Ankylosing spondylitis treatment can be a frustrating and confusing path for most patients to navigate, since doctors do not generally even agree on what causes AS, forget about how to effectively treat it.
The vast majority of indicated modalities are symptomatic in nature and will provide no hope of actually curing or resolving the disorder. This is so common with musculoskeletal conditions and is particularly true of most autoimmune diseases, just like AS and rheumatoid arthritis.
Research clearly shows that most cases of spondylitis which eventually resolve or stabilize do so through natural means and is not because of the positive effects of any treatment. Basically, patients can invest more hope in fate and circumstance than they can in medical science when it comes to actually curing AS.
This dissertation examines the successes and failures of treating ankylosing spondylitis.
Here are the usual methods used to treat ankylosing spondylitis and how they will provide benefits to affected patients:
Physical therapy will help to maintain joint mobility and improve functionality. However, physical therapy can be very painful for some AS sufferers.
Pain management drugs are used in large quantities by many patients.
DMARDs are used, just like in other inflammatory musculoskeletal conditions. These drugs may or may not help reduce progression of the disease. Results are often not consistent patient to patient.
Immune suppressors can be very effective for AS victims, since the symptomatic process is enacted by the patient's own immune system. Of course, the side effects of this type of therapy can be severe or even fatal, because a reduced immune system makes the patient prone to disease and infection which may be lethal in some cases.
Of course, all the usual risks of pharmaceutical therapy apply with all of teh above products.
Back surgery is used in some circumstances to improve movement and functionality or to prevent serious organ complications which can result from significant spinal deformity. Surgery generally offers very limited benefits for most patients, but provides many substantial risks to consider.
AS treatment using traditional medical methods is a risky endeavor to be sure. The modalities are dangerous, often addictive and can enact a host of troublesome side effects and health issues. Worse still is the unpredictable nature of the effectiveness of said treatments. Some patients respond and others do not.
Psychoemotional therapies, such as knowledge therapy, can be highly effective for those who are open to the logical idea of a psychogenic causation or contribution. The best part of this path is the cost-free and risk-free nature of treatment and the lack of side effects. Even if this path can provide partial relief, it is worth investigating for many sufferers.
I am an avid supporter of the various forms of knowledge therapy for all manner of autoimmune diseases. As a group, these conditions have stumped medical science, since doctors are ever burdened with the illogical prejudice of needing to find a structural cause.
In conditions where a definitive cause does not exist, the patient is doomed to suffer under unenlightened and often ridiculous treatment modalities until the condition resolves on their own or the patient succumbs to the disease. Do not let this be your destiny. Instead, do your on research and realize that the path back to health may be the one least traveled in the AS treatment sector today.
If you do decide on pharmaceutical or surgical care, be sure to at least understand the risk/benefit ratio and hold your doctor to their prognosis for treatment.