dead wrong. It is mean and callous on our so called caring society. I for one, call for an immediate end to this practice of denial.

  6. The revelation of CCSVI as not causing MS if correct is a sad turn. However, it does not mean that CCSVI is not a result of the disease itself. IT is clearly one of the symptoms that help to exacerbate the comfort and well being of those afflicted with MS, We do angioplasty on other arteries to relieve the symptom of angina. I would argue strongly that the problems of neck blockages in veins is a serious factor and should be fully covered by health system. Different provinces are using studies like this to deny suffers relief and that is dead wrong. It is mean and callous on our so called caring society. I for one, call for an immediate end to this practice of denial.

    • There is no scientific evidence that "CCSVI" however defined as any relation to symptoms of MS. There are only unscientific anecdotal reports of instantaneous improvement in symptoms when hope is engendered in exactly the same way as classical faith healing with faith in Jesus, etc. See video below. Except in very rare situations, angioplasty of veins is never indicated. Unlike arteries, there are so many different pathways for venous drainage from most organs, including the brain, that it is useless to dilate one of them. No MS patient is being denied any scientifically proven beneficial treatment.

      [youtube UJfKaGTtvmg http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UJfKaGTtvmg youtube]

  7. There is no scientific evidence that "CCSVI" however defined as any relation to symptoms of MS. There are only unscientific anecdotal reports of instantaneous improvement in symptoms when hope is engendered in exactly the same way as classical faith healing with faith in Jesus, etc. See video below. Except in very rare situations, angioplasty of veins is never indicated. Unlike arteries, there are so many different pathways for venous drainage from most organs, including the brain, that it is useless to dilate one of them. No MS patient is being denied any scientifically proven beneficial treatment.

    [youtube UJfKaGTtvmg http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UJfKaGTtvmg youtube]

  8. My wife had the CCSVI venoplasty procedure 6 months ago. Almost all of her MS symptoms have disappeared.

  9. My wife had the CCSVI venoplasty procedure 6 months ago. Almost all of her MS symptoms have disappeared.

  10. Which symptoms have improved?

  11. Colin Rose, I really don't understand your arguments here. While it may be proven that CCSVI is not a cause of MS, it can still be a valid treatment to alleviate symptoms. It is no different than doing surgery on patients that is not curative but designed to relieve symptoms. As for anecdotal reports being unscientific and therefore invalid, I must point out to you that physicians doing research have long depended on anecdotal reports from participants. How otherwise can you measure a patient's level of pain or feelings of nausea…and in psychiatry, don't we have to depend on the patients to tell us if they are hearing voices or feeling depressed.

  12. Colin Rose, I really don't understand your arguments here. While it may be proven that CCSVI is not a cause of MS, it can still be a valid treatment to alleviate symptoms. It is no different than doing surgery on patients that is not curative but designed to relieve symptoms. As for anecdotal reports being unscientific and therefore invalid, I must point out to you that physicians doing research have long depended on anecdotal reports from participants. How otherwise can you measure a patient's level of pain or feelings of nausea…and in psychiatry, don't we have to depend on the patients to tell us if they are hearing voices or feeling depressed.

    • Great reply. Some people like to wag their heads…………. if it reduces ONE sympton – it makes no difference if it was the cause of my MS, or cure for my MS. What it would mean is that I am a happier person minus some of the HELL that I have every day. 2% is better than zero percent. And, it is much higher in those who can now walk that couldn't before. I was found not to have clogged arteries. Clogged arteries can lead to stroke, so I would just as soon have them cleared. Whether it affect the MS or not. Unfortunately, I had nothing to unclog, so it did not have a bearing on my situation..

    • As I pointed out above, faith in Jesus, etc. can relieve symptoms. Why bother taking the risk of an invasive procedure? But if one is going to prove that a medical treatment does anything useful, one has to do a carefully blinded, controlled trial. Until such a trial demonstrates an acceptable risk/benefit ratio, it is highly unethical and contrary to the Hippocratic oath for any doctor to perform such a procedure. In the case of "CCSVI" and "liberation", one first has to prove that "CCSVI" even exists. So far every independent, well-blinded study has failed to find any evidence of Zamboni's "CCSVI".

  13. Great reply. Some people like to wag their heads…………. if it reduces ONE sympton – it makes no difference if it was the cause of my MS, or cure for my MS. What it would mean is that I am a happier person minus some of the HELL that I have every day. 2% is better than zero percent. And, it is much higher in those who can now walk that couldn't before. I was found not to have clogged arteries. Clogged arteries can lead to stroke, so I would just as soon have them cleared. Whether it affect the MS or not. Unfortunately, I had nothing to unclog, so it did not have a bearing on my situation..

  14. As I pointed out above, faith in Jesus, etc. can relieve symptoms. Why bother taking the risk of an invasive procedure? But if one is going to prove that a medical treatment does anything useful, one has to do a carefully blinded, controlled trial. Until such a trial demonstrates an acceptable risk/benefit ratio, it is highly unethical and contrary to the Hippocratic oath for any doctor to perform such a procedure. In the case of "CCSVI" and "liberation", one first has to prove that "CCSVI" even exists. So far every independent, well-blinded study has failed to find any evidence of Zamboni's "CCSVI".