Literature DB >> 27690836

Advancements in Imaging Technology: Do They (or Will They) Equate to Advancements in Our Knowledge of Recovery in Whiplash?

James M Elliott, Sudarshan Dayanidhi, Charles Hazle, Mark A Hoggarth, Jacob McPherson, Cheryl L Sparks, Kenneth A Weber.   

Abstract

Synopsis It is generally accepted that up to 50% of those with a whiplash injury following a motor vehicle collision will fail to fully recover. Twenty-five percent of these patients will demonstrate a markedly complex clinical picture that includes severe pain-related disability, sensory and motor disturbances, and psychological distress. A number of psychosocial factors have shown prognostic value for recovery following whiplash from a motor vehicle collision. To date, no management approach (eg, physical therapies, education, psychological interventions, or interdisciplinary strategies) for acute whiplash has positively influenced recovery rates. For many of the probable pathoanatomical lesions (eg, fracture, ligamentous rupture, disc injury), there remains a lack of available clinical tests for identifying their presence. Fractures, particularly at the craniovertebral and cervicothoracic junctions, may be radiographically occult. While high-resolution computed tomography scans can detect fractures, there remains a lack of prevalence data for fractures in this population. Conventional magnetic resonance imaging has not consistently revealed lesions in patients with acute or chronic whiplash, a "failure" that may be due to limitations in the resolution of available devices and the use of standard sequences. The technological evolution of imaging techniques and sequences eventually might provide greater resolution to reveal currently elusive anatomical lesions (or, perhaps more importantly, temporal changes in physiological responses to assumed lesions) in those patients at risk of poor recovery. Preliminary findings from 2 prospective cohort studies in 2 different countries suggest that this is so, as evidenced by changes to the structure of skeletal muscles in those who do not fully recover. In this clinical commentary, we will briefly introduce the available imaging decision rules and the current knowledge underlying the pathomechanics and pathophysiology of whiplash. We will then acknowledge known prognostic factors underlying functional recovery. Last, we will highlight emerging evidence regarding the pathobiology of muscle degeneration/regeneration, as well as advancements in neuroimaging and musculoskeletal imaging techniques (eg, functional magnetic resonance imaging, magnetization transfer imaging, spectroscopy, diffusion-weighted imaging) that may be used as noninvasive and objective complements to known prognostic factors associated with whiplash recovery, in particular, poor functional recovery. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2016;46(10):861-872. doi:10.2519/jospt.2016.6735.

Entities:  

Keywords:  cervical spine; functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI); magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) research; radiology/medical imaging; spinal pain

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27690836      PMCID: PMC7274526          DOI: 10.2519/jospt.2016.6735

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Orthop Sports Phys Ther        ISSN: 0190-6011            Impact factor:   4.751


  131 in total

1.  Test performance of the individual NEXUS low-risk clinical screening criteria for cervical spine injury.

Authors:  E A Panacek; W R Mower; J F Holmes; J R Hoffman
Journal:  Ann Emerg Med       Date:  2001-07       Impact factor: 5.721

2.  Cervical Artery Dissection: A Review of the Epidemiology, Pathophysiology, Treatment, and Outcome.

Authors:  Christina A Blum; Shadi Yaghi
Journal:  Arch Neurosci       Date:  2015-10-17

3.  Acceleration injury of the cervical spine by hypertranslation of the head. Part I. Effect of normal translation of the head on cervical spine motion: a radiological study.

Authors:  L Penning
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  1992-06       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 4.  The development of persistent pain and psychological morbidity after motor vehicle collision: integrating the potential role of stress response systems into a biopsychosocial model.

Authors:  Samuel A McLean; Daniel J Clauw; James L Abelson; Israel Liberzon
Journal:  Psychosom Med       Date:  2005 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 4.312

5.  Expression of specific white adipose tissue genes in denervation-induced skeletal muscle fatty degeneration.

Authors:  J P Dulor; B Cambon; P Vigneron; Y Reyne; J Nouguès; L Casteilla; F Bacou
Journal:  FEBS Lett       Date:  1998-11-13       Impact factor: 4.124

6.  External validation of a clinical prediction rule to predict full recovery and ongoing moderate/severe disability following acute whiplash injury.

Authors:  Carrie Ritchie; Joan Hendrikz; Gwendolen Jull; James Elliott; Michele Sterling
Journal:  J Orthop Sports Phys Ther       Date:  2015-04       Impact factor: 4.751

Review 7.  Satellite cells and the muscle stem cell niche.

Authors:  Hang Yin; Feodor Price; Michael A Rudnicki
Journal:  Physiol Rev       Date:  2013-01       Impact factor: 37.312

8.  Polymorphisms in the glucocorticoid receptor co-chaperone FKBP5 predict persistent musculoskeletal pain after traumatic stress exposure.

Authors:  Andrey V Bortsov; Jennifer E Smith; Luda Diatchenko; April C Soward; Jacob C Ulirsch; Catherine Rossi; Robert A Swor; William E Hauda; David A Peak; Jeffrey S Jones; Debra Holbrook; Niels K Rathlev; Kelly A Foley; David C Lee; Renee Collette; Robert M Domeier; Phyllis L Hendry; Samuel A McLean
Journal:  Pain       Date:  2013-04-26       Impact factor: 6.961

9.  Complex multilocus effects of catechol-O-methyltransferase haplotypes predict pain and pain interference 6 weeks after motor vehicle collision.

Authors:  Andrey V Bortsov; Luda Diatchenko; Samuel A McLean
Journal:  Neuromolecular Med       Date:  2013-08-21       Impact factor: 3.843

10.  Cervical radiographic evaluation of alert patients following blunt trauma.

Authors:  R P Fischer
Journal:  Ann Emerg Med       Date:  1984-10       Impact factor: 5.721

View more
  3 in total

Review 1.  Advancing imaging technologies for patients with spinal pain: with a focus on whiplash injury.

Authors:  James M Elliott; Mark J Hancock; Rebecca J Crawford; Andrew C Smith; David M Walton
Journal:  Spine J       Date:  2017-07-31       Impact factor: 4.166

2.  Does Overall Cervical Spine Pathology Relate to the Clinical Heterogeneity of Chronic Whiplash?

Authors:  James M Elliott; Todd B Parrish; David M Walton; Amy J Vassallo; Joel Fundaun; Marie Wasielewski; D Mark Courtney
Journal:  Am J Emerg Med       Date:  2019-07-01       Impact factor: 2.469

3.  Deep Learning Convolutional Neural Networks for the Automatic Quantification of Muscle Fat Infiltration Following Whiplash Injury.

Authors:  Kenneth A Weber; Andrew C Smith; Marie Wasielewski; Kamran Eghtesad; Pranav A Upadhyayula; Max Wintermark; Trevor J Hastie; Todd B Parrish; Sean Mackey; James M Elliott
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2019-05-28       Impact factor: 4.379

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.