• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

美国成年人中颈动脉夹层与脊柱推拿的相关性。

The association between cervical artery dissection and spinal manipulation among US adults.

机构信息

Health Services Research, Southern California University of Health Sciences, Whittier, CA, USA.

The Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice, Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH, USA.

出版信息

Eur Spine J. 2023 Oct;32(10):3497-3504. doi: 10.1007/s00586-023-07844-9. Epub 2023 Jul 8.

DOI:10.1007/s00586-023-07844-9
PMID:37422607
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10591258/
Abstract

PURPOSE

Cervical artery dissection (CeAD), which includes both vertebral artery dissection (VAD) and carotid artery dissection (CAD), is the most serious safety concern associated with cervical spinal manipulation (CSM). We evaluated the association between CSM and CeAD among US adults.

METHODS

Through analysis of health claims data, we employed a case-control study with matched controls, a case-control design in which controls were diagnosed with ischemic stroke, and a case-crossover design in which recent exposures were compared to exposures in the same case that occurred 6-7 months earlier. We evaluated the association between CeAD and the 3-level exposure, CSM versus office visit for medical evaluation and management (E&M) versus neither, with E&M set as the referent group.

RESULTS

We identified 2337 VAD cases and 2916 CAD cases. Compared to population controls, VAD cases were 0.17 (95% CI 0.09 to 0.32) times as likely to have received CSM in the previous week as compared to E&M. In other words, E&M was about 5 times more likely than CSM in the previous week in cases, relative to controls. CSM was 2.53 (95% CI 1.71 to 3.68) times as likely as E&M in the previous week among individuals with VAD than among individuals experiencing a stroke without CeAD. In the case-crossover study, CSM was 0.38 (95% CI 0.15 to 0.91) times as likely as E&M in the week before a VAD, relative to 6 months earlier. In other words, E&M was approximately 3 times more likely than CSM in the previous week in cases, relative to controls. Results for the 14-day and 30-day timeframes were similar to those at one week.

CONCLUSION

Among privately insured US adults, the overall risk of CeAD is very low. Prior receipt of CSM was more likely than E&M among VAD patients as compared to stroke patients. However, for CAD patients as compared to stroke patients, as well as for both VAD and CAD patients in comparison with population controls and in case-crossover analysis, prior receipt of E&M was more likely than CSM.

摘要

目的

颈椎动脉夹层(CeAD)包括椎动脉夹层(VAD)和颈动脉夹层(CAD),是与颈椎推拿(CSM)相关的最严重的安全隐患。我们评估了美国成年人中 CSM 和 CeAD 之间的关联。

方法

通过健康索赔数据分析,我们采用病例对照研究,对照为缺血性脑卒中患者,病例交叉设计,最近的暴露与 6-7 个月前的同一病例的暴露进行比较。我们评估了 CeAD 与 3 级暴露(CSM 与医疗评估和管理(E&M)就诊和既无暴露)之间的关联,以 E&M 作为参照组。

结果

我们确定了 2337 例 VAD 病例和 2916 例 CAD 病例。与人群对照相比,VAD 病例在过去一周内接受 CSM 的可能性是接受 E&M 的 0.17(95%CI 0.09 至 0.32)倍。换句话说,在病例中,E&M 比 CSM 更有可能在过去一周内发生,相对于对照组。在 VAD 患者中,CSM 在过去一周内发生的可能性是 E&M 的 2.53(95%CI 1.71 至 3.68)倍,而在没有 CeAD 的脑卒中患者中。在病例交叉研究中,CSM 在 VAD 前一周发生的可能性是 E&M 的 0.38(95%CI 0.15 至 0.91)倍,而在 6 个月前。换句话说,在病例中,E&M 比 CSM 更有可能在过去一周内发生,相对于对照组。14 天和 30 天的时间框架的结果与一周时相似。

结论

在私人保险的美国成年人中,CeAD 的总体风险非常低。与脑卒中患者相比,VAD 患者接受 CSM 的可能性大于 E&M。然而,与脑卒中患者相比,CAD 患者以及 VAD 和 CAD 患者与人群对照和病例交叉分析相比,E&M 发生的可能性大于 CSM。

