Okay, let me catch my breath. I am going around in circles because I've been reading these boards for years and I have read MANY THINGS ABOUT NERVE BIOPSIES!!!

Here's what happened. Alan just phoned me. It seems Dr. Zonenshein, the neurosurgeon just visited Alan in his hospital room. Alan said he was just like Dr. Fred (so he's a good guy). He had Alan's MRI films and he told Alan the following: "Alan, your stenosis is, on a scale of 1 to 10, a 5. I don't think it's causing your neuropathy. I think the ivig might help you.

Get that???? He doesn't think Alan's back is causing his neuropathy!!!!
He doesn't think his spinal stenosis has anything to do with his PN. Alan explained how when I massage his back and his spine and the pain goes away, the doctor replied, 'well, she's massaging muscles and that brings oxygen and circulation into your feet".

The doctor said he thought the ivig might help Alan, BUT......... if it doesn't, "I would recommend you let me do a nerve biopsy. I've done many of them and let's say I did 100, well, I helped 70 people. You might be one of the 70 or you might be one of the 30. You never know."

I went nuts on the phone and I said to Alan: "Are you talking about a sural nerve biopsy???, I've heard serious stuff about this, it's dangerous and the only thing it does is tell you a definite diagnosis, it DOESN'T FIX ANYTHING!!!!

Now I am certain that I have read this on the boards. The only thing getting a sural nerve biopsy is to get a definite diagnosis. Now am I right or am I wrong?

Also, Alan said: "Well, he didn't mention the word Sural He just said nerve biopsy". I said to Alan: "Listen, did he say punch biopsy or sural nerve biopsy"? and Alan said "all he said was nerve biopsy".

And when Alan asked him "Isn't this a risky procedure, won't I be laid up"? the doctor responded "Oh, no, you go in and come out the same day, you'll just be a little numb and your feet are numb anyway aren't they?" He told Alan, he takes a little piece of the nerve from the bottom of the ankle, he sends it for a biopsy and when they get the results, they find out if they can fix it or they can't fix it!!!

So what the heck is going on here? I told Alan, "Listen, you are just beginning this ivig thing, it takes time, you DON'T GO GETTING ANY NERVE BIOPSY, at least don't even consider it now".

Alan said: "Calm down, we are not talking right now, we are talking IF the ivig doesn't work". Way down the road.....I asked him what else did the doctor say and the Alan said: He said: "Alan, if you were not able to walk more than a block, I would say you have serious back problem, but you walk, you go to the gym, YOU DO NOT HAVE A BACK PROBLEM, so I don't recommend any surgery on your back and even if I did operate you can't get an endoscopic dischectomy, I would have to put a rod in your back (with his stenosis). The doctor further said: "So thankfully, we don't have to go that route" This is exactly what the doctor told Alan.

Alan said he was very very nice, answered all his questions (I do wish Alan thought to ask him if he was talking about a sural nerve biopsy). Alan said he has never heard of a sural anything. That's because I'm the one who listens when the doctors are talking.

The other day when Dr. Goldfarb came to visit Alan, I distinctly asked her "Have you ever actually diagnosed anyone with CIDP?" and she responded "Only with a nerve biopsy" and I replied: "You mean a sural nerve biopsy?" and she said "my, you are a smart woman".

So I do know nerve biopsies are serious stuff right?

I need more information on this stuff. Thankfully he's not jumping into this head first. Got to give this ivig thing a chance, right?

jeez!!!!!!!!

okay, just went to the following website, where it explains it:
http://www.healthline.com/adamcontent/nerve-biopsy

Describes the whole thing, and like I said, doesn't say where it fixes anything, it just confirms a diagnosis. Maybe I'm wrong!!