Reply To: Denied/Delayed ivIG

January 20, 2017 at 9:46 pm

Here is an old post that discusses PE vs IVIg:

As far as side affects of PE goes, there are far fewer than with IVIg. PE is recommended for those that have had bad experiences using IVIg, and there are many more bad experiences from IVIg than PE. Dosage and infusion rates, along with what and how much benedryl, etc, etc to use before administering the IVIg… all come into play due to the less tolerable nature of the overall IVIg treatment process.

Yes, there is an increased risk of infection if one does not take proper care of the PE “port”. I had absolutely no issues with any kind of infection with PE, and I had several ports over 2-3 years. Installation of a port is more invasive that an IV, but not during or after PE treatments. I had all sorts of complications with IVIg (cuts, bruises, infiltrations, swellings, etc) as a result of being poked with a needle by people (RN’s at a Center of Excellence!) who didn’t really care and often brute forced the needle because my veins were not always popping out for them. I hate IV’s because of this experience! I’d rather have a port!

More importantly, I believe quite strongly I would be walking today if my first Neuro (a non-CIDP specialist) had me do PE before IVIg. Now, I recommend 3 days of PE before starting IVIg as a general rule.

I can’t look up your policy because CIGNA has it hidden behind their system. But you can access it because you are a member. use the link I gave you above to sign in.