相似文献

1
The association between cervical artery dissection and spinal manipulation among US adults.美国成年人中颈动脉夹层与脊柱推拿的相关性。
Eur Spine J. 2023 Oct;32(10):3497-3504. doi: 10.1007/s00586-023-07844-9. Epub 2023 Jul 8.
2
Cervical artery dissection in young adults in the stroke in young Fabry patients (sifap1) study.年轻法布里病患者卒中研究(sifap1)中年轻成年人的颈动脉夹层。
Cerebrovasc Dis. 2015;39(2):110-21. doi: 10.1159/000371338. Epub 2015 Jan 23.
3
Association between cervical artery dissection and spinal manipulative therapy -a medicare claims analysis.颈椎动脉夹层与脊柱推拿疗法的相关性——一项医疗保险索赔分析。
BMC Geriatr. 2022 Nov 29;22(1):917. doi: 10.1186/s12877-022-03495-5.
4
Does cervical manipulative therapy cause vertebral artery dissection and stroke?颈椎整复疗法会导致椎动脉夹层和中风吗?
Neurologist. 2008 Jan;14(1):66-73. doi: 10.1097/NRL.0b013e318164e53d.
5
Influenza-Like Illness is Associated with Increased Short-Term Risk of Cervical Artery Dissection.流感样疾病与短时间内增加的颈动脉夹层风险相关。
J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis. 2021 Feb;30(2):105490. doi: 10.1016/j.jstrokecerebrovasdis.2020.105490. Epub 2020 Nov 27.
6
Characteristics and outcomes of patients with multiple cervical artery dissection.多支颈内动脉夹层患者的特征和结局。
Stroke. 2014 Jan;45(1):37-41. doi: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.113.001654. Epub 2013 Dec 10.
7
Differential features of carotid and vertebral artery dissections: the CADISP study.颈动脉和椎动脉夹层的不同特征:CADISP 研究。
Neurology. 2011 Sep 20;77(12):1174-81. doi: 10.1212/WNL.0b013e31822f03fc. Epub 2011 Sep 7.
8
Clinical perceptions of the risk of vertebral artery dissection after cervical manipulation: the effect of referral bias.颈椎手法治疗后椎动脉夹层风险的临床认知:转诊偏倚的影响。
Spine J. 2002 Sep-Oct;2(5):334-42. doi: 10.1016/s1529-9430(02)00411-4.
9
Differential Risk Factors and Outcomes of Ischemic Stroke due to Cervical Artery Dissection in Young Adults.青年因颈动脉夹层导致缺血性脑卒中的差异风险因素和结局。
Cerebrovasc Dis. 2020;49(5):509-515. doi: 10.1159/000510437. Epub 2020 Sep 25.
10
Cervical arterial dissections and association with cervical manipulative therapy: a statement for healthcare professionals from the american heart association/american stroke association.颈动脉硬化夹层及其与颈椎手法治疗的关联:美国心脏协会/美国中风协会给医疗保健专业人员的声明
Stroke. 2014 Oct;45(10):3155-74. doi: 10.1161/STR.0000000000000016. Epub 2014 Aug 7.

