I was diagnosed with RA in 1987. Around 1997, all the symptoms ceased and I was no longer plagued with the disease. I felt perfectly normal -- and it was a real blessing. My RA had gone into remission.
However, in 2005 two large lumps appeared on my right wrist. They were mostly painless. My PCP didn't know what had caused them, so she sent me to an orthopedic surgeon. He told me that the lumps were arthritic pannus, a substance secreted from joints under attack by RA. They wouldn't go away on their own, he told me, but could be removed surgically. When I expressed surprise that RA was the culprit here -- it had been in "remission" for many years, and I thought that meant "inactive" -- he said that RA never actually went away, that it could still do damage even though it didn't present with symptoms.
He felt that would be a good idea because the pannus would probably continue to get larger and would, eventually, cause impairment in my wrist and hand. Not long after that I had the surgery. The pannus was removed, and I recovered without incident.
In 2008 I began experiencing RA symptoms again, mainly in my hands (in the past it had attacked joints all over my body). The remission is over. I'm aware that I was very lucky to be in remission for so long, but now I'm confused. I keep reading about other people with the disease who go into "remission" for a period of a few weeks or months. And I'm wondering -- does the disease really continue to do damage in the body while its in remission? I'm confused, now.
Thanks to anyone who might have an answer or who can point me in the right direction to get one!
Brad,
Thank you for the link to Lene's article on remission. She really hits the mark, doesn't she. When I was first diagnosed with this disease, and was dealing with the incredible, disabling pain it causes, I had no hope at all for remission. So when it happened, around 10 years later, I was very grateful. And all through the years that followed, the years where I was able to live my life without RA pain, I remained grateful -- and aware that the disease wasn't actually gone, but could reappear at any time. When it did, the manner in which it manifested surprised me. And of course now, it's back and slowly ramping up in intensity, just like the first time.
My understanding of remission is like yours -- that it means you're totally without symptoms for a period of time, long or short. But that orthopedic surgeon suggested that even without symptoms, the disease was still doing its damage, but silently. Sneakily.
So far I haven't been able to find anything about remission that talks about this, but I'll keep looking. Thanks again for your reply, and here's wishing you the best, too. I hope that you'll also be feeling better very soon.