Conclusion and recommendations
“Based on these extensive, scientifically solid data
obtained from investigators outside of Ferrara, we see no rationale to support
CCSVI as a key pathogenetic factor in MS. Furthermore an ongoing large
multi-center Italian epidemiological study recruiting more than 1000 MS
patients and about 1000 healthy controls and patients with other neurodegenerative
diseases, promoted by the Italian Foundation of Multiple Sclerosis and endorsed
by the Italian Society of Neurology will greatly augment our scientific
knowledge about the relationship between CCSVI and MS. There is the theoretical
possibility that the venous drainage of autoimmune lymphocytes from the brain
may cause some endothelial changes during the longstanding disease course of MS,
maybe in combination with immunosuppressive therapies. Yet even if this were
the case, this is insufficient to justify invasive, costly and potentially
dangerous manipulations of the deep cervical venous system in MS patients. Therefore,
both the EFNS and the ENS Multiple Sclerosis Scientist Panel and ECTRIMS Executive
Committee emphasize the high risk and absence of a scientific basis for “liberation
procedures” in MS patients. All societies are in full accord with the Multiple
Sclerosis International Federation statement on CCSVI (http://www.msif.org/en/research/msif_on_ccsvi.html)”.
obtained from investigators outside of Ferrara, we see no rationale to support
CCSVI as a key pathogenetic factor in MS. Furthermore an ongoing large
multi-center Italian epidemiological study recruiting more than 1000 MS
patients and about 1000 healthy controls and patients with other neurodegenerative
diseases, promoted by the Italian Foundation of Multiple Sclerosis and endorsed
by the Italian Society of Neurology will greatly augment our scientific
knowledge about the relationship between CCSVI and MS. There is the theoretical
possibility that the venous drainage of autoimmune lymphocytes from the brain
may cause some endothelial changes during the longstanding disease course of MS,
maybe in combination with immunosuppressive therapies. Yet even if this were
the case, this is insufficient to justify invasive, costly and potentially
dangerous manipulations of the deep cervical venous system in MS patients. Therefore,
both the EFNS and the ENS Multiple Sclerosis Scientist Panel and ECTRIMS Executive
Committee emphasize the high risk and absence of a scientific basis for “liberation
procedures” in MS patients. All societies are in full accord with the Multiple
Sclerosis International Federation statement on CCSVI (http://www.msif.org/en/research/msif_on_ccsvi.html)”.