Guest guest Posted July 28, 2004 Report Share Posted July 28, 2004 In a message dated 7/27/04 9:15:39 PM Eastern Daylight Time, susanr20z03@... writes: > Rich, let me try agian to reply---I agree with you, but your Ep was > obviously no slouch either! > > , I for one appreciate your insights and thoughts. Thanks for stirring the pot! Good job. Rich O Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 28, 2004 Report Share Posted July 28, 2004 In a message dated 7/27/04 9:15:39 PM Eastern Daylight Time, susanr20z03@... writes: > Rich, let me try agian to reply---I agree with you, but your Ep was > obviously no slouch either! > > , I for one appreciate your insights and thoughts. Thanks for stirring the pot! Good job. Rich O Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 28, 2004 Report Share Posted July 28, 2004 > ......................... > I've told by every EP I've seen that success is defined > as " maintaining a NSR six months after the procedure without the use > of anti arrhythmic drugs. > > P <MI> > That's great it there's some consistency out there, research articles appear to have quite a variation. Some consider meds that work post procedure that didn't pre-procedure a success too e.g. http://www.pulsus.com/ccc2003/abs/a668.htm Perhaps we should make sure we ask the EPs what their numbers are for both procedural and clinical success rates? -- D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 28, 2004 Report Share Posted July 28, 2004 > ......................... > I've told by every EP I've seen that success is defined > as " maintaining a NSR six months after the procedure without the use > of anti arrhythmic drugs. > > P <MI> > That's great it there's some consistency out there, research articles appear to have quite a variation. Some consider meds that work post procedure that didn't pre-procedure a success too e.g. http://www.pulsus.com/ccc2003/abs/a668.htm Perhaps we should make sure we ask the EPs what their numbers are for both procedural and clinical success rates? -- D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 28, 2004 Report Share Posted July 28, 2004 > ......................... > I've told by every EP I've seen that success is defined > as " maintaining a NSR six months after the procedure without the use > of anti arrhythmic drugs. > > P <MI> > That's great it there's some consistency out there, research articles appear to have quite a variation. Some consider meds that work post procedure that didn't pre-procedure a success too e.g. http://www.pulsus.com/ccc2003/abs/a668.htm Perhaps we should make sure we ask the EPs what their numbers are for both procedural and clinical success rates? -- D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 28, 2004 Report Share Posted July 28, 2004 #1] <<<<and good as he is I'm still suspicious that he's got such a high rate because he doesn't take on high-risk cases.>>>> Kathleen ...................................... ...................................... #2]In a message dated 7/27/2004 6:58:04 PM Eastern Standard Time, james@d... writes: <<<<Also, why do most others EP's report significantly lower rates of " success " , " cures " than Dr. Natale?- I have never been able to figure this out--He is certainly very talented but the ablation procedure and equipment are also being used by other very talented Eps also-Statistics can be manipulated to show anything and I have never been ableto medically understand the diffference in Dr. Natales rates and others->>>> ...................................... ...................................... Let me start by saying I'm not defending Natale or any other EP. And I'm not endorsing any one of them. As a matter a fact I'm not even sure where I'll have my future ablation done...but the CC and Natale are definitely one of my choices. Right now I'm just hoping the poison Amiodorone will buy me some time and keep me in NSR without killing me. Secondly, Natale's numbers are not all that different from other experienced EP's. As a matter of fact they are all quite close. If there was that much difference I wouldn't have used the phrase " the CC and Natale are definitely one of my choices " According to a couple of top EP's I've talked to the best guy is Dr. Papone in Italy who claims to have an 90% success rate on the first try. How does a two week vacation in Italy sound? My wife didn't buy it either...... Now I'm sure numbers are sometimes skewed in the medical profession. I keep remembering what my GP told me: " Medicine is a business " and what my EP told me: " There's a lot of hype in the EP field right now " But I really believe that playing with the numbers is not SOP. And definitely the exception not the rule. OK, with that said, here goes: I don't know if I'm considered high risk or not but this is exactly what Natale told me: #1) He has an " 80% success rate " #2) He's had no fatalities. 