引用本文的文献

1
Vertebral Artery Dissection Following High Velocity Low Amplitude Cervical Manipulation: A Case Report.高速低振幅颈椎手法治疗后椎动脉夹层:一例报告
Cureus. 2025 Jul 10;17(7):e87689. doi: 10.7759/cureus.87689. eCollection 2025 Jul.
2
Missing information and selective reporting confounds the literature on the association between spinal manipulation and vertebral artery dissection.信息缺失和选择性报告使关于脊柱推拿与椎动脉夹层之间关联的文献变得混乱。
Neurol Sci. 2025 Aug 6. doi: 10.1007/s10072-025-08394-2.
3
Combined chiropractic care and Tai Chi for chronic neck pain: A protocol for a pilot randomized trial.脊椎按摩疗法与太极拳联合治疗慢性颈部疼痛:一项试点随机试验方案。
Contemp Clin Trials Commun. 2025 Apr 11;45:101482. doi: 10.1016/j.conctc.2025.101482. eCollection 2025 Jun.
4
Chiropractic and Spinal Manipulation: A Review of Research Trends, Evidence Gaps, and Guideline Recommendations.整脊疗法与脊柱推拿:研究趋势、证据空白及指南建议综述
J Clin Med. 2024 Sep 24;13(19):5668. doi: 10.3390/jcm13195668.
5
Plausible Mechanisms of Causation of Immediate Stroke by Cervical Spine Manipulation: A Narrative Review.颈椎推拿导致即刻卒中的可能致病机制:一项叙述性综述
Cureus. 2024 Mar 20;16(3):e56565. doi: 10.7759/cureus.56565. eCollection 2024 Mar.
6
Symptoms of Patients With Vertebral Artery Dissection Presenting to Chiropractors: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.向脊椎按摩师就诊的椎动脉夹层患者的症状:系统评价与荟萃分析
Cureus. 2023 Dec 29;15(12):e51297. doi: 10.7759/cureus.51297. eCollection 2023 Dec.

本文引用的文献

1
Evidence-based treatment recommendations for neck and low back pain across Europe: A systematic review of guidelines.基于证据的欧洲颈腰痛治疗推荐:指南的系统评价。
Eur J Pain. 2021 Feb;25(2):275-295. doi: 10.1002/ejp.1679. Epub 2020 Nov 12.
2
Manipulation and Mobilization for Treating Chronic Nonspecific Neck Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis for an Appropriateness Panel.手法治疗和关节松动术治疗慢性非特异性颈痛:适宜性评价小组的系统评价和荟萃分析。
Pain Physician. 2019 Mar;22(2):E55-E70.
3
Non-pharmacological management of persistent headaches associated with neck pain: A clinical practice guideline from the Ontario protocol for traffic injury management (OPTIMa) collaboration.与颈痛相关的持续性头痛的非药物管理:安大略省交通伤管理方案(OPTIMa)合作的临床实践指南。
Eur J Pain. 2019 Jul;23(6):1051-1070. doi: 10.1002/ejp.1374. Epub 2019 Feb 28.
4
A case-control study of the determinants for cervicocerebral artery dissection.颈内动脉夹层的决定因素的病例对照研究。
J Neurol. 2019 Jan;266(1):119-123. doi: 10.1007/s00415-018-9096-0. Epub 2018 Nov 12.
5
Dissection of Cervical and Cerebral Arteries.颈动脉和脑动脉解剖
Curr Neurol Neurosci Rep. 2017 Aug;17(8):59. doi: 10.1007/s11910-017-0769-3.
6
The Treatment of Neck Pain-Associated Disorders and Whiplash-Associated Disorders: A Clinical Practice Guideline.颈部疼痛相关疾病和挥鞭样损伤相关疾病的治疗:临床实践指南。
J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2016 Oct;39(8):523-564.e27. doi: 10.1016/j.jmpt.2016.08.007.
7
Cervicocerebral artery dissection.颈脑动脉夹层
Curr Opin Cardiol. 2015 Nov;30(6):603-10. doi: 10.1097/HCO.0000000000000224.
8
Cervical artery dissection: trauma and other potential mechanical trigger events.颈内动脉夹层:创伤和其他潜在的机械触发事件。
Neurology. 2013 May 21;80(21):1950-7. doi: 10.1212/WNL.0b013e318293e2eb. Epub 2013 May 1.
9
Assessing the risk of stroke from neck manipulation: a systematic review.评估颈部推拿致中风风险:系统评价。
Int J Clin Pract. 2012 Oct;66(10):940-7. doi: 10.1111/j.1742-1241.2012.03004.x.
10
Clinical practice implications of the Bone and Joint Decade 2000-2010 Task Force on Neck Pain and Its Associated Disorders: from concepts and findings to recommendations.2000 - 2010年骨骼与关节十年任务组关于颈部疼痛及其相关疾病的临床实践意义:从概念、发现到建议
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2008 Feb 15;33(4 Suppl):S199-213. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181644641.