Cervicocerebral artery dissection stands out as a significant contributor to ischemic stroke in young adults. Several studies have shown that arterial tortuosity is associated with dissection. We searched Pubmed and Embase to identify studies on the association between arterial tortuosity and cervicocerebral artery dissection, and to perform a review on the epidemiology of cervicocerebral artery tortuosity and dissection, pathophysiology, measurement of vessels tortuosity, strength of association between tortuosity and dissection, clinical manifestation and management strategies. The prevalence of tortuosity in dissected cervical arteries was reported to be around 22%-65% while it is only around 8%-22% in non-dissected arteries. In tortuous cervical arteries elastin and tunica media degradation, increased wall stiffness, changes in hemodynamics as well as arterial wall inflammation might be associated with dissection. Arterial tortuosity index and vertebrobasilar artery deviation is used to measure the level of vessel tortuosity. Studies have shown an independent association between these two measurements and cervicocerebral artery dissection. Different anatomical variants of tortuosity such as loops, coils and kinks may have a different level of association with cervicocerebral artery dissection. Symptomatic patients with extracranial cervical artery dissection are often treated with anticoagulant or antiplatelet agents, while patients with intracranial arterial dissection were often treated with antiplatelets only due to concerns of developing subarachnoid hemorrhage. Patients with recurrent ischemia, compromised cerebral blood flow or contraindications for antithrombotic agents are usually treated with open surgery or endovascular technique. Those with subarachnoid hemorrhage and intracranial artery dissection are often managed with surgical intervention due to high risk of re-hemorrhage.

Recent media coverage of high-profile cases of cervical artery dissection (CAD) has ignited the discussion about the role of cervical spine manipulation (CSM) in causing cervical artery dissection. However, research does not support a causal association between cervical spine manipulation and cervical artery dissection in a healthy cervical spine. The objective of this study was to review the 10 most recent case reports of cervical spine manipulation and cervical artery dissection for convincing evidence of the causation of cervical artery dissection by cervical spine manipulation. Nine of 10 case reports showed no convincing evidence of a causal relationship between cervical spine manipulation and cervical artery dissection. The 10th case report was exceptional as the CSM was contraindicated by pre-existing cervical spine pathology. We conclude that these 10 case reports provide no convincing evidence of the causation of cervical artery dissection by cervical spine manipulation in a healthy cervical spine. One case report demonstrated that cervical spine manipulation can cause cervical artery dissection when performed in the presence of pre-existing cervical spine pathology. Therefore, we conclude that practitioners should exclude cervical spine pathology before performing cervical spine manipulation.

UNASSIGNED: It is uncertain whether antiplatelets or anticoagulants are more effective in preventing early recurrent stroke in patients with cervical artery dissection. Following the publication of the observational Antithrombotic for STOP-CAD (Stroke Prevention in Cervical Artery Dissection) study, which has more than doubled available data, we performed an updated systematic review and meta-analysis comparing antiplatelets versus anticoagulation in cervical artery dissection.
UNASSIGNED: The systematic review was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42023468063). We searched 5 databases using a combination of keywords that encompass different antiplatelets and anticoagulants, as well as cervical artery dissection. We included relevant randomized trials and included observational studies of dissection unrelated to major trauma. Where studies were sufficiently similar, we performed meta-analyses for efficacy (ischemic stroke) and safety (major hemorrhage, symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage, and death) outcomes using relative risks.
UNASSIGNED: We identified 11 studies (2 randomized trials and 9 observational studies) that met the inclusion criteria. These included 5039 patients (30% [1512] treated with anticoagulation and 70% [3527]) treated with antiplatelets]. In meta-analysis, anticoagulation was associated with a lower ischemic stroke risk (relative risk, 0.63 [95% CI, 0.43 to 0.94]; P=0.02; I2=0%) but higher major bleeding risk (relative risk, 2.25 [95% CI, 1.07 to 4.72]; P=0.03, I2=0%). The risks of death and symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage were similar between the 2 treatments. Effect sizes were larger in randomized trials. There are insufficient data on the efficacy and safety of dual antiplatelet therapy or direct oral anticoagulants.
UNASSIGNED: In this study of patients with cervical artery dissection, anticoagulation was superior to antiplatelet therapy in reducing ischemic stroke but carried a higher major bleeding risk. This argues for an individualized therapeutic approach incorporating the net clinical benefit of ischemic stroke reduction and bleeding risks. Large randomized clinical trials are required to clarify optimal antithrombotic strategies for management of cervical artery dissection.