2% chance of stroke. 1% chance of PV stenosis. <basically the same numbers as I got from other EP's> #3) He said " depending on how much scarring I have inside my heart from my previous heart bypass surgeries that it would also determine the success rate. " It could be only " 50% " depending on that factor and he wouldn't know until he goes inside and takes a look. The other EP's I've seen did not mention that little fact. Now I'm pretty sure if he wanted to skew his numbers he sure wouldn't want me as a patient with a possibility of only a 50% chance of success. Wouldn't you agree? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 28, 2004 Report Share Posted July 28, 2004 #1] <<<<and good as he is I'm still suspicious that he's got such a high rate because he doesn't take on high-risk cases.>>>> Kathleen ...................................... ...................................... #2]In a message dated 7/27/2004 6:58:04 PM Eastern Standard Time, james@d... writes: <<<<Also, why do most others EP's report significantly lower rates of " success " , " cures " than Dr. Natale?- I have never been able to figure this out--He is certainly very talented but the ablation procedure and equipment are also being used by other very talented Eps also-Statistics can be manipulated to show anything and I have never been ableto medically understand the diffference in Dr. Natales rates and others->>>> ...................................... ...................................... Let me start by saying I'm not defending Natale or any other EP. And I'm not endorsing any one of them. As a matter a fact I'm not even sure where I'll have my future ablation done...but the CC and Natale are definitely one of my choices. Right now I'm just hoping the poison Amiodorone will buy me some time and keep me in NSR without killing me. Secondly, Natale's numbers are not all that different from other experienced EP's. As a matter of fact they are all quite close. If there was that much difference I wouldn't have used the phrase " the CC and Natale are definitely one of my choices " According to a couple of top EP's I've talked to the best guy is Dr. Papone in Italy who claims to have an 90% success rate on the first try. How does a two week vacation in Italy sound? My wife didn't buy it either...... Now I'm sure numbers are sometimes skewed in the medical profession. I keep remembering what my GP told me: " Medicine is a business " and what my EP told me: " There's a lot of hype in the EP field right now " But I really believe that playing with the numbers is not SOP. And definitely the exception not the rule. OK, with that said, here goes: I don't know if I'm considered high risk or not but this is exactly what Natale told me: #1) He has an " 80% success rate " #2) He's had no fatalities. 2% chance of stroke. 1% chance of PV stenosis. <basically the same numbers as I got from other EP's> #3) He said " depending on how much scarring I have inside my heart from my previous heart bypass surgeries that it would also determine the success rate. " It could be only " 50% " depending on that factor and he wouldn't know until he goes inside and takes a look. The other EP's I've seen did not mention that little fact. Now I'm pretty sure if he wanted to skew his numbers he sure wouldn't want me as a patient with a possibility of only a 50% chance of success. Wouldn't you agree? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 28, 2004 Report Share Posted July 28, 2004 #1] <<<<and good as he is I'm still suspicious that he's got such a high rate because he doesn't take on high-risk cases.>>>> Kathleen ...................................... ...................................... #2]In a message dated 7/27/2004 6:58:04 PM Eastern Standard Time, james@d... writes: <<<<Also, why do most others EP's report significantly lower rates of " success " , " cures " than Dr. Natale?- I have never been able to figure this out--He is certainly very talented but the ablation procedure and equipment are also being used by other very talented Eps also-Statistics can be manipulated to show anything and I have never been ableto medically understand the diffference in Dr. Natales rates and others->>>> ...................................... ...................................... Let me start by saying I'm not defending Natale or any other EP. And I'm not endorsing any one of them. As a matter a fact I'm not even sure where I'll have my future ablation done...but the CC and Natale are definitely one of my choices. Right now I'm just hoping the poison Amiodorone will buy me some time and keep me in NSR without killing me. Secondly, Natale's numbers are not all that different from other experienced EP's. As a matter of fact they are all quite close. If there was that much difference I wouldn't have used the phrase " the CC and Natale are definitely