Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, School of Health Sciences, Division of Physical Therapy and Sport Rehabilitation, University of Nottingham, United Kingdom.
Department of Physical Therapy, LUNEX International University of Health, Exercise and Sports, Differdange, Luxembourg; Luxembourg Health & Sport Sciences Research Institute A.s.b.l., Differdange, Luxembourg.
Braz J Phys Ther. 2023 May-Jun;27(3):100493. doi: 10.1016/j.bjpt.2023.100493. Epub 2023 Mar 17.
Blood flow and brain ischaemia have been of interest to physical therapists for decades. Despite much debate, and multiple publications around risk assessment of the cervical spine, more work is required to achieve consensus on this vital, complex topic. In 2020, the International Federation of Orthopaedic Manipulative Physical Therapists (IFOMPT) Cervical Framework adopted the dubious terminology 'vascular pathologies of the neck', which is misleading, on the premise that 1) not all flow limitations leading to ischaemia, are associated with observable blood vessel pathology and 2) not all blood flow limitations leading to ischaemia, are in the anatomical region of the 'neck'.
This paper draws upon the full body of haemodynamic knowledge and science, to describe the variety of arterial flow limitations affecting the cervico-cranial region.
It is the authors' contention that to apply clinical reasoning and appropriate risk assessment of the cervical spine, there is a requirement for clinicians to have a clear understanding of anatomy/anatomical relations, the haemodynamic science of vascular flow limitation, and related pathologies. This paper describes the wide range of presentations and haemodynamic mechanisms that clinicians may encounter in practice. In cases with a high index suspicion of vascular involvement or an adverse response to assessment/intervention, appropriate referral should be made for further investigations, using consistent terminology. The term 'vascular flow limitation' is proposed when considering the range of mechanisms at play. This fits the terminology used (in vascular literature) at other anatomical sites and is understood by medical colleagues.
几十年来,血流和脑缺血一直是物理治疗师关注的焦点。尽管存在很多争议,并且围绕颈椎风险评估发表了多篇文章,但在这个至关重要且复杂的主题上,仍需要更多的工作来达成共识。2020 年,国际骨科手法物理治疗师联合会(IFOMPT)颈椎框架采用了有争议的术语“颈部血管病理学”,前提是 1)并非所有导致缺血的血流限制都与可观察到的血管病理学有关,2)并非所有导致缺血的血流限制都在“颈部”的解剖区域。
本文借鉴了整个血液动力学知识和科学体系,描述了影响颈颅区域的各种动脉血流限制。
作者认为,要进行颈椎的临床推理和适当的风险评估,临床医生需要清楚地了解解剖/解剖关系、血管血流限制的血液动力学科学以及相关病理学。本文描述了临床医生在实践中可能遇到的广泛表现和血液动力学机制。在高度怀疑血管受累或对评估/干预有不良反应的情况下,应使用一致的术语,根据需要进行进一步调查。在考虑发挥作用的各种机制时,提出了“血管血流限制”一词。这符合在其他解剖部位使用的血管文献中的术语,并且被医学同事所理解。