For GPM: I think I've just been unlucky. There are 14 folks in my particular trial - 'cording to the nurse, only myself and one other required more than one set of injections and I'm the only one who's currently scheduled for a third set. I went into this thinking I'd have only a couple reports and then could report complete success and end this particular thread on an up note. It didn't work out that way but it seems to be much more successful with other folks. Scheduled for my third and final round next week - hopefully that'll do it but if not, well, then, this is my contribution to medical science. No treatment is 100% effective and you need the negatives as well as the positive to adequately assess the effectiveness of the treatment.

For Jocond: I'm in Portland Oregon.

Wish me better luck for monday!

All that stuff - cords and lumps - will remain in your hand. All Xiaflex does, or is supposed to do, is weaken the cord in one spot, so that it can be snapped. You still have the disease, and it is still active. So yes, from what you're saying I think you're a success.

After reading some comments on this topic, but only having had Kenalog injection twice, I have a few comments.

The injection of unbuffered Lidocaine, while a sharp sting, is not too bad and certainly tolerable. My next Kenalog injection will be with buffered Lidocaine and I will report. I would suggest requesting, when allowed, Lidocaine in the palm closer to the wrist and waiting about 15 minutes. You will then not feel anything from that point to the tip of your fingers which are in line with the Lidocaine injection location.

Lidocaine for breaking the cords could be a problem as the doctor could over do it without your feedback. Personally, I would rather do it than someone else as the feedback loop would be much shorter.

I have to agree with Wanker, all patients should e-mail, or publish a web page as I have, (http://kineoptics.com/stuff.html), pictures to their doctor to contribute to the data.

After reading all the reports on Auxilium AA4500, I have to agree with a few in that the procedure seems to be more of a "chemical NA". The standard NA procedure appears to have less pain and swelling. Could it be that Auxilium AA4500 injections require less skill and technique than NA and thus more attractive? Unless there is much less recurring with Auxilium AA4500, I'd opt for NA when it becomes necessary in my hand.

Wolfgang, I have a link at the top of the page. Is it done correctly?

http://www.kineoptics.com/stuff.html

The reason Xiaflex (used in the Auxilium trials) is supposedly better is because unlike surgery and NA there is no scar tissue left behind to complicate further/repeated procedures. Another "possible" reason is longer times before reocccurence but I don't think there's enough data to support this yet. Finally, although I've heard conflicting numbers for the cost of Xiaflex-- anywhere from $1000- to $5000 per-- it seems to be a real money maker for MDs and as you say requires much less skill.

Joe said:

After reading all the reports on Auxilium AA4500, I have to agree with a few in that the procedure seems to be more of a "chemical NA". The standard NA procedure appears to have less pain and swelling. Could it be that Auxilium AA4500 injections require less skill and technique than NA and thus more attractive? Unless there is much less recurring with Auxilium AA4500, I'd opt for NA when it becomes necessary in my hand.