Seventh cervical rib associated with subclavian artery occlusion and multiple infarcts: case report

A cervical rib, or supernumerary (extra) rib arising from the 7th cervical vertebra, is a congenital abnormality that occurs in less than 1% of the population. Clinically, it can cause obscure nervous or vascular symptoms and be difficult to diagnose. In this rare case, a 37-year-old woman developed a subclavian artery occlusion after undergoing a chiropractic manipulation for neck, shoulder, and arm pain. The occlusion led to multiple cerebellar infarcts, frontal subarachnoid hemorrhage, myocardial infarction, and right-hand vascular compromise. The patient was subsequently diagnosed with a 7th cervical rib, which likely caused compression of the subclavian artery after a hyperextension injury sustained during the chiropractic procedure. The departments of vascular surgery, neurosurgery, cardiology, and neurology collaborated to review all elements of the patient's diagnosis and care. After the patient was stabilized, she spent 6 weeks in acute inpatient rehabilitation; upon discharge, her symptoms were greatly improved but still present. Three months later, the patient underwent a subclavian-artery-to-axillary-artery bypass with resection of the left cervical rib. She tolerated surgery well with no complications. As a result of the devastating insults sustained secondary to the presence of the 7th cervical rib and her subclavian artery occlusion, this patient faced months of recovery. Treatment involved a structured interdisciplinary plan of care.     

Use of Translatoric Mobilization in a Patient with Cervicogenic Dizziness and Motion Restriction: A Case Report

Abstract

Some physical therapists consider the report of dizziness at end-range cervical extension when coupled with side-bending and rotation to the same side (coupled lower cervical rotation in extension) to be a positive sign of vertebral artery compromise. However, degenerative changes and associated movement abnormalities in cervical motion segments may also produce dizziness. The use of mid-line translatoric joint mobilization in the presence of limited active cervical motion that is accompanied by dizziness during cervical extension, rotation, and coupled rotation in extension has not been addressed in the current literature. This case report describes the examination, evaluation, diagnosis, intervention, and outcomes for a 64-year-old woman who presented with limited cervical mobility and the complaint of dizziness during performance of these movements. Examination included a clinical differentiation process to determine the cause of the movement-related dizziness. Examination findings included increased translatoric joint play, tenderness, and reproduction of dizziness at the C4-C6 segments and decreased translatoric joint play at the C1-C4 and C7-T4 motion segments. Intervention included movement re-education and application of translatoric joint mobilization to the hypomobile segments. After 8 visits, there was complete resolution of dizziness during all active cervical movements and improved cervical mobility, as documented with the CROM. This case report demonstrates that clinical symptoms consistent with cervicogenic dizziness and limited cervical mobility may be treated safely and effectively using translatoric joint mobilization techniques. Confirmatory diagnostic ultrasound analysis of the vertebral artery revealed no compromise in flow velocity during the application of these translatoric mobilization techniques.     

Ultrasound analysis of the vertebral artery during non-thrust cervical translatoric spinal manipulation

Objective

Cervical translatoric spinal manipulation (TSM) techniques have been suggested as a safer alternative to cervical thrust rotatory techniques. The objective of this study was to determine the effect of three C5–C6 non-thrust TSM techniques on vertebral artery (VA) lumen diameter (LD) and two blood flow velocity parameters. The two-tailed research hypothesis was that the TSM techniques would result in a significant change (increase or decrease) in blood flow velocity and arterial LD at the C5–C6 intertransverse portion of the VA.

Methods

In a sample of 30 subjects representative of a clinical population, color-coded duplex Doppler diagnostic ultrasound imaging was used to collect data on LD, peak systolic velocity (PSV), and end diastolic velocity with the cervical spine positioned in neutral and in three different manipulation positions. Pair-wise mean differences between measurements at baseline (neutral position) and in all three manipulation positions were analyzed using two-tailed paired t-tests with alpha set at 0·05.

Results

Of the 18 paired comparisons, there were four statistically significant differences between measurements in the neutral position and a manipulation position, three concerning LD and one PSV.

