RE:PFO & ANEURYSM

[LISA26]

Hello...i Am 26 Yrs Old And I Have A Pfo With Aneurysm. I Have Heard Alot Of Concern About This Condition If You Are A Diver. I Am Not A Diver..but Would Like To Talk To Someone That Knows About This Condition. I Have Done Alot Of Research On This Topic. Is There Anyone Out There That Has This???
Thanks

 

[SCUBAMedicBill]

Welcome to SCUBA Board. The following Link relates to PFO PFO . You may also want to go to the Divers Alert Network, Medical Section this link DAN Medical . You should beable to get some good information there.

Good Luck and I hope all works out well.

Bill

 

[DI_Guy]

Here is a good site with lots of info about PFO as well...

http://www.hyperchamber.com/decompression_illness/

It's about 1/2 way down the page.

 

[rockjock3]

I don't know where some people are getting their numbers. I talked to my doctor about this and also did research on the internet. I found about 3 sites that state 30-40% of population has this. All the rest of the sites I checked (30-40) stated numbers between 3-10% of the population has this. The part where 30-40% comes in is that they suspect PFO might be a factor in 30-40% of strokes, not that 30-40% of the population has this defect.

My doctor also called and talked to three DMOs (Navy Medical Dive Officers) that have about 80 years of medical practice and diving between them. They all confirmed that the percentage of the population that has this defect is closer to the 3-10% number and plays into diving much less than some sites have tried to lead us to believe.

 

[BigJetDriver]

Rockjock,

With all due respect to your Doc and his Docs, while no one knows for sure, without doing invasive testing of a very large sample of the population, DAN and the Docs who study this extensively postulate a figure in the range of 19 to 27 %. (Note: In the population that the Navy DMO's work with, the figure might well be lower, but that is not representative of the population at large.)

While there is some argument about how "dangerous" the presence of a PFO is in the diving population, in relationship to DCS, there is no argument about what happens if the patient is in "bubble trouble" to start with, and his or her PFO opens (under some stress, such as coughing, or climbing a ladder). The immediate passage of bubbles into the arterial side of the circulation will have immediate and usually disastrous results.

 

[rockjock3]

Rockjock,

With all due respect to your Doc and his Docs, while no one knows for sure, without doing invasive testing of a very large sample of the population, DAN and the Docs who study this extensively postulate a figure in the range of 19 to 27 %. (Note: In the population that the Navy DMO's work with, the figure might well be lower, but that is not representative of the population at large.)

While there is some argument about how "dangerous" the presence of a PFO is in the diving population, in relationship to DCS, there is no argument about what happens if the patient is in "bubble trouble" to start with, and his or her PFO opens (under some stress, such as coughing, or climbing a ladder). The immediate passage of bubbles into the arterial side of the circulation will have immediate and usually disastrous results.

BigJetDriver69

I understand as well, what you are saying. The DMOs in question aren't (and I verified) talking about "their population" but the population as a whole. These are three DMOs that don't work with each other and are at different bases.

Also, I don't and none the the DMOs downplayed the possible effects that this could have a play in under the appropriate circumsatance.

My primary fault was with people saying this was a 30-33% or higher chance that somebody has this and it is actually much lower than that. One out of three is much scarier than a "less than one" to 2 in 10 possibly having the problem. The doctors all said that the medical field's concern is not with these not closing but that they have a tendency to close to early. This is why, they told me, that things such as tylonol are not supposed to be taken during pregnacy because it is one of the many things that can cause a PFO to close early and cause problems for the baby.

Again. I am not finding any fault with what effects a PFO can have just the on the fact that three credible and unassociated Doctors in the diving specialty (who would much rather have the military pay for a test for me than a $400,000 life-insurance policy) have said about the percentages getting blown out of porportion.

 

[wandernsoul]

HiHo,

Perhaps this isn't the right place for this question, but it does regard PFO, so here goes. I also posted this on Scuba Clinic.
I had a PFO repair nearly 30 years ago. All's well since then, done lots of diving with no problems whatsoever regarding the surgery. Active lifestyle, no problems with any kinds of symptoms.
I now have a new doc and dentist and because of previous need for antibiotic prophylaxis before dental work the new doc consults a cardiologist. He says no to the need for Rx but then goes on to ask whether I've ever had a follow-up echo done. Geez, I think so but it's been literally decades. So new doc asks if I'm willing, I say yes, but then find out it's going to be a bubble study, which means trans-esophageal echo. WHOA BABY. That I'm not willing to do unless I REALLY NEED TO. None of my previous docs, including cardiologists, have ever suggested it.
Is this the new medical standard???
Anyone have any insight for me?

Thanks much,
Beck