[Downloaded free from http://www.indianjpain.org on Thursday, January 18, 2018, IP: 80.93.123.

51]

Case Report

A Case Report of Cervical Myelopathy After Neck

Manipulation in a Patient with Cervical Spondylosis and
Radiculopathy: Cause and Effect or Natural Progression?
Gaurav Chauhan, Murali Patri, Cheryl J. Mordis, Vivek Loomba
Department of Anesthesiology, Pain and Perioperative Medicine, Henry Ford Health System, Detroit, Michigan, USA

Abstract
A 47-year-old female, with cervical spondylosis and radiculopathy, presented with clinical features of cervical myelopathy after
outpatient physical therapy. An emergent neurological surgery was scheduled after radiological evidence of cord compression. The
symptoms subsided after surgery. Conservative management modalities should be practiced keeping in mind the potential of cervical
spondylosis to progress to catastrophic complications such as myelopathy. It may be difficult to accurately implicate neck manipulation
in the onset of the cervical myelopathy as it may be clinically silent or coexist with radiculopathy. It is vital to adequately counsel the
patient, about this phenomenon to avoid legal ramifications.

Keywords: Cervical myelopathy, cervical spondylosis, chronic pain, neck manipulation

Background radiculopathy, after a motor vehicle accident 14  years

ago, presented with complaints of neck pain, intermittent
The progression of cervical myelopathy as a sequela of the
severe bilateral arm pain, and headaches. The patient
neck manipulation or due to the natural progression of
underwent physical therapy 10 months ago and her neck
the condition is imputable. The natural history of cervical
pain became worse. She reported the development of
myelopathy includes static and dynamic factors.[1,2] Static
intermittent electric shock-like shooting, numbing, and
factors such as osteophyte formation and ligamentum
tingling pains starting at the anterolateral shoulder with
flavum hypertrophy can reduce the spinal canal diameter
radiation down both arms into the third, fourth, and
and promote cord compression. Dynamic factors
fifth digits, especially while bending her head forward.
become relevant when the normal motion of cervical
The patient developed changes in her writing along with
spine causes static components to interact in such a
deterioration in fine motor activities such as sewing.
manner that aggravates or promotes spinal cord damage.
She further complained of nonspecific headaches that
We present a case report of a 47-year-old woman, with
radiated to the upper neck, shoulders, and scapular
cervical spondylosis with radiculopathy, who presented
region bilaterally and interfered with her sleep. She
with clinical signs and symptoms along with radiological
reported gradually developing a feeling of heaviness in
evidence of cervical myelopathy during her follow-up visit,
after the failure of outpatient physical therapy. The patient
Address for correspondence: Gaurav Chauhan,
thoroughly reviewed the case report and gave written Apt 1607, 1350 W. Bethune St., Detroit, Michigan 48202, USA.
permission to the authors for publishing the report. E-mail: Gchauha1@hfhs.org
Previous Presentation: Jan 9, 2017 for 42nd Annual Regional
Clinical Vignette Anesthesiology and Acute Pain Medicine Meeting (ASRA),
A 47-year-old woman, with a history of bilateral San Francisco, California, USA.
carpal tunnel syndrome and cervical spondylosis with
This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons
Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 License, which allows others to remix,
Access this article online tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as the author is credited
Quick Response Code: and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.
Website:
For reprints contact: reprints@medknow.com
www.indianjpain.org

How to cite this article: Chauhan G, Patri M, Mordis CJ, Loomba V. A

DOI: case report of cervical myelopathy after neck manipulation in a patient
10.4103/ijpn.ijpn_60_17 with cervical spondylosis and radiculopathy: cause and effect or natural
progression?. Indian J Pain 2017;31:197-200.

      © 2018 Indian Journal of Pain | Published by Wolters Kluwer - Medknow 197  
[Downloaded free from http://www.indianjpain.org on Thursday, January 18, 2018, IP: 80.93.123.51]