Discussion

The three significant differences in LD ranged from 4·6 to 3·2% and were not associated with changes in blood flow velocity. The one significant change in PSV was only 6·6 cm/s. A value that still greatly exceeded the end diastolic velocity. No subject experienced symptoms associated with VA compromise. This study has provided evidence for the safety of the three lower cervical non-thrust TSM techniques on the current population studied. Further study is required on thrust versus non-thrust TSM techniques and on levels other than C5–C6.     

Cervical manipulation to a patient with a history of traumatically induced dissection of the internal carotid artery: a case report and review of the literature on recurrent dissections.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the use of rotational cervical manipulation in treating a patient who had undergone a traumatically induced dissection of the internal carotid artery and to review the literature on recurrent cervical artery dissections. CLINICAL FEATURES: A 21-year-old woman with hemiparesis from an internal carotid artery dissection that occurred as the result of a motor vehicle accident had neck pain and headaches. Moderate range of motion restrictions in the neck were present along with articular restrictions to movement palpation. INTERVENTION AND OUTCOME: After a year of soft-tissue treatment, we obtained detailed, informed consent from the patient to attempt diversified manipulation to the neck. The patient described greater and more immediate relief and longer pain-free periods than could be achieved by soft-tissue treatment alone. CONCLUSION: Patients with previous cervical artery dissections may present with unrelated neck pain and headaches and request treatment. In selected cases, with complete informed consent, manipulation of the neck may relieve these symptoms. A review of published case reports on recurrent dissections suggests that trauma is not a significant factor in the second dissection. Care must be taken in extrapolating the results from this case to any other patient with a history of cervical artery dissection.     

Repeated Applications of Thoracic Spine Thrust Manipulation do not Lead to Tolerance in Patients Presenting with Acute Mechanical Neck Pain: A Secondary Analysis

