Ablations
Posted , 10 users are following.
I did some research in the Stanford hospital library.
In 1861 the accepted treatment for pneumonia is dehydration and
bleeding because there is too much liquid in the lung, for some
reason.
In 2016 the accepted treatment for atrial fibrillation was ablation of
parts of the heart where, for some reason, false signals were
originating, for some reason.
In 2100 . . . .
Reactions welcome !
0 likes, 13 replies
deirdre2016 masonc
Posted
Don't get the connection???
masonc deirdre2016
Posted
betty47298 masonc
Posted
afiblady masonc
Posted
mikelly321 masonc
Posted
afiblady masonc
Posted
hhanover masonc
Posted
I get it. In 2100 some genetic treatment to revive the substrate of the heart will take care of the whole problem with propagation of electrical impulses. Now all I need to do is live to 2100. 162 years old shouldn't be a problem. I'll hire Dorian Gray's portraitist.
Whatever happened to the MAZE procedure where the surgeon opened the chest and cut a pattern into the heart muscle? Stuff changes.
afiblady masonc
Posted
Thought it over. 1861 was wrong. We r probably wrong now. But who do we trust?
It's like raising kids. U do the best u can when u r doing it, only to find out years later u wasted your time. They are rotten anyway.
My brain hurts now.
hhanover afiblady
Posted
siaw56215 masonc
Posted
jay7196 masonc
Posted
Joydeck masonc
Posted
Ablation seems to work in less than 50% of patients, and probably way less. More importantly, long term (a year or more) follow-up studies are non existent. There may be a reason why (excuse the irony).
mikelly321 masonc
Posted
Yeah, I love how they put me on Flecainide (and have kept me on it) immediately after my ablation so there was never any real chance to see if it had worked on its own. I only know that three or four years later, I'm still on this medication, and if I stop taking it, the symptoms return. I've heard of people getting four or five ablations. Going from ironic to moronic.