one of my choices " According to a couple of top EP's I've talked to the best guy is Dr. Papone in Italy who claims to have an 90% success rate on the first try. How does a two week vacation in Italy sound? My wife didn't buy it either...... Now I'm sure numbers are sometimes skewed in the medical profession. I keep remembering what my GP told me: " Medicine is a business " and what my EP told me: " There's a lot of hype in the EP field right now " But I really believe that playing with the numbers is not SOP. And definitely the exception not the rule. OK, with that said, here goes: I don't know if I'm considered high risk or not but this is exactly what Natale told me: #1) He has an " 80% success rate " #2) He's had no fatalities. 2% chance of stroke. 1% chance of PV stenosis. <basically the same numbers as I got from other EP's> #3) He said " depending on how much scarring I have inside my heart from my previous heart bypass surgeries that it would also determine the success rate. " It could be only " 50% " depending on that factor and he wouldn't know until he goes inside and takes a look. The other EP's I've seen did not mention that little fact. Now I'm pretty sure if he wanted to skew his numbers he sure wouldn't want me as a patient with a possibility of only a 50% chance of success. Wouldn't you agree? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 28, 2004 Report Share Posted July 28, 2004 Sorry D....I my previous post I erroneously attributed a quote by " jerrynmn1 " to you. Sorry. P <MI> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 28, 2004 Report Share Posted July 28, 2004 Sorry D....I my previous post I erroneously attributed a quote by " jerrynmn1 " to you. Sorry. P <MI> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 28, 2004 Report Share Posted July 28, 2004 Sorry D....I my previous post I erroneously attributed a quote by " jerrynmn1 " to you. Sorry. P <MI> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 28, 2004 Report Share Posted July 28, 2004 Natale is sounding better all the time. I'm glad I asked the question, and I hope others are benefitting from the very thoughtful analyses being posted by this board's members. I really liked to hear from the higher-risk folks about what Natale told them. Thanks, all. Kathleen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 29, 2004 Report Share Posted July 29, 2004 TO Kat in OH, Just one clarification. Chronic is a LOT different from persistent, they're not the same at all. In chronic, there is no in and out, no surprises, you're just in AF all the time, and as long as the overall rate is kept low with beta-blockers or Calcium channel blockers, you go about your life almost normally, save for some energy drop. You don't " feel " AF at all. I have always felt lucky to be chronic rather than in and out, have lived well with chronic for 15 months now. All the best. Kathleen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 29, 2004 Report Share Posted July 29, 2004 > TO Kat in OH, > > Just one clarification. Chronic is a LOT different from persistent, they're not the > same at all. In chronic, there is no in and out, no surprises, you're just in AF all > the time, and as long as the overall rate is kept low with beta- blockers or > Calcium channel blockers, you go about your life almost normally, save for > some energy drop. You don't " feel " AF at all. I have always felt lucky to be > chronic rather than in and out, have lived well with chronic for 15 months now. > All the best. Kathleen Now I'm confused...! I thought afib that does not respond to treatment of any kind and lasts unabated for a period of time, is chronic *or* persistent and Afib that comes and goes, in and out, over any period of time is intermittent or occasional. From m-w.com: chronic: marked by long duration or frequent recurrence persistent: existing for a long or longer than usual time or continuously intermittent: coming and going at intervals Either way, I've had 'em all... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 29, 2004 Report Share Posted July 29, 2004 > TO Kat in OH, > > Just one clarification. Chronic is a LOT different from persistent, they're not the > same at all. In chronic, there is no in and out, no surprises, you're just in AF all > the time, and as long as the overall rate is kept low with beta-blockers or > Calcium channel blockers, you go about your life almost normally, save for > some energy drop. You don't " feel " AF at all. Some folks are lucky that way. Others are miserable in chronic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 30, 2004 Report Share Posted July 30, 2004 Kathleen wrote: > Chronic is a LOT different from persistent, they're not the > same at all. In chronic, there is no in and out, no surprises, you're > just in AF all > the time, and as long as the overall rate is kept low