[Non-cerebrovascular complication in chirotherapy manipulation of the cervical vertebrae]

Safety of cervical spine manipulation: are adverse events preventable and are manipulations being performed appropriately? A review of 134 case reports

BACKGROUND

Cervical spine manipulation (CSM) is a commonly utilized intervention, but its use remains controversial.

PURPOSE

To retrospectively analyze all available documented case reports in the literature describing patients who had experienced severe adverse events (AEs) after receiving CSM to determine if the CSM was used appropriately, and if these types of AEs could have been prevented using sound clinical reasoning on the part of the clinician.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health were systematically searched for case reports between 1950 and 2010 of AEs following CSM.

STUDY SELECTION

Case reports were included if they were peer-reviewed; published between 1950 and 2010; case reports or case series; and had CSM as an intervention. Articles were excluded if the AE occurred without CSM (e.g. spontaneous); they were systematic or literature reviews. Data extracted from each case report included: gender; age; who performed the CSM and why; presence of contraindications; the number of manipulation interventions performed; initial symptoms experienced after the CSM; and type of resultant AE.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Based on the information gathered, CSMs were categorized as appropriate or inappropriate, and AEs were categorized as preventable, unpreventable, or unknown. Chi-square analysis with an alpha level of 0.05 was used to determine if there was a difference in proportion between six categories: appropriate/preventable, appropriate/unpreventable, appropriate/unknown, inappropriate/preventable, inappropriate/unpreventable, and inappropriate/unknown.

RESULTS

One hundred thirty four cases, reported in 93 case reports, were reviewed. There was no significant difference in proportions between appropriateness and preventability, P = .46. Of the 134 cases, 60 (44.8%) were categorized as preventable, 14 (10.4%) were unpreventable and 60 (44.8%) were categorized as 'unknown'. CSM was performed appropriately in 80.6% of cases. Death resulted in 5.2% (n = 7) of the cases, mostly caused by arterial dissection.

LIMITATIONS

There may have been discrepancies between what was reported in the cases and what actually occurred, since physicians dealing with the effects of the AE, rather than the clinician performing the CSM, published many of the cases.

CONCLUSIONS

This review showed that, if all contraindications and red flags were ruled out, there was potential for a clinician to prevent 44.8% of AEs associated with CSM. Additionally, 10.4% of the events were unpreventable, suggesting some inherent risk associated with CSM even after a thorough exam and proper clinical reasoning.

[The role of the cervical spine and the craniomandibular system in the pathogenesis of tinnitus. Somatosensory tinnitus]

The causes of tinnitus, vertigo, and hearing disturbances may be pathological processes in the cervical spine and temporomaxillary joint. In these cases, tinnitus is called somatosensory tinnitus (SST). For afferences of the cervical spine, projections of neuronal connections in the cochlear nucleus were found. A reflex-like impact of the cervical spine on the cochlear nucleus can be assumed. The tinnitus treatment concept of the Charité University Hospital in Berlin involves the cooperation of ENT specialists with many other disciplines in an outpatient clinic. A standardized examination protocol has been established, and physical therapy has been integrated into the interdisciplinary tinnitus treatment. For tinnitus-modulating therapy of muscular trigger points, local anesthetics as well as self-massage or treatment by a physiotherapist or osteopath are useful.

Adverse effects of spinal manipulation: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To identify adverse effects of spinal manipulation.

DESIGN

Systematic review of papers published since 2001.

SETTING

Six electronic databases.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Reports of adverse effects published between January 2001 and June 2006. There were no restrictions according to language of publication or research design of the reports.

RESULTS

The searches identified 32 case reports, four case series, two prospective series, three case-control studies and three surveys. In case reports or case series, more than 200 patients were suspected to have been seriously harmed. The most common serious adverse effects were due to vertebral artery dissections. The two prospective reports suggested that relatively mild adverse effects occur in 30% to 61% of all patients. The case-control studies suggested a causal relationship between spinal manipulation and the adverse effect. The survey data indicated that even serious adverse effects are rarely reported in the medical literature.

CONCLUSIONS

Spinal manipulation, particularly when performed on the upper spine, is frequently associated with mild to moderate adverse effects. It can also result in serious complications such as vertebral artery dissection followed by stroke. Currently, the incidence of such events is not known. In the interest of patient safety we should reconsider our policy towards the routine use of spinal manipulation.

Adverse effects of spinal manipulation: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To identify adverse effects of spinal manipulation.

DESIGN

Systematic review of papers published since 2001.

SETTING

Six electronic databases.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Reports of adverse effects published between January 2001 and June 2006. There were no restrictions according to language of publication or research design of the reports.

