DOI 10.1097/nrl.0000000000000656
Cervical Artery Dissection Diagnosed Following Chiropractic Cervical Manipulation: A STOP-CAD Subanalysis.
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES
Cervical artery dissection (CeAD) is an important cause of ischemic stroke in young adults. Nearly 100 million annual chiropractic cervical manipulations are performed in the United States. The relationship between manipulation and CeAD remains controversial.
METHODS
We analyzed patients in the multicenter STOP-CAD registry (n=4023) to identify CeAD cases diagnosed after chiropractic cervical manipulation. Demographics and clinical features were compared between manipulation-associated and nonmanipulation-associated cases using χ 2 and t tests. Multivariable logistic regression identified key factors associated with manipulation-related CeAD.
RESULTS
About 1 in 20 CeAD cases in this registry reported antecedent cervical manipulation. In multivariable binary logistic regression, compared with patients without prior manipulation, those with prior manipulation were younger (OR per year 0.98, 95% CI: 0.97-0.99, P =0.014), more often female (OR: 1.64, 95% CI: 1.21-2.23, P =0.001), less often diabetic (OR: 0.24, 95% CI: 0.08-0.78, P =0.018), presented with neck pain (OR: 2.80, 95% CI: 2.08-3.77, P <0.001), and had higher odds of isolated vertebral artery dissection (OR: 2.15, 95% CI: 1.57-2.94, P <0.001). Recurrent ischemic stroke rates were similar between groups.
CONCLUSIONS
Given the very high number of manipulations performed annually, the absolute risk of secondary CeAD is extremely low. Manipulation-associated cases have distinct clinical features, occurring more often in younger women with vertebral dissections. Whether manipulation acts as a precipitating trigger or patients with early CeAD symptoms seek manipulation remains unresolved.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.