with > beta-blockers or > Calcium channel blockers, you go about your life almost normally, save > for > some energy drop. You don't " feel " AF at all. Rob wrote: > Now I'm confused...! I thought afib that does not respond to > treatment of any kind and lasts unabated for a period of time, is > chronic *or* persistent and Afib that comes and goes, in and out, > over any period of time is intermittent or occasional. > > From m-w.com: > chronic: marked by long duration or frequent recurrence > persistent: existing for a long or longer than usual time or > continuously > intermittent: coming and going at intervals > > Either way, I've had 'em all... > > > Hi Rob/Kathhleen, see http://www.affacts.org/Questions/classified.html for the definition of the " 3 P's " .(persistent AF can be converted) Whilst I think it's true that there is a trend toward lessening of symptoms when going chronic(permanent) this is not a hard and fast rule. There are some people with chronic(permanent) AF who have a real bad time and there are folks with paroxysmal AF who are asymptomatic. -- D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 30, 2004 Report Share Posted July 30, 2004 > Hi Rob/Kathhleen, > see > http://www.affacts.org/Questions/classified.html > for the definition of the " 3 P's " .(persistent AF can be converted) > Whilst I think it's true that there is a trend toward lessening of > symptoms when going chronic(permanent) this is not a hard and fast > rule. There are some people with chronic(permanent) AF who have a real > bad time and there are folks with paroxysmal AF who are asymptomatic. > > -- > D Thank you . That certainly clarifies it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 30, 2004 Report Share Posted July 30, 2004 TO : Yeah, the terminology is a pain. Help out, those of you who are in AF 24/7, always in AF, no episodes, just permanent AF, never in nsr, never. What is THE word(ing) that will make it clear to others what we are talking about? I've been using chronic, permanent. I think the problem word may be " persistent, " because that can mean either frequent or permanent. All you 24/7ers, what do we call ourselves so that we don't confuse others? Kathleen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 30, 2004 Report Share Posted July 30, 2004 To Kat: The only time I am aware of AF is when I climb too many stairs at once, or otherwise exercise too much. My heart then does what I call palpitations, by which I mean noticeable and " quirky " thumps. These stop as soon as I stop the exercise, though, within just 15 or 20 seconds. I suspect all that means is because of the exercise each beat is a little harder, and of course because the beats are irregular (all the time), at such moments of unusual exercise I become aware of them. Except for that I have zero awareness of the irregular rhythm (but it sure shows up on my periodic ECG's). Others in 24/7 seem to have much the same situation as mine, unawareness of AF as we go about our daily lives. (Of course I never forget the AF because of the coumadin, the beta-blockers and the digoxin - who could forget?) All the best. Kathleen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 30, 2004 Report Share Posted July 30, 2004 TO - thanks, excellent clarifications. I communicate (directly) mostly with those in 24/7 who are not symptomatic, and tend to forget that some in 24/ 7 do have problems, even under good rate control. It's so hard to get good stats - I wonder what percentage of those in 24/7, with otherwise healthy hearts and under successful rate control, do continue to have regular problems with their AF (other than the energy loss, which is at least partially attributable to the meds and which most of us are aware of). So many questions. Thanks again. Kathleen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 30, 2004 Report Share Posted July 30, 2004 I've been 24/7 for at least a couple of months now, Kathleen-- I've been using the term Persistent because it hasn't self-terminated (and because Permanent just sounds too, well, permanent...). If my DC cardioversion Tuesday doesn't work and I go back to 24/7 very soon, I guess I'll have moved from Persistent to Permanent; if it works and I then revert in a week or two, I guess I'll still be Persistent. TR In AFIBsupport , " kageygreenbay " <KageyD@a...> wrote: > TO : > > Yeah, the terminology is a pain. Help out, those of you who are in AF 24/7, > always in AF, no episodes, just permanent AF, never in nsr, never. What is > THE word(ing) that will make it clear to others what we are talking about? I've > been using chronic, permanent. I think the problem word may be " persistent, " > because that can mean either frequent or permanent. > > All you 24/7ers, what do we call ourselves so that we don't confuse others? > > Kathleen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.