It has been demonstrated that patients receiving mobilization techniques do not exhibit tolerance to repeated applications. However, this phenomenon has not been investigated for thoracic manipulation. Our aim was to determine if patients receiving thoracic thrust manipulation exhibit tolerance to repeated applications in acute mechanical neck pain. Forty-five patients were randomly assigned to two groups. The control group received electro- and thermotherapy for 5 sessions, and the experimental group received the same program and also received a thoracic thrust manipulation once a week for 3 consecutive weeks. Outcome measures included neck pain and cervical mobility. Within-session change scores for pain and mobility during treatment sessions #1, 3, and 5 were examined with a one-way repeated measured ANOVA. A 2-way ANOVA with session as within-subject variable and group as between-subject variable was used to compare change scores for each visit between groups to ascertain if there were significant between-group differences in within-session changes for the experimental versus the control group. The ANOVA showed that for either group the 3 within-session change scores were not significantly different (P > 0.1). The 2-way ANOVA revealed significant differences between groups for both pain and neck mobility in within-session change scores (all, P < 0.001). Change scores in each session were superior in the experimental group as compared to those in the control group. The results suggest that patients receiving thoracic manipulation do not exhibit tolerance to repeated applications with regard to pain and mobility measures in acute mechanical neck pain. Further studies should investigate the dose-response relationship of thoracic thrust manipulation in this population.KEYWORDS: Neck Pain, Thoracic Thrust Manipulation, ToleranceNeck pain is a significant problem in society. The incidence rate for self-reported neck pain in the general population has been reported to be between 146 and 213 per 1,000 patient years¹. The reported point prevalence of neck pain varies between 9.5–35%^2,3. The 12-month prevalence for neck pain ranges from 30–50%, and the 12-month prevalence of activity-limiting pain is reported to be between 1.7% and 11.5%¹. Nearly half of patients with neck pain will go on to develop chronic symptoms⁴, and many will continue to exhibit moderate disability at long-term follow-up⁵. In the United States, neck pain accounts for almost 1% of all visits to primary care physicians⁶. After lumbar spine-related diagnoses at 19%, cervical spine diagnoses were the second most common reason for referral at 16% in a US study on outpatient physical therapy⁷. Similarly, the economic burden associated with the management of neck pain patients is second only to low back pain in annual workers'' compensation costs in the United States⁸.In the majority of patients with neck pain, no patho-anatomic diagnosis can be provided resulting in a diagnostic label of non-specific or mechanical neck pain for many patients. Childs et al⁹ have proposed a treatment-based classification system to further differentiate among this likely heterogeneous group of patients. In this classification, manual therapy to the cervical and thoracic spine, particularly thrust and non-thrust manipulation, is the main treatment intervention proposed for management of the mobility subgroup. There is growing evidence supporting the use of thoracic thrust manipulation in the management of this subgroup of patients with mechanical neck pain with multiple studies showing noted improvements in pain, range of motion, and function^10–13.However, the design of previous studies^10–13 has varied in that the researchers have used different numbers of manipulations. This makes it difficult for clinicians to determine how many applications of thrust manipulation are likely to maximize patient outcomes. In this context, one issue we need to consider is whether repeated application of thoracic manipulation leads to tolerance. Tolerance is defined here as a decrease in the effect size or magnitude of the intervention over time, as measured within sessions. Tolerance should affect the number of interventions provided. In the context of thoracic manipulation for patients with mechanical neck pain, tolerance to thoracic manipulation would logically decrease the number of manipulations that are applied and that are required for the demonstrated positive study outcomes.Paungmali et al¹⁴ studied tolerance to repeated applications of a manual non-thrust technique directed at the elbow region. They showed that the technique had a hypoalgesic effect measured as an increase in pressure pain threshold levels at each session that was of similar magnitude to the first time the technique was administered, suggesting that non-thrust techniques do not cause tolerance to repeated applications. It should be noted that this study did not include a control group so the possibility of consistent improvements in their cohort could have potentially been related to a placebo effect. Irrespective, this phenomenon of cumulative tolerance has yet to be investigated with regards to thrust techniques. Studying thrust in addition to non-thrust techniques is relevant, since non-thrust and thrust interventions stimulate different axial sensory beds¹⁵. Also, thoracic spine manipulation was shown to result in significantly greater short-term reductions in pain and disability than thoracic non-thrust manipulation in neck pain patients¹⁶. From a clinical perspective, one could argue that it is necessary to investigate the tolerance aspect not only with regard to neurophysiological measures, such as pressure pain thresholds, but also with regard to clinically relevant outcomes, such as pain and mobility.We recently conducted a randomized clinical controlled trial comparing the effectiveness of an electro- and thermotherapy program alone or in combination with thoracic spine thrust manipulation in patients with acute neck pain¹⁷. This paper presents a secondary analysis of data related to the tolerance aspect of the thoracic spine thrust manipulation. The purpose of this paper is to analyze whether repeated application of thoracic manipulation causes tolerance with regard to pain and mobility outcomes in patients with acute neck pain. We hypothesized that repeated application of thoracic spine manipulation would not lead to tolerance to repeated applications both with regard to pain and neck mobility outcomes.     

Immediate effects of thoracic manipulation in patients with neck pain: a randomized clinical trial

Mechanical neck pain is a common occurrence in the general population resulting in a considerable economic burden. Often physical therapists will incorporate manual therapies directed at the cervical spine including joint mobilization and manipulation into the management of patients with cervical pain. Although the effectiveness of mobilization and manipulation of the cervical spine has been well documented, the small inherent risks associated with these techniques has led clinicians to frequently utilize manipulation directed at the thoracic spine in this patient population. It is hypothesized that thoracic spine manipulation may elicit similar therapeutic benefits as cervical spine manipulation while minimizing the magnitude of risk associated with the cervical technique. The purpose of this randomized clinical trial was to investigate the immediate effects of thoracic spine manipulation on perceived pain levels in patients presenting with neck pain. The results suggest that thoracic spine manipulation results in immediate analgesic effects in patients with mechanical neck pain. Further studies are needed to determine the effects of thoracic spine manipulation in patients with neck pain on long-term outcomes including function and disability.     