UNASSIGNED: Cervical artery dissection is the most common cause of stroke in younger adults. To date, there is no conclusive evidence on which antithrombotic therapy should be used to treat patients.
UNASSIGNED: To perform an individual patient data meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials comparing anticoagulants and antiplatelets in prevention of stroke after cervical artery dissection.
UNASSIGNED: PubMed.gov, Cochrane database, Embase, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched from inception to August 1, 2023.
UNASSIGNED: Randomized clinical trials that investigated the effectiveness and safety of antithrombotic treatment (antiplatelets vs anticoagulation) in patients with cervical artery dissection were included in the meta-analysis. The primary end point was required to include a composite of (1) any stroke, (2) death, or (3) major bleeding (extracranial or intracranial) at 90 days of follow-up.
UNASSIGNED: Two independent investigators performed a systematic review according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, and inconsistencies were resolved by a principal investigator.
UNASSIGNED: The primary outcome was a composite of (1) ischemic stroke, (2) death, or (3) major bleeding (extracranial or intracranial) at 90 days of follow-up. The components of the composite outcome were also secondary outcomes. Subgroup analyses based on baseline characteristics with a putative association with the outcome were performed. Logistic regression was performed using the maximum penalized likelihood method including interaction in the subgroup analyses.
UNASSIGNED: Two randomized clinical trials, Cervical Artery Dissection in Stroke Study and Cervical Artery Dissection in Stroke Study and the Biomarkers and Antithrombotic Treatment in Cervical Artery Dissection, were identified, of which all participants were eligible. A total of 444 patients were included in the intention-to-treat population and 370 patients were included in the per-protocol population. Baseline characteristics were balanced. There were fewer primary end points in those randomized to anticoagulation vs antiplatelet therapy (3 of 218 [1.4%] vs 10 of 226 [4.4%]; odds ratio [OR], 0.33 [95% CI, 0.08-1.05]; P = .06), but the finding was not statistically significant. In comparison with aspirin, anticoagulation was associated with fewer strokes (1 of 218 [0.5%] vs 10 of 226 [4.0%]; OR, 0.14 [95% CI, 0.02-0.61]; P = .01) and more bleeding events (2 vs 0).
UNASSIGNED: This individual patient data meta-analysis of 2 currently available randomized clinical trial data found no significant difference between anticoagulants and antiplatelets in preventing early recurrent events.

UNASSIGNED: This study aimed to emphasize the importance of cranial nerve (CN) palsies in spontaneous cervical artery dissection (sCeAD).
UNASSIGNED: A search term-based literature review was conducted on \"cervical artery dissection\" and \"cranial nerve palsy.\" English and German articles published until October 2023 were considered.
UNASSIGNED: Cranial nerve (CN) palsy in sCeAD is evident in approximately 10% of cases. In the literature, isolated palsies of CN II, III, VII, IX, X, and XII have been reported, while CN XI palsy only occurs in combination with other lower cranial nerve palsies. Dissection type and mural hematoma localization are specific to affected CN as CN palsies of II or III are solely evident in those with steno-occlusive vessel pathologies located at more proximal segments of ICA, while those with CN palsies of IX, X, XI, and XII occur in expansive sCeAD at more distal segments. This dichotomization emphasizes the hypothesis of a different pathomechanism in CN palsy associated with sCeAD, one being hypoperfusion or microembolism (CN II, III, and VII) and the other being a local mass effect on surrounding tissue (CN IX, X, XI, and XII). Clinically, the distinction between peripheral palsies and those caused by brainstem infarction is difficult. This differentiation is key, as, according to the reviewed cases, peripheral cranial nerve palsies in sCeAD patients mostly resolve completely over time, while those due to brainstem stroke do not, making cerebrovascular imaging appraisal essential.
UNASSIGNED: It is important to consider dissections as a potential cause of peripheral CN palsies and to be aware of the appropriate diagnostic pathways. This awareness can help clinicians make an early diagnosis, offering the opportunity for primary stroke prevention.