Chauhan, et al.: Case report of cervical myelopathy after neck manipulation

the legs along with an inability to walk at a brisk pace
and reported multiple falls due to balance-related issues.
She started using a walker since last 4 months. She never
received any chronic pain injections or had any previous
spine surgeries. Her medical history was significant for
hypertension, hypercholesterolemia, chronic bronchitis,
and gastroesophageal reflux disease. She worked as a
housekeeper but could not keep up with the demands of
her job due to her symptoms. On examination, the pain
was localized to the cervical paraspinal muscles, anterior
shoulder with “numbness” in the axilla; medial upper
arm; lateral forearm; and third, fourth, and fifth digits.
There was wasting of intrinsic muscles in both hands and
decreased sensation to light and sharp touch bilaterally in
the upper extremities in a nondermatomal pattern. She
had 3/5 strength in C5-T1 distribution with decreased
pinch and grip strength and 4/5 strength in L2-S1. The
cervical compression test (Spurling’s test) was positive
for reproduction of arm pain bilaterally. The Hoffmann’s
test and scapulohumeral reflexes were positive. The biceps
and supinator reflexes (C5 and C6) were absent, with a
brisk triceps reflex (C7). The knee and ankle reflexes were
accentuated (hyperreflexia), and Babinski reflex with ankle
clonus was present bilaterally. She had a positive Romberg
sway along with compromised coordination as evidenced
by difficulty walking and placing one foot in front of the
other (tandem walking). She was graded as a 4 on the
Nurick scale [Table  1] and 3 on the Cooper myelopathy
scale [Table  2]. The magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)
of cervical spine reported a prominent central extrusion
component with inferior migration to the C6-7 interspace,
which was abutting and flattening the ventral cord surface
[Figure  1]. The MRI also reported a mild diffuse disk
osteophyte complex at C5-6, asymmetric to the right,
which led to mild-to-moderate foraminal narrowing
[Figure  2]. The patient underwent emergent anterior
cervical discectomy at C5-6, C6-7, with C6 corpectomy
and plating. During the surgery, a large sequestered
fragment leading to severe compression of thecal sac was
seen behind the C6 body. The fragment was retrieved
and adequate decompression of thecal sac was done all
the way laterally. After an uneventful hospital course, the
patient was discharged on the fifth postoperative day with
a Miami J collar and a wheeled walker and a grade 5 motor
power in all myotomes. Three weeks after the surgery, the
neck collar was removed and patient reported significant
improvement in the neck and arm symptoms. The X-ray of
the neck spine confirmed satisfactory hardware placement
[Figure  3]. The patient was ambulating with a cane for
up to 30-min intervals and continued to have narrow-
based gait and slow velocity. She had 5/5 motor strength
in C5-T1 and L2-S1 bilaterally, and her reflexes were 2+
throughout. Her only complaints were infrequent neck
spasms and minimal residual paresthesias in the hands.
The patient was able to actively participate in physical
therapy for gait training. At 6 months after the discharge,
she was undergoing physiatrist evaluation for specialized
rehabilitation to determine if she could return to work.

Table 1: The Nurick score[6]—the higher the grade, the more severe the deficit
Grade 0 Signs or symptoms of root involvement but without evidence of spinal cord disease
Grade 1 Signs of spinal cord disease but no difficulty in walking
Grade 2 Slight difficulty in walking that did not prevent full-time employment
Grade 3 Difficulty in walking that prevented full-time employment or the ability to perform all housework but that was not severe enough
to require someone else’s help to walk
Grade 4 Able to walk with someone else’s help or the aid of a frame
Grade 5 Chairbound or bedridden

Table 2: Cooper myelopathy scale[6]—the higher the grade, the more severe the deficit
Upper extremity function
  Grade 0 Intact
  Grade 1 Sensory symptoms only
  Grade 2 Mild motor deficit with some functional impairment
  Grade 3 Major functional impairment in at least one upper extremity but upper extremities useful for simple tasks
  Grade 4 No movement or flicker of movement in upper extremities; no useful function
Lower extremity function
  Grade 0 Intact
  Grade 1 Walks independently but not normally
  Grade 2 Walks but needs cane or walker
  Grade 3 Stands but cannot walk
  Grade 4 Slight movement but cannot walk or stand
  Grade 5 Paralysis
Upper and lower extremities are analyzed separately, but the grades are not summarized.