A risk–benefit assessment strategy to exclude cervical artery dissection in spinal manual-therapy: a comprehensive review

Cervical artery dissection refers to a tear in the internal carotid or the vertebral artery that results in an intramural haematoma and/or an aneurysmal dilatation. Although cervical artery dissection is thought to occur spontaneously, physical trauma to the neck, especially hyperextension and rotation, has been reported as a trigger. Headache and/or neck pain is the most common initial symptom of cervical artery dissection. Other symptoms include Horner’s syndrome and lower cranial nerve palsy. Both headache and/or neck pain are common symptoms and leading causes of disability, while cervical artery dissection is rare. Patients often consult their general practitioner for headache and/or neck pain, and because manual-therapy interventions can alleviate headache and/or neck pain, many patients seek manual therapists, such as chiropractors and physiotherapists. Cervical mobilization and manipulation are two interventions that manual therapists use. Both interventions have been suspected of being able to trigger cervical artery dissection as an adverse event. The aim of this review is to provide an updated step-by-step risk–benefit assessment strategy regarding manual therapy and to provide tools for clinicians to exclude cervical artery dissection.

• Key messages

• Cervical mobilization and/or manipulation have been suspected to be able to trigger cervical artery dissection (CAD). However, these assumptions are based on case studies which are unable to established direct causality.

• The concern relates to the chicken and the egg discussion, i.e. whether the CAD symptoms lead the patient to seek cervical manual-therapy or whether the cervical manual-therapy provoked CAD along with the non-CAD presenting complaint.

• Thus, instead of proving a nearly impossible causality hypothesis, this study provide clinicians with an updated step-by-step risk–benefit assessment strategy tool to (a) facilitate clinicians understanding of CAD, (b) appraise the risk and applicability of cervical manual-therapy, and (c) provide clinicians with adequate tools to better detect and exclude CAD in clinical settings.

     

Possible manifestation of temporomandibular joint dysfunction on chiropractic cervical X-ray studies

OBJECTIVE: Our purpose was to show that biomechanical alterations toward and away from normal on x-ray studies may be the result of changes in temporomandibular joint dysfunction and to discuss possible neurologic explanations for this phenomenon. CLINICAL FEATURES: Two patients are discussed; the first had migraine headache symptoms, and the second had chronic hypomobility of mandibular opening, dizziness, headache, and neck pain and stiffness. In both patients mensuration changes in different types of cervical x-ray studies were noted in conjunction with exacerbation of, and elimination of, temporomandibular joint dysfunction. INTERVENTION: Comanagement of these cases was done with dental professionals. Chiropractic treatment included vectored/linear, upper cervical, high-velocity, low-amplitude chiropractic manipulation of the atlas vertebra, diversified manipulation, myofascial therapy, stretch and spray procedures, and soft tissue manual techniques. CONCLUSION: Temporomandibular joint dysfunction may cause cervical muscular and spinal biomechanical changes that may become visible and change on x-ray examination. Further investigation into this phenomenon is recommended.     

Uneventful upper cervical manipulation in the presence of a damaged vertebral artery

OBJECTIVE: To discuss a case in which a patient with a previously injured vertebral artery underwent manipulation in the upper cervical spine without alteration of her symptom pattern. The literature concerning the relative safety of specific upper cervical manipulative techniques is reviewed. CLINICAL FEATURES: A 42-year-old woman had a 3-week history of unilateral suboccipital pain that she related to a sudden twisting of her head and neck that occurred while she was putting sheets of drywall on top of her car. Subsequent examination by a neurologist 2 weeks later was unremarkable, and a tension-type headache was diagnosed. Approximately 10 days later (3 weeks after injury), a single high-velocity upper-cervical manipulation (incorporating slight rotation and full lateral flexion) was performed with no change in her symptom pattern. Two weeks after that, the patient had development of a lateral medullary syndrome (also known as Wallenberg syndrome) after she briefly extended and rotated her upper cervical spine while painting a ceiling. INTERVENTION AND OUTCOME: The patient was treated with anticoagulant therapy, and the lateral medullary infarct healed without incident. The spinocerebellar and subtle motor symptoms also resolved, but the ipsilateral suboccipital headache and the loss of temperature sensation associated with the spinothalamic tract lesion were still present 9 months later. CONCLUSION: This case report demonstrates that vigorous manipulation of the upper cervical spine is possible without injuring an already damaged vertebral artery. It is suggested that the line of drive used during the single manipulation, almost pure lateral flexion with slight rotation, was responsible for the apparent innocuous response. Guidelines for the evaluation and management of vertebral artery dissection are reviewed. Because it is currently impossible to identify patients at risk of having a dissected vertebral artery with standard in-office examination procedures, rotational manipulation of the upper cervical spine should be abandoned by all practitioners, and schools should remove such techniques from their curriculums.     

