The article linked below appeared in today's San Francisco Chronicle. It is the story of a pianist, Misha Dichter, whose father had two botched DD surgeries and who was living in fear of developing the disease himself. He did develop DD and the article relates how he coped with it for several years before having surgery. The amazing thing about this article is that it never mentions NA AND that the surgery was peformed by a surgeon at Stanford University. This is the same Stanford University where the initial Auxillium trial was conducted back in, I believe, 2002 and where the Stage 3 trials were conducted in 2007 and where one of the lead researchers and Auxillium consultants, Vincent Hentz (MD), practices medicine. It may be that for this pianist surgery was the best option but I'm just flabbergasted that another, known option was not presented to him. Xiaflex is also not mentioned. I'm also quite concerned that every DD patient who reads the SF Chronicle article will think, once again, that surgery is the only option. If one goes to the end of the article there is a place to leave comments. I'm also emailing the reporter -E-mail Kathryn Roethel at datebookletters@sfchronicle.com.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cg.../DDGC1BVH60.DTL
http://tinyurl.com/yb2fb8l (easier link)

This is a link to the submission form to enable one to write a letter to the editor which could conceivably be published and help other DD sufferers learn about NA

http://www.sfgate.com/chronicle/submissions/#1

Diane

Hi, Callie -

Glad the surgery went well for you. For so many it does not. I am very happy with my recent NA, and definitely consider it the first choice. My father's poor surgery results made me look harder - now I am frustrated because he needs more work, and there is not a doctor in Colorado who does NA.

Callie;

Your post might be construed as if you believed Open Surgery is very safe and has few complications. Surely you can't mean that. The facts speak for themselves. A recent exhaustive research of the published literature regarding Open Surgery says.....

"Major complications occurred in 15.7%, including digital nerve injury 3.4%, digital artery injury 2%, infection 2.4%, hematoma 2.1%, and complex regional pain syndrome 5.5%. Other common, more minor injuries included flare reaction in 9.9%, wound healing complications in 22.9%, and a range of other complications."

While the majority still do well with fasciectomy, the rate of complications from NA are practically non-existent but with equivalent results. Further, the rate of complications goes way up upon repeated fasciectomy whereas this is not the case with NA. There is no good argument as to why NA should not be tried first before resorting to a far more invasive procedure with commensurate higher rates of complication. None. Did I mention the relative costs and recovery time?

I suspect that most posters here have not had Open Surgery so they can't speak to it. However, I find the majority that have are glad to learn of NA.

RandyH,

You said, "Your post might be construed as if you believed Open Surgery is very safe and has few complications. Surely you can't mean that".

You are correct. I don't mean that. If anyone has tried to interpret that meaning from my comments they are making a mistake. Almost every (perhaps all) surgery has possibilities of complications. I have never said anything to the contrary. I have said that the surgery techniques have improved considerably with time. I have also said that there are very, very few who have complained on this worldwide forum about their results from surgery considering that there have been tens of thousands who have had the surgery. Of those who have complained it is the repetive same people and rarely few others.

Mike S

I think that's an accurate comparative assessment but I would add an additional benefit to NA that offsets it's higher rate of recurrence. NA can be repeated nearly indefinitely, whereas Open Surgery offers about to three procedures in the same aria and you're done.

No doubt about it. I know a person who had *one* Open Surgery with great results and no recurrence. I also know a "three and done" person who can't user her hands any longer. Open Surgery is always waiting in the wings and the next step in the ladder of invasiveness if NA fails you. So why would anyone advise to start with full Open Surgery?