OBJECTIVE: The management of cervical artery dissections (CADs) is poorly standardized given the scarce number of prospective studies comparing medical and interventional approach to CAD. The aim of the present study is to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies on the treatments of CAD.
METHODS: Systematic review and meta-analysis (pre-registered on PROSPERO [CRD42022297512] are performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses [PRISMA] guidelines searching in three different databases [PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Database]) of studies on medical or interventional approach to CAD. Only prospective studies were selected to reduce the risk of bias for the primary meta-analysis. Secondarily, retrospective studies were also included. The aim was to assess the rate of stroke and of stroke/death/bleeding (major or intracranial) by Der Simonian-Laird weights of random effects model.
RESULTS: After screening 456 articles, 6 prospective and 22 retrospective studies were identified. Two randomized controlled trials and five retrospective studies comparing antiplatelet (APT) vs oral anticoagulant therapy (OAC) for CAD were identified, as well as four prospective and 17 retrospective single-arm studies evaluating stenting for CAD. In the meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing APT vs OAC, 444 patients were considered, and a borderline significant association was identified in terms of stroke/death in the APT vs OAC groups (odds ratio [OR], 5.6; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.94-33.38; P = .06; I2 = 0%). No differences were found for the stroke/death/bleeding outcome (OR, 1.25; 95% CI, 0.19-8.18; P = .81; I2 = 0%) between the two treatments. In the meta-analysis including also retrospective studies, overall risk of bias was considered \"serious,\" and 4104 patients were included with no differences in APT vs OAC for stroke (OR, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.53-2.11; P = .29; I2 = 18%); no other comparisons were possible. The pooled meta-analysis of prospective studies on stenting for CAD included four series, for a total of 68 patients, in whom stenting was adopted primarily after failed medical therapy or after traumatic dissection. The pooled rate of stroke/death was 7% (95% CI, 3%-17%; I2 = 0%). The analysis of moderators identified a significant inverse association between the percentage of traumatic dissection and a reduction in postoperative stroke (Y = -1.60-2.02X; P = .03). The pooled rate of the composite endpoint of stroke/death/ or major bleeding was 8% (95% CI, 3%-18%; I2 = 0%). Secondarily, the meta-analysis also included 17 retrospective studies with overall 457 patients and showed a 2.1% pooled rate of stroke/death (95% CI, 1.0%-3.3%; I2 = 0%) and 3.2% stroke/death/bleeding (95% CI, 1.8%-4.7%; I2 = 0%).
CONCLUSIONS: Few prospective studies on CAD treatment are present in literature. APT and OAC seem to have similar efficacy in reducing the recurrence of stroke after CAD. No definitive conclusion can be drawn for stenting, due to the low number of studies available. More prospective studies are necessary to evaluate its potential additional value over medical therapy alone in the early phase after CAD.

BACKGROUND: Vertebral artery injury (VAI) following blunt trauma can lead to acute or delayed life-threatening posterior fossa ischemic stroke. Its management raises controversial issues and is still open to debate.
METHODS: We report the case of a 48-year-old male who presented a life-threatening posterior circulation ischemic stroke, secondary to a vertebral artery dissection caused by a cervical spine fracture. This case was successfully managed through intravenous thrombolysis and endovascular thrombectomy followed by antiplatelet therapy and an anterior cervical discectomy and fusion. At the one-year follow-up, the patient had no persisting deficit and was back working as a policeman.
CONCLUSIONS: Rapid management of patients with dramatic clinical presentation can lead to full recovery. Implications include a systematic screening of blunt trauma VAI through computed tomography angiography when dealing with high-risk cervical spine fractures; patients harboring both a cervical spine fracture and a VAI must be transferred to a tertiary referral hospital able to deal both with strokes and cervical spine surgery to ensure responsiveness in case of stroke.

UNASSIGNED: Chiropractic cervical spinal manipulations have several complications and can result in vascular injury, including traumatic dissection of the vertebral arteries. A 43-year-old woman was admitted to the emergency department after performing a self-chiropractic spinal manipulation. She experienced headache and vomiting and was unresponsive with severe hypertension at the time of hospital admission. Clinical computerized tomography angiography showed narrowing of the right vertebral artery but was inconclusive for dissection or thrombosis. At autopsy, subacute dissection of the right vertebral artery was identified along with cerebral edema and herniation. A small peripheral pulmonary thromboembolism in the right lung was also seen. Neuropathology consultation confirmed the presence of diffuse cerebral edema and acute hypoxic-ischemic changes, with multifocal acute subarachnoid and intraparenchymal hemorrhage of the brain and spinal cord. This case presents a unique circumstance of a fatal vertebral artery dissection after self-chiropractic manipulation that, to the best of our knowledge, has not been previously described in the medical literature.

Early symptoms of vertebral artery dissection (VAD) may be nonspecific, including neck pain and headache. Neck pain and headache are also common reasons for patients to seek chiropractic care. We hypothesized that neck pain and/or headache would be the most prevalent symptoms among patients with undiagnosed VAD presenting to chiropractors compared to dizziness or other symptoms. We searched PubMed, Ovid, the Index to Chiropractic Literature, Google Scholar, and gray literature through September 2023 for observational studies describing patients aged ≥10 with previously undiagnosed VAD presenting to a chiropractor. Article selection, data extraction, and quality assessment were performed in duplicate. We synthesized the point prevalence of symptoms and other clinical features. We included 10 case reports describing 10 patients (mean age = 37, SD = 7, 60% female). All patients had either neck pain or headache (100%; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 100%-100%). The most prevalent individual symptoms were neck pain (90%; 95% CI = 71%-100%), headache (80%; 95% CI = 55%-100%), visual disturbance (50%; 95% CI = 19%-81%), and dizziness (40%; 95% CI = 10%-70%). The certainty of results was very low due to publication bias. While our findings suggest that neck pain and/or headache are the most prevalent symptoms among patients with undiagnosed VAD visiting a chiropractor, the small sample size and reliance on case reports preclude any definitive conclusions. Further research with larger sample sizes, control groups, and better control of confounders is required to corroborate these results. Chiropractors should be aware of VAD features and refer suspected patients for emergency care.

暂无摘要。