Nuffield Department of Clinical Neurosciences, The University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.
Department of Physical Therapy and Human Movement Sciences, Northwestern University, Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL, United States.
Pain. 2022 Jul 1;163(7):e789-e811. doi: 10.1097/j.pain.0000000000002509. Epub 2021 Oct 12.
There is no clear understanding of the mechanisms causing persistent pain in patients with whiplash-associated disorder (WAD). The aim of this systematic review was to assess the evidence for nerve pathology and neuropathic pain in patients with WAD. EMBASE, PubMed, CINAHL (EBSCO), and MEDLINE were searched from inception to September 1, 2020. Study quality and risk of bias were assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scales. Fifty-four studies reporting on 390,644 patients and 918 controls were included. Clinical questionnaires suggested symptoms of predominant neuropathic characteristic in 34% of patients (range 25%-75%). The mean prevalence of nerve pathology detected with neurological examination was 13% (0%-100%) and 32% (10%-100%) with electrodiagnostic testing. Patients independent of WAD severity (Quebec Task Force grades I-IV) demonstrated significantly impaired sensory detection thresholds of the index finger compared with controls, including mechanical (SMD 0.65 [0.30; 1.00] P < 0.005), current (SMD 0.82 [0.25; 1.39] P = 0.0165), cold (SMD -0.43 [-0.73; -0.13] P = 0.0204), and warm detection (SMD 0.84 [0.25; 1.42] P = 0.0200). Patients with WAD had significantly heightened nerve mechanosensitivity compared with controls on median nerve pressure pain thresholds (SMD -1.10 [-1.50; -0.70], P < 0.0001) and neurodynamic tests (SMD 1.68 [0.92; 2.44], P = 0.0004). Similar sensory dysfunction and nerve mechanosensitivity was seen in WAD grade II, which contradicts its traditional definition of absent nerve involvement. Our findings strongly suggest a subset of patients with WAD demonstrate signs of peripheral nerve pathology and neuropathic pain. Although there was heterogeneity among some studies, typical WAD classifications may need to be reconsidered and include detailed clinical assessments for nerve integrity.
对于与挥鞭样损伤相关的障碍(WAD)患者持续性疼痛的发生机制尚不清楚。本系统评价旨在评估 WAD 患者神经病理学和神经病理性疼痛的证据。从建库到 2020 年 9 月 1 日,我们检索了 EMBASE、PubMed、CINAHL(EBSCO)和 MEDLINE。使用纽卡斯尔-渥太华质量评估量表评估研究质量和偏倚风险。纳入了 54 项研究,共报告了 390644 例患者和 918 例对照。临床问卷提示 34%(25%-75%)的患者存在以神经病理性为主要特征的症状。通过神经检查检测到的神经病理学的平均发生率为 13%(0%-100%),通过电诊断检测的发生率为 32%(10%-100%)。无论 WAD 严重程度(魁北克任务组分级 I-IV)如何,患者的食指感觉检测阈值均明显低于对照组,包括机械感觉(SMD 0.65[0.30;1.00],P<0.005)、电流感觉(SMD 0.82[0.25;1.39],P=0.0165)、冷觉(SMD-0.43[-0.73; -0.13],P=0.0204)和温觉(SMD 0.84[0.25;1.42],P=0.0200)。与对照组相比,WAD 患者的正中神经压痛阈(SMD-1.10[-1.50; -0.70],P<0.0001)和神经动力学试验(SMD 1.68[0.92; 2.44],P=0.0004)的神经机械敏感性明显升高。WAD Ⅱ级患者也存在类似的感觉功能障碍和神经机械敏感性,这与传统的无神经受累定义相矛盾。我们的研究结果强烈表明,WAD 患者中有一部分存在周围神经病理学和神经病理性疼痛的迹象。尽管一些研究存在异质性,但可能需要重新考虑典型的 WAD 分类,并包括对神经完整性的详细临床评估。