Is there a role for premanipulative testing before cervical manipulation?

BACKGROUND: Spinal manipulative therapy is used millions of times every year to relieve symptoms from biomechanic dysfunction of the cervical spine. Concern about cerebrovascular accidents after cervical manipulative therapy is common but rarely reported. Premanipulative tests of the vertebral artery are presumed to identify patients at risk but controversy exists about their usefulness. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to examine vertebral artery blood flow in patients with a positive premanipulative test for contraindication to spinal manipulative therapy and to investigate if chiropractors would reconsider treating such patients if dynamic vascular Doppler examination was normal. DESIGN AND SETTING: A prospective study at a university hospital vascular laboratory. METHODS: Chiropractors in private practice from 3 Danish counties referred patients with a positive premanipulative test for an examination of vertebral artery blood flow. Premanipulative testing was performed by an experienced chiropractor. Flow velocities were measured in both vertebral arteries by color duplex sonography. In addition, chiropractors were asked if they would treat their patient despite a positive premanipulative test if the vascular ultrasound examination was normal. RESULTS: A total of 20 consecutive patients with a positive premanipulative test were referred. Five were excluded because symptoms could not be reproduced during the vascular examination. In the remaining patients, no significant difference in peak flow velocity or time-averaged mean flow velocity with different head positions was found. Nineteen of 21 chiropractors would treat a patient with a positive premanipulative test if the vascular examination was normal. Eight of the patients with a positive manipulative test were treated without complications. Six are now symptom-free, and 2 have improved symptoms. The remaining 8 patients refused manipulation and continue to have the same symptoms. CONCLUSION: It appears that a positive premanipulative test is not an absolute contraindication to manipulation of the cervical spine. If the test is able to identify patients at risk for cerebrovascular accidents, we suggest patients with a reproducible positive test should be referred for a duplex examination of the vertebral artery flow. If duplex flow is normal, the patient should be eligible for cervical manipulation despite the positive premanipulative test.     

Management of chronic ankle pain using joint mobilization and ASTYM? treatment: a case report

Treatment of ankle sprains predominately focuses on the acute management of this condition; less emphasis is placed on the treatment of ankle sprains in the chronic phase of recovery. Manual therapy, in the form of joint mobilization and manipulation, has been shown to be effective in the management of this condition, but the combination of joint mobilization and manipulation in tandem with ASTYM® treatment has not been explored. The purpose of this case report is to chronicle the management of a patient with chronic ankle pain who was treated with manual therapy including manipulation and ASTYM treatment. As a result of a fall down stairs 6 months previously, the patient sustained a severe ankle sprain. The soft tissue damage was accompanied by bony disruptions which warranted the patient spending 3 weeks in a walking boot. At the initial evaluation, the patient reported difficulty with descending stairs reciprocally and not being able to run more than 4 minutes on the treadmill before the pain escalated to the level that she had to stop running. After five sessions of therapy consisting of joint mobilization, manipulation and ASTYM, the patient was able to descend stairs and run 40 minutes without pain.     

