Screening-Prozedere: Gefahrensituationen bei Patienten mit HWS-Symptomen

Zusammenfassung

Bei einem Patienten mit Nackenschmerzen ist drei Behandlungen lang alles in Ordnung. Ab der vierten Behandlung treten zunehmend bilaterale Parästhesien auf. Beide, Therapeut und Arzt, erkennen das Warnsignal. Ein weiteres MRT wird veranlasst. Trotz ausgeprägter Symptomatik sieht auf dem neuen Bild niemand das verengte Rückenmark. Stattdessen folgt eine neue Verordnung – mit Konsequenzen für den Patienten.

• Literatur

• 1 Emery SE. Cervical spondylotic myelopathy: Diagnosis and treatment. The Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons 2001; 9 (6) 376-388
• 2 Fehlings MG, Skaf G. A review of the pathophysiology of cervical spondylotic myelopathy with insights for potential novel mechanisms drawn from traumatic spinal cord injury. Spine 1998; 23 (24) 2730-2737
• 3 Henschke N, Maher CG, Refshauge KM et al. Prevalence of and screening for serious spinal pathology in patients presenting to primary care settings with acute low back pain. Arthritis and Rheumatism 2009; 60 (10) 3072-3080
• 4 Huisstede BMA, Miedema HS, Verhagen AP et al. Multidisciplinary consensus on the terminology and classification of complaints of the arm, neck and/or shoulder. Occupational and Environmental Medicine 2007; 64 (5) 313-319
• 5 Karadimas SK, Erwin WM, Ely CG et al. Pathophysiology and natural history of cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Spine 2013; 38 (22) (Suppl. 01) S21-36
• 6 Kempster PA, Rollinson RD. The Lhermitte phenomenon: Variant forms and their significance. Journal of Clinical Neuroscience 2008; 15 (4) 379-381
• 7 Kendall NA. Psychosocial approaches to the prevention of chronic pain: The low back paradigm. Baillière’s best practice & research. Clinical rheumatology 1999; 13 (3) 545-554
• 8 Michaleff ZA, Maher CG, Verhagen AP et al. Accuracy of the Canadian C-spine rule and NEXUS to screen for clinically important cervical spine injury in patients following blunt trauma: A systematic review. CMAJ: Canadian Medical Association Journal 2012; 184 (16) E867-876
• 9 Mitchell J, Keene D, Dyson C et al. Is cervical spine rotation, as used in the standard vertebrobasilar insufficiency test, associated with a measureable change in intracranial vertebral artery blood flow?. Manual Therapy 2004; 9 (4) 220-227
• 10 Nagata K, Yoshimura N, Hashizume H et al. The prevalence of cervical myelopathy among subjects with narrow cervical spinal canal in a population-based magnetic resonance imaging study: The Wakayama Spine Study. The Spine Journal 2014; 14: 2811-2817
• 11 Osti OL, Gun RT, Abraham G et al. Potential risk factors for prolonged recovery following whiplash injury. European Spine Journal 2005; 14 (1) 90-94
• 12 Rąpała K, Walczak P, Truszczyńska A et al. Diagnostic and therapeutic problems of back pain syndromes and their distribution according to a colour coding system of flags. Ortopedia, Traumatologia, Rehabilitacja 2012; 14 (3) 215-227
• 13 Rivett DA. Adverse events and the vertebral artery: Can they be averted?. Man Ther 2006; 11 (4) 241-242
• 14 Salvi FJ, Jones JC, Weigert BJ. The assessment of cervical myelopathy. The Spine Journal 2006; 6 (Suppl. 06) 182S-189S
• 15 Shaw WS, van der Windt DA, Main CJ et al. Early patient screening and intervention to address individual-level occupational factors („blue flags”) in back disability. Journal of occupational rehabilitation 2009; 19 (1) 64-80
• 16 Sung WS, Sung MJ, Chan JH et al. Intramedullary spinal cord metastases: A 20-year institutional experience with a comprehensive literature review. World Neurosurgery 2013; 79 (3-4) 576-584
• 17 Yarbrough CK, Murphy RKJ, Ray WZ et al. The natural history and clinical presentation of cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Advances in Orthopedics 2012; 480643
• 18 Young WB. The clinical diagnosis of myelopathy. Seminars in ultrasound, CT and MR 1994; 15 (3) 250-254