Spontaneous Cervical Artery Dissections and Implications for Homocysteine

Dr Haynes' comments on my homocysteine study, recently published,1 are a welcome response from an individual who has made important contributions in the field of vertebral arterial patency and premanipulative testing by means of Doppler velocimetry.2 Dr Haynes' arguments concerning the noninvasiveness and safety of the procedure, the relatively low cost of the Doppler velocimeter, and what appears to be good interexaminer reliability of the instrument are well taken; however, a number of additional considerations need to be kept in mind as well:

Although high sensitivity of the technique with encouraging kappa statistics have provided encouraging signs for considering this protocol for routine premanipulative testing, further data on its specificity and sensitivity for identifying arteries likely to dissect would be highly desirable.

As Dr. Haynes aptly points out, the need to provide further homocysteine data to more definitively establish the risk of cervical manipulation is clearly evident as well; however, there is a now a 30-year compendium of literature associating homocysteine with the disruption of arterial and epithelial integrity which cannot be ignored:

There is little doubt that as much useful information as possible regarding premanipulative testing needs to be conveyed to the chiropractic practitioner—as Dr Haynes has pointed out—if arterial dissections or strokes are to be avoided. However, as both the study by Schievink,7 which Haynes has cited, as well as my own studies1, 8 have shown, the risk of spontaneous arterial dissection that has been reported may be as much as an order of magnitude greater than the stroke rates generally attributed to chiropractic intervention.8 Thus, in terms of the welfare of the patient, one needs to look beyond what Dr Haynes has proposed and try to provide the most useful information for the individual who may be at risk for an arterial dissection—whether a chiropractic patient or not. Thus, I would maintain that until a more definitive candidate for testing the population at large can be presented, the homocysteine determination should remain a consideration for adding to the patient's profile. In a perfect world, it would be included most likely by the medical physician (who in best medical practice would be screening the patient for cardiovascular risk factors anyway) in a routine physical examination of the patient. Following this scenario, there would be no additional blood-stick but simply the retrieval of data that most ideally would already have been included in a patient's background information.

Furthermore, I believe that pursuing the biochemistry of the vertebral artery by means of studying homocysteine or any other metabolite levels is the best way to understand how both genetic and environmental defects may have conspired to place the vertebral arteries of certain individuals in harm's way. Certainly, one would hope for a thorough biochemical, as well as structural, examination of the circulatory system of any future patient suspected of having expired as either a direct or indirect result of spinal manipulation—a process that was outrageously thwarted recently with the disappearance of the heart of Lana Lewis, the deceased subject of the recent inquest in Toronto in which attempts were made to link a chiropractor to the death of a patient 8 days after the appointment.9