Dissection of the carotid artery as a cause of fatal airway obstruction

Carotid artery dissection is a rare entity, and most cases are attributable to causative factors, which include trauma and local malignancy. The vast majority of dissections present with cerebral infarct; those few that present with local mass effect and respiratory compromise may deteriorate rapidly, requiring urgent resuscitation and consideration of endotracheal intubation, which is often dangerous and/or impossible. The case of a spontaneous internal carotid artery dissection in an otherwise healthy young man, leading to gross mass effect and eventual fatal airway obstruction, is presented here. The need for a high index of suspicion for cervical vascular injury in cases of neck injury (even trivial), known head and neck malignancy/irradiation, or coagulopathy is highlighted. Patients presenting with unilateral neck swelling and symptoms related to mass effect must be assumed to have progressive airway obstruction, and difficult intubation should be anticipated.     

Vertebral artery dissection and cerebellar infarction following chiropractic manipulation

Vertebral artery dissection (VAD) associated with chiropractic cervical manipulation is a rare but potentially disabling condition. In this report, we present a young patient manifesting with repeated vertigo. Owing to the initial misdiagnosis, the patient later developed cerebellar stroke with inability to stand or walk. Vertigo and disequilibrium are the usual presenting symptoms of this condition, which can result from inner ear or vestibular nerve dysfunction, vertebrobasilar insufficiency, and even lethal cerebellar infarction or haemorrhage; these last two, although rarely seen in young adults, can be caused by traumatic or spontaneous arterial injury, including injury secondary to chiropractic cervical manipulation. A number of cases of VAD associated with chiropractic cervical manipulation have been reported, but rarely in the emergency medicine literature. We present a case of this rare occurrence, and discuss the diagnostic pitfalls.     

Treatment of a Patient with Cervical Radiculopathy Using Thoracic Spine Thrust Manipulation, Soft Tissue Mobilization, and Exercise

While there is currently little evidence to suggest which non-operative treatment approach is best for the management of patients with cervical radiculopathy, emerging evidence suggests that these patients benefit from a multimodal treatment approach. The purpose of this case report is to describe the physical therapy management of a patient with cervical radiculopathy. Diagnosis was based on the patient''s meeting three of the four criteria in the diagnostic test cluster currently used to identify patients with cervical radiculopathy. Treatment included thrust manipulation of the thoracic spine, soft tissue mobilization, and therapeutic exercise. After three visits, patient-perceived disability, as measured by the Patient-Specific Functional Scale, improved from 5/10 to 10/10. The Numeric Pain Rating Score decreased from 4.66/10 to 0/10. The patient rated his improvement as a very great deal better on the Global Rating of Change Scale. These clinically meaningful improvements were maintained at the 14-week follow-up. While a cause-and-effect relationship may not be established from a case report, a multimodal approach including thoracic spine manipulation, soft tissue mobilization, and therapeutic exercise was associated with decreased pain and perceived disability in a patient with cervical radiculopathy. Further research is needed to investigate benefits of the components of this approach.Key Words: Cervical Radiculopathy, Physical Therapy, Soft Tissue Mobilization, Spinal ManipulationCervical radiculopathy is a disorder of a cervical nerve root¹ and is common in the general population, with an annual incidence of approximately 83 per 100,000². Patients with cervical radiculopathy often report neck pain; however, they most frequently seek treatment to address their arm pain^1,3,4. People with neck pain combined with upper extremity symptoms experience greater levels of disability than do people with neck pain alone⁴. Authors have suggested that patients with neck and arm pain should be treated more expeditiously in order to avoid the further negative impact on mental health status associated with chronic symptoms⁴.Treatment strategies for patients with cervical radiculopathy range from conservative management to surgery. Evidence suggests that patients who are treated conservatively may experience superior outcomes compared to those who undergo surgery⁵; however, there is little evidence to suggest which non-operative interventions are the most effective^6,7. Recently, two case series^3,8 used a combination of thrust and non-thrust mobilization/manipulation techniques directed at the cervical and thoracic spine, mechanical cervical traction, and exercise to treat patients with a clinical diagnosis of cervical radiculopathy. Cleland et al³ reported that 10 of 11 patients demonstrated clinically meaningful improvement in pain and function at discharge and 6-month follow-up. Waldrop⁸ reported improvement of 13% to 88% in the Northwick Park Neck questionnaire scores in 6 patients, with scores ranging from 13% to 88%. A recent prospective cohort study⁷ also described the use of an individualized approach including thrust and non-thrust cervical mobilization/manipulation techniques, repeated endrange exercises to promote centralization of symptoms, neural mobilization, traction, and cervical stabilization exercises. Of the participants, 77% surpassed the minimally clinically important difference on the Bournemouth Disability Questionnaire at discharge (mean=11 visits). This value increased to 93% at long-term follow-up (mean=8.2 months).While these preliminary reports suggest that a multimodal treatment approach may be beneficial for patients with cervical radiculopathy, exactly which interventions should be included in this approach, and in what combination, requires further research. The purpose of this case report is to describe the evaluation, clinical decision-making process, and treatment of a patient with cervical radiculopathy. The rationale for thrust manipulation of the thoracic spine and soft tissue mobilization are discussed. Approval for this case report was provided by the Institutional Review Board at Cayuga Medical Center, Ithaca, New York.     

