Though I have a personal reason for asking, I'm mostly interested in the medical/scientific statistical outcome of repeating the procedure after initial failure, so I'm putting this in this forum.
The idea of nerve ablation makes sense. If there's intense chronic nerve pain (which I have from cancer), you test by numbing the nerve(s) with an anesthetic, then if the pain goes away, you damage those nerves long-term by burning them with radiofrequency waves (not sure how that works) so they take 6 months or a year to heal, and you're meanwhile pain free. Apparently just cutting the nerves isn't good, because doctors discovered that can lead to phantom nerve pain like an amputation, so long-term damage is the better choice. When the nerves finally heal, the procedure can be repeated for more relief.
So I had three intercostal nerves tested with temporary anesthesia, and 90% of my pain disappeared instantly for 18 hours. Perfect test.
Then I had the radio frequency ablation done, and the pain actually got slightly worse and has stayed that way for three weeks. There's a weird sort of semi-numbness in the area, as if something happened, but the pain is still intense.
Originally, the doctor said it might take 3-4 weeks for the nerves to die but I should see gradual improvement. I had none and it's 3 weeks plus a day. Now I'm having trouble getting answers from the doctor, though he has hinted that they may need to repeat the procedure.
I'm trying to figure out what usually happens, statistically, when the procedure doesn't work as expected the first time, so I can make an informed decision how to proceed. Do most people who have the same procedure find it works the second time? Or does it tend to fail again? If it fails once, do people need a stronger (different) procedure before it works on them?
My googlefu of scientific papers has failed. All I can find online are anecdotal reports from people on forums, and I can't even get my doctor to give insight from his 30 years experience. I'd just like some statistical insight, as far as the overall odds of success for repeating the exact same procedure after an initial failure, using a different procedure, etc.
The idea of nerve ablation makes sense. If there's intense chronic nerve pain (which I have from cancer), you test by numbing the nerve(s) with an anesthetic, then if the pain goes away, you damage those nerves long-term by burning them with radiofrequency waves (not sure how that works) so they take 6 months or a year to heal, and you're meanwhile pain free. Apparently just cutting the nerves isn't good, because doctors discovered that can lead to phantom nerve pain like an amputation, so long-term damage is the better choice. When the nerves finally heal, the procedure can be repeated for more relief.
So I had three intercostal nerves tested with temporary anesthesia, and 90% of my pain disappeared instantly for 18 hours. Perfect test.
Then I had the radio frequency ablation done, and the pain actually got slightly worse and has stayed that way for three weeks. There's a weird sort of semi-numbness in the area, as if something happened, but the pain is still intense.
Originally, the doctor said it might take 3-4 weeks for the nerves to die but I should see gradual improvement. I had none and it's 3 weeks plus a day. Now I'm having trouble getting answers from the doctor, though he has hinted that they may need to repeat the procedure.
I'm trying to figure out what usually happens, statistically, when the procedure doesn't work as expected the first time, so I can make an informed decision how to proceed. Do most people who have the same procedure find it works the second time? Or does it tend to fail again? If it fails once, do people need a stronger (different) procedure before it works on them?
My googlefu of scientific papers has failed. All I can find online are anecdotal reports from people on forums, and I can't even get my doctor to give insight from his 30 years experience. I'd just like some statistical insight, as far as the overall odds of success for repeating the exact same procedure after an initial failure, using a different procedure, etc.
via International Skeptics Forum http://ift.tt/1vxl4iZ
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire