A
Top Radiologist Sympathises
Quotes from the Post
During my researches
into Arachnoiditis and it's causes I managed to make
contact with a senior, career long, radiologist.
I cannot name this
person and the following excerpt from one email shows
why:
"I cannot
take a public position but I am delighted to help
you unofficially. I work with Prof (name removed)
at (name removed) and he would not be pleased if I
took a public position. (name removed) has written
about arachnoiditis and appeared in several court
cases.
Sorry to appear a bit of a wimp. I will help as I
can"
However, as you guys
know my work and therefore, that it can be trusted,
I can quote from our private email. Even in these
statements, whilst trying to remain loyal to his boss
and mindful of his position, he has made some very
telling statements.
26th February
01
"I find it interesting
that radiologists were still using Myodil when the
risks were well known and water-soluble alternatives
were available. The incident in the early 1980s when
Myodil was used and not removed (I was present) and
water-soluble agents were readily available. Humans
stick to what they know even when it has been shown
to be no longer appropriate."
8th Mar 01
Thanks for your e-mails.
Its always very interesting to read what you write.
It's so easy to see only the
doctor perspective.
17 April 01
I was brought up
in the post-myodil/pantopaque
era and grew up with metrizamide. I started training
in radiology in 1981 at (removed) Hospital. I was
always led to believe that myodil should be aspirated
after use and a spinal needle was designed specifically
for this purpose.
I
have in my collection a lumbar myelogram that I performed
using metrizamide of a patient with post-myodil arachnoiditis
with globules of myodil seen on the control film.
I do remember a patient
(not at (removed)) who had a myelogram (about 1983)
and the radiologist made the decision deliberately
not to aspirate the contrast (!).
I also have a case
of a nurse who had a myodil myelogram abroad and the
contrast had been left in. I removed as much as I
could.
The
teaching is that the myodil was only absorbed slowly
if at all. Myodil can be seen on radiographs taken
after many years. Myodil to all intents and purposes
is not absorbed and over a period of time causes arachnoiditis
in a proportion of cases.
It is important to remember that prior to metrizamide/dimerX
there was nothing else to use (also pre CT/EMI scan
and NMR/MRI). Its all a question of relative risks.
18th May 01
It's always sad to
read of the sufferings of back patients. When Myodil/Pantopaque
was all that was available it had to be used.
I
cannot understand why it was not removed from the
patient more routinely particularly at a time when
water soluble agents were available and the link with
arachnoiditis was established .
When I first came
to (removed) I was admitting about 2
patients a week for myelography (usually lumbar
radiculography). This has all
more or less been swept away by MRI. I now do about
2-3 myelograms a year.
30th Oct 01
Best wishes and as
always good wishes for your activities.
In October of last
year I was working on the video, "Arachnoiditis
- Fighting Back", as an unpaid researcher. I
had just asked him if he could recommend a spokesperson
to comment on the issue of Arachnoiditis caused by
iatrogenic factors, surely his profession would want
to comment and give their own point of view. Despite
his previously regular answers, none came through.
I continue to try and contact him, but I had no joy.
I wonder why he baled?
All that this correspondence
proves is that the debate over contrast media and
the link to arachnoiditis is still alive in medical
circles. It also shows that the highest echelons of
the medical profession are still very active in trying
to keep a lid on this matter. The terrible truth is
that the truth will always out, and, they have lost
their battle of containment.
Mike Feehan
©2002
Top
Back to Editorial Index