Gross morphology and pathoanatomy of the vertebral arteries

Cerebrovascular accidents are an uncommon, but well documented, complication of cervical spine manipulation. This paper reviews vertebral artery gross morphology and pathoanatomy as they relate to possible mechanisms of injury to this vessel. Certain positions of the head and neck can lead to vertebral artery compromise and may ultimately lead to a cerebrovascular accident. The results obtained from a cadaver study on vertebral artery diameter at the site of the posterior arch of atlas are also presented.     

Cervical spine manipulation: an alternative medical procedure with potentially fatal complications

There are multiple reports in the literature of serious and at times fatal complications after cervical spine manipulation therapy (CSMT), even though CSMT is considered by some health providers to be an effective and safe therapeutic procedure for head and neck pain syndromes. We report a case of a young female with cervicalgia and headache with fatal posterior circulation cerebrovascular accident after CSMT. Serious complications are infrequent, with a reported incidence between one per 100,000 to one in 2 million manipulations. The most frequent injuries involve artery dissection or spasm. Stroke as a complication of cervical manipulation and dissection of the vertebral arteries (VAD) is a rare but well recognized problem. Neck pain, headache, vertigo, vomiting and ataxia are typical symptoms of VAD, but this vascular injury also can be asymptomatic. The most common risk factors are migraine, hypertension, oral contraceptive pills and smoking. Stroke following CSMT is more common than the literature reports. The best values derive from retrospective surveys. The lack of identifiable risk factors place those who undergo CSMT at risk of neurologic damage. Accurate patient information and early recognition of the symptoms are important to avoid catastrophic consequences.     

Role of Manual Physical Therapy and Specific Exercise Intervention in the Treatment of a Patient with Cervicogenic Headaches: A Case Report

Abstract

Headaches are a common complaint among patients seeking medical care. This case report highlights the role of physical therapy (PT) management including manual therapy and specific exercise interventions in the care of a patient with cervicogenic headaches. The patient was an 18-year-old female college student with a medical diagnosis of migraine headaches. Her history included three previous motor vehicle accidents. Treatment from her primary care physician and optometrist had had no effect on her headache intensity and frequency. Findings on the PT examination included upper cervical segmental restrictions and neuromuscular imbalances. The primary treatment strategy for this patient included cervical manipulation, neuromuscular retraining of deep neck flexors, and soft tissue manipulation. The patient demonstrated improvement with a total of seven treatment sessions over a five-week period. Neck Pain Disability Index score improved from a score of 38% perceived disability at initial examination to a score of 10% upon discharge. Headache frequency and intensity significantly improved as upper cervical segmental mobility and deep cervical flexor function improved to within normal limits. This case report demonstrates the potential role of manual physical therapy and specific exercise intervention in quickly improving function and impairments in a patient with cervicogenic headaches.