RESULTS

The searches identified 32 case reports, four case series, two prospective series, three case-control studies and three surveys. In case reports or case series, more than 200 patients were suspected to have been seriously harmed. The most common serious adverse effects were due to vertebral artery dissections. The two prospective reports suggested that relatively mild adverse effects occur in 30% to 61% of all patients. The case-control studies suggested a causal relationship between spinal manipulation and the adverse effect. The survey data indicated that even serious adverse effects are rarely reported in the medical literature.

CONCLUSIONS

Spinal manipulation, particularly when performed on the upper spine, is frequently associated with mild to moderate adverse effects. It can also result in serious complications such as vertebral artery dissection followed by stroke. Currently, the incidence of such events is not known. In the interest of patient safety we should reconsider our policy towards the routine use of spinal manipulation.

Lumbar epidural hematoma after chiropractic manipulation for lower-back pain: case report

OBJECTIVE

Spinal manipulation therapy is widely used for the treatment of lower-back pain. Serious complications to spinal manipulation are most often seen in the cervical region. We report the first case of a lumbar epidural hematoma after chiropractic manipulation.

CLINICAL PRESENTATION

A 77-year-old man with a long history of lower-back pain underwent chiropractic manipulation of the lower spine. He was receiving anticoagulation therapy as a result of chronic atrial fibrillation. After a manipulation session, he developed partial cauda equina syndrome with lower extremity paresis and urinary retention. Computed tomographic and magnetic resonance imaging scans showed an epidural hematoma at the L3 level.

INTERVENTION AND TECHNIQUE

We performed surgical evacuation of the hematoma through laminectomy of L3 and L4. During the follow-up period, his motor deficits improved, but the bladder dysfunction remained.

CONCLUSION

This is the first case report of a lumbar epidural hematoma after chiropractic manipulation. Even rare complications after chiropractic manipulation of the spine should be weighed against potential benefits of such treatment. Caution should be shown in patients receiving antithrombotic therapy.

[Is systematic radiography needed before spinal manipulation? Recommendations of the SOFMMOO]

OBJECTIVES

The French National Health Authority recommends systematic radiography before lumbar manipulation. However, current research shows radiography to have more disadvantages than advantages. For the cervical spine, in cases of complication following cervical manipulation, the lack of prior radiography is a fault, even if such x-ray results would have advised manipulation. To establish clear recommendations on this topic, we searched in the literature for complications of spinal manipulations that could have been prevented had preliminary radiography been performed to determine whether these complications were anticipated or not by the international guidelines.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Literature search.

RESULTS

For the lumbar and thoracic spine, the international guidelines are sufficient, except in cases of aneurysmal bone cyst, which can appear until the age of 25 years. For the cervical spine, despite a lack of data in the literature, prudence and medicolegal issues justify the performance of systematic radiography.

CONCLUSION

The SOFMMOO recommends systematic radiography prior to cervical manipulation and in case of back or neck pain in patients of less than 25 years of age. In all other cases, the international guidelines provide sufficient recommendations.

[Accusations of malpractice in chirotherapeutic treatment]

BACKGROUND

Little is known about the incidence of adverse effects after chiropractic manipulation. Over representation of severe and under representation of less severe complications has to be assumed.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A total of 57 expert opinions from the malpractice advisory board of the North Rhine General Medical Council (Nordrheinische Arztekammer), as well as judgments from German courts since 1949, were analyzed.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

A total of 16 of 57 cases of chiropractic manipulation (since 1975) were attested as malpractice by expert opinion, seven of which had significant negative consequences. In nine cases, the judgments of German courts refer to manual therapy. Of these, five deal with informed consent. Observance of the "Bingen Declaration" would have avoided all cases of malpractice found by the advisory board over 29 years.

Risks associated with spinal manipulation

The aim of this systematic review was to summarize the evidence about the risks of spinal manipulation. Articles were located through searching three electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library), contacting experts (n =9), scanning reference lists of relevant articles, and searching departmental files. Reports in any language containing data relating to risks associated with spinal manipulation were included, irrespective of the profession of the therapist. Where available, systematic reviews were used as the basis of this article. All papers were evaluated independently by the authors. Data from prospective studies suggest that minor, transient adverse events occur in approximately half of all patients receiving spinal manipulation. The most common serious adverse events are vertebrobasilar accidents, disk herniation, and cauda equina syndrome. Estimates of the incidence of serious complications range from 1 per 2 million manipulations to 1 per 400,000. Given the popularity of spinal manipulation, its safety requires rigorous investigation.