If this is the same as the venogram I had to diagnose the MTS, it involves putting a drip in the top of your foot.

This is horrible and hurts, but that's as bad as it gets - they inject contrast through this cannula into the foot veins which then shows the venous return under continuous X-rays. They tilt you up and down on the table, so you are sort of standing up but only on the good leg, to watch how well the blood gets back up the leg.

I think I've heard the contrast can be a bit risky, and you do have to be on a drip or drink gallons of water to flush the kidneys through afterwards.

I have had at least 5 venograms now that I can recall - 1 for diagnosis, a long session of it to show the before & after flow for the stenting, although this time they put the cannula into my groin not the foot.

Then there was one for each time they checked the thrombolysis lines - so 3 in total then. And as far as I know, I am ok, although I was catheterised and immobilised for the thrombolysis and was lying there in HDU drinking anything that came my way(!) and got my output up to 4 litres in 24hrs, so I guess I flushed my kidneys fairly thoroughly =)

It's not nice, yes there are probably quite a lot of risks, but I have been ok with it I think, although whether all the x-rays affect anything long term like fertility or likelihood of getting cancer or whatever, I don't know.

I think venography was part of my initial emergency care in order to direct the medication into my leg, so it really just blends in with a bunch of other procedures, a component of a bigger process going on then. But from what I remember my experience was pretty different than scattybat; that could be the difference of the US and GBR, or maybe the difference in doctor. I was definitely not moved around at all during mine, but I was also suffering from massive pulmonary embolism and in pretty bad shape, so well, they were being as careful as possible with me. However, I was also just in a kind of daze by the time the doctors got to working on my leg, so I really don't remember much, and I can't really tell you anything then by first hand experience.

What I don't understand is the reason your doctor says to do the scan - to see if your son has PTS. There isn't any way that I'm aware of to SEE it. I mean, they could see if he has chronic clotting (though that would have shown up on his doppler anyway), and having chronic clots doesn't necessarily mean a person has PTS. PTS is identified by the symptoms a person has rather than really seeing anything in a scan, so I don't understand what the point would be of the venography. By the way, a person could even have PTS without chronic clotting, a lot of that has to do with how much damage may have been done to the veins. Again, things in your son's case seem to be relatively mild from what I'm understanding. Since he's not too far into recovery, I can well imagine he may still have some discomfort (which may be just as much from his surgery as his DVT), but likely that will continue to improve as time passes. If I were in your situation, I would certainly be asking more questions as to the reason the doctor believes he needs a venography prior to getting it done.

I agree. Start asking a lot of questions so you know if this is a medically necessary test.

PTS doesn't necessarily reveal itself so soon after a clotting event. Many people are diagnosed a year or two after.

Veinography or phlebography is where dye is injected (venogram) to check out the contrast of the veins.

Like rmb states, PTS doesn't become apparently right away. It's usually after the full recovery process that it can be determine which veins are narrower and which valves are damaged.

A doppler can also do this but it is not as precise.

If you have PTS, you'll now it, but again, depending on how long ago he suffered the clot, it may not be apparent yet.

Here is a newsletter that my organization did on PTS which may be helpful:

http://stoptheclot.org/Newsletters/Natt_Newsletter_Spring_2006.pdf

Thank you very much for your opinions an good information. I will ask a lot more questions before deciding anything.

Haven't really heard of anyone having a venography to monitor or diagnose PTS. I thought PTS was more of a symptomatic problem that develops as a result of the clot....not necessarily a visual imaging type of thing for one to "see". Because in many cases, PTS can develop long after the clot is gone. Did the dr. say specifically what he was looking for the venography to reveal that would correlate to a PTS diagnosis?