Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics
Volume 28, Issue 8 , Pages 617-622, October 2005

An Analysis of the Etiology of Cervical Artery Dissections: 1994 to 2003

  • Michael T. Haneline, DC, MPH

      Affiliations

    • Associate Professor, Palmer College of Chiropractic West, San Jose, Calif
    • Corresponding Author InformationSubmit requests for reprints to: Michael T. Haneline, DC, MPH, Palmer College of Chiropractic West, 90 E. Tasman Drive, San Jose, CA 95134.
  • ,
  • Gary N. Lewkovich, DC

      Affiliations

    • Private Practice

Received 4 April 2004; received in revised form 6 July 2004

Abstract 

Objective

To provide a literature review of the etiologic breakdown of cervical artery dissections.

Methods

A literature search of the MEDLINE database was conducted for English-language articles published from 1994 to 2003 using the search terms cervical artery dissection (CAD), vertebral artery dissection, and internal carotid artery dissection. Articles were selected for inclusion only if they incorporated a minimum of 5 case reports of CAD and contained sufficient information to ascertain a plausible etiology.

Results

One thousand fourteen citations were identified; 20 met the selection criteria. There were 606 CAD cases reported in these studies; 321 (54%) were internal carotid artery dissection and 253 (46%) were vertebral artery dissection, not including cases with both. Three hundred seventy-one (61%) were classified as spontaneous, 178 (30%) were associated with trauma/trivial trauma, and 53 (9%) were associated with cervical spinal manipulation. If one apparently biased study is dropped from the data pool, the percentage of CADs related to cervical spinal manipulation drops to approximately 6%.

Conclusions

The case series that were reviewed in this article indicated that most CADs reported in the previous decade were spontaneous but that some were associated with trauma/trivial trauma, and a minority with cervical spine manipulation. This etiologic breakdown of CAD does not differ significantly from what has been portrayed by most other authors.

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 15.00 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

 Sources of support: No external funding was provided for this study.

PII: S0161-4754(05)00246-0

doi:10.1016/j.jmpt.2005.08.016

Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics
Volume 28, Issue 8 , Pages 617-622, October 2005