Literature DB >> 12381972

Internal forces sustained by the vertebral artery during spinal manipulative therapy.

Bruce P Symons1, Tim Leonard, Walter Herzog.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Spinal manipulative therapy (SMT) has been established as a clinically effective modality for the management of several musculoskeletal disorders. One major issue with the use of SMT is its safety, especially with respect to neck manipulation and the risk of stroke in the vertebrobasilar system.
OBJECTIVES: Our objectives were to quantify the strains and forces sustained by the vertebral artery (VA) in situ during SMT. STUDY
DESIGN: This was a cadaveric study.
METHODS: Six VAs were obtained from 5 unembalmed postrigor cadavers. The cephalad/distal (C0-C1) and caudad/proximal (C6-subclavian artery) loops of the VA were carefully exposed and instrumented with a pair of piezoelectric ultrasonographic crystals. The strains between each crystal pair were recorded during range of motion testing and diagnostic tests and during a variety of SMT procedures. The VA was then dissected free and strained on a materials testing machine until mechanical failure occurred.
RESULTS: SMT performed on the contralateral side of the cervical spine resulted in an average strain of 6.2% +/- 1.3% to the distal (C0-C1) loop of the VA and a 2.1% +/- 0.4% strain to the proximal (C6) loop. These values were similar to or lower than the strains recorded during diagnostic and range of motion testing. Failure testing demonstrated that the VAs could be stretched to 139% to 162% of their resting length before mechanical failure occurred. Therefore the strains sustained by the VA during SMT represent approximately one ninth of the strain at mechanical failure.
CONCLUSIONS: SMT resulted in strains to the VA that were almost an order of magnitude lower than the strains required to mechanically disrupt it. We conclude that under normal circumstances, a single typical (high-velocity/low-amplitude) SMT thrust is very unlikely to mechanically disrupt the VA.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12381972     DOI: 10.1067/mmt.2002.127076

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Manipulative Physiol Ther        ISSN: 0161-4754            Impact factor:   1.437


  12 in total

1.  Comments about "Atherosclerosis in the vertebral artery: an intrinsic risk factor in the use of spinal manipulation? (2006) Surg Radiol Anat 28:129-134, by Cagnie B, Barbaix E, Vinck E, D'Herde K, Cambier D".

Authors:  Michael T Haneline; Anthony L Rosner
Journal:  Surg Radiol Anat       Date:  2007-02-06       Impact factor: 1.246

2.  The relation between the spatial distribution of vertebral artery compromise and exposure to cervical manipulation.

Authors:  Gregory N Kawchuk; Gian S Jhangri; Eric L Hurwitz; Shari Wynd; S Haldeman; Michael D Hill
Journal:  J Neurol       Date:  2008-01-15       Impact factor: 4.849

3.  Cervical artery dissection: a biomechanical perspective.

Authors:  Bruce Symons; Walter Herzog
Journal:  J Can Chiropr Assoc       Date:  2013-12

4.  Risk of traumatic injury associated with chiropractic spinal manipulation in Medicare Part B beneficiaries aged 66 to 99 years.

Authors:  James M Whedon; Todd A Mackenzie; Reed B Phillips; Jon D Lurie
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2015-02-15       Impact factor: 3.468

5.  Current understanding of the relationship between cervical manipulation and stroke: what does it mean for the chiropractic profession?

Authors:  Donald R Murphy
Journal:  Chiropr Osteopat       Date:  2010-08-03

6.  The perivascular environment along the vertebral artery governs segment-specific structural and mechanical properties.

Authors:  Boran Zhou; Mohammed Alshareef; David Prim; Michael Collins; Michael Kempner; Adam Hartstone-Rose; John F Eberth; Alexander Rachev; Tarek Shazly
Journal:  Acta Biomater       Date:  2016-09-06       Impact factor: 8.947

7.  Changes in internal carotid and vertebral arterial wall stiffness with head movement can be detected with shear wave elastography.

Authors:  Lucy Caroline Thomas; Kalos Chan; Gail Durbridge
Journal:  J Man Manip Ther       Date:  2019-10-30

Review 8.  Adverse effects of spinal manipulation: a systematic review.

Authors:  E Ernst
Journal:  J R Soc Med       Date:  2007-07       Impact factor: 5.344

9.  Chiropractic care and the risk of vertebrobasilar stroke: results of a case-control study in U.S. commercial and Medicare Advantage populations.

Authors:  Thomas M Kosloff; David Elton; Jiang Tao; Wade M Bannister
Journal:  Chiropr Man Therap       Date:  2015-06-16

10.  Tissue damage markers after a spinal manipulation in healthy subjects: a preliminary report of a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  A Achalandabaso; G Plaza-Manzano; R Lomas-Vega; A Martínez-Amat; M V Camacho; M Gassó; F Hita-Contreras; F Molina
Journal:  Dis Markers       Date:  2014-12-25       Impact factor: 3.434

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.