      
198 198  Indian Journal of Pain ¦ Volume 31 ¦ Issue 3 ¦ September-December 2017
[Downloaded free from http://www.indianjpain.org on Thursday, January 18, 2018, IP: 80.93.123.51]
Chauhan, et al.: Case report of cervical myelopathy after neck manipulation
Figure 1: Right foraminal stenosis at C5-6. Large disk extrusion
­spanning the C6 vertebral body favored to be originating from a disk
osteophyte complex at C5-6, causing effacement of the CSF and mild
ventral cord flattening. Mild right foraminal stenosis at C5-6
Figure 2: MRI transverse section
Discussion
In patients with cervical spondylosis with or without
radiculopathy, cervical myelopathy may develop
insidiously. Initial symptoms may be limited to a
decreased range of motion along with neck stiffness.[1]
The dermatomal pattern of radiculopathy may give way
to nonspecific, global pain, and paresthesia in upper
extremities along with a change in intensity and character
of pain.[1,2] The patient may develop brachialgia, which
is defined as episodes of shooting, stabbing pain in
the arm, elbow, wrist, or fingers followed by dull-achy
heaviness in the arm and tingling and numbness in the
      Indian Journal of Pain ¦ Volume 31 ¦ Issue 3 ¦ September-December 2017
Figure 3: X-ray of postsurgical neck: two-level anterior c­ervical
discectomy and fusion (C5-6, C6-7), ­
­ corporectomy of C6, and
­expandable cage
hands. In some subjects, radiculopathy might coexist with
myelopathy creating a variable pattern on examination.
Decline in fine motor control may be seen along with
changes in bowel or bladder function.[3-5] The presence of
spasticity, hyperreflexia and clonus of lower extremities,
areflexia or fasciculation of upper extremities along with
dysesthesias, and positive Hoffman’s sign should sensitize
the clinician toward the presence of cord compression.[1,2]
In severe cases, varying degrees of unstable balance and
gait due to impaired proprioception, coordination, and
superficial sensory loss may lead to a functional limitation
that can be graded using the Nurick score. The Cooper
myelopathy scale can be used to grade both upper and
lower extremity symptoms due to root compression.[6] The
differential diagnosis for acute onset myelopathy includes
ossification of posterior longitudinal ligaments, spinal
cord arteriovenous malformation, metastatic or primary
spinal cord tumors, syringomyelia, spinal cord infarction,
whiplash syndrome (hyperextension–hyperflexion injury),
Brown-Sequard syndrome, and central cord syndrome.[3,4]
It is important to consider nonmyelopathic disorders such
as amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, Guillain–Barré syndrome,
shoulder amyotrophy, normal pressure hydrocephalus,
traumatic or neoplastic brachial plexopathy, vitamin B12
deficiency, diabetic neuropathy, and multiple sclerosis.
Along with the characteristic signs and symptoms, MRI
or CT scans of the cervical spine are instrumental in
199  
[Downloaded free from http://www.indianjpain.org on Thursday, January 18, 2018, IP: 80.93.123.51]
Chauhan, et al.: Case report of cervical myelopathy after neck manipulation
clinching the diagnosis of myelopathy and delineating the
underlying pathomechanics of the acute process.[7]
This report is an important addition to recent publications
reporting cases that were described as postmanipulative
complications.[8-10] In this case, there was a lag of 10 months
between the neck manipulation and evaluation by a pain
specialist; furthermore, the symptoms worsened in the
last 6  months. In light of this evidence, the worsening
of the symptoms of the patient was attributed to the
natural progression of the disease. Neck manipulation can
accentuate the dynamic pathway of myelopathy, but it can
also be coincidental. The flexion of the neck can cause the
spinal cord to stretch over ventral osteophytic ridges leading
to friction-induced damage. The extension of the neck may
cause buckling of the ligamentum flavum into the spinal
cord causing pressure-induced injury.[11] Malone et  al.[12]
in their retrospective review of neurosurgical patients
commented that they cannot establish a causal relationship
between cervical manipulation and progression of disk
herniation to myelopathy. Oppenheim et al.[13] reported 18
patients who had received spinal manipulation and whose
neurological condition immediately worsened. Injuries
were sustained to the cervical, thoracic, and lumbar spine
and resulted, variously, in myelopathy, paraparesis, cauda
equina syndrome, and radiculopathy. They concluded that
spinal manipulation may be associated with significant
complications in patients with disk herniation, and
imaging can be done before manipulation to identify
patients with significant risk factors, such as substantial
disk herniations or occult malignancies. Leboeuf-Yde
et  al.[14] reported six cases in whom complications
developed before manipulation. They further commented
that had any intervention been provided in these cases, the
intervention could have been implicated in the incident,
when it evidently would have occurred anyway. All the
authors have unanimously echoed that a cause–effect
relationship between the neck manipulation and cervical
myelopathy is ambiguous at its best. Disk herniation can
progress to myelopathy without provocation, and there are
no objective measures to predict the same.[8-13]
Conclusion
This case report emphasizes the fact that a careful
interpretation of evidence on hand for any kind of
posttreatment complications, in patients with disk
herniation, should be done considering the progression
due to the natural history of the disease independent
of the manipulative treatment, as a differential. It is
important to be aware of the possibility, in patients with
disk herniation with or without radiculopathy, to develop
cervical myelopathy. The conservative management
200
modalities such as neck manipulation should be practiced
keeping in mind the potential of pathology to progress
to catastrophic complication such as myelopathy. There
is a consensus that the causal relationship between
manipulation and the subsequent appearance of
symptoms should not be assumed. Following neck
manipulation, cervical myelopathy may be clinically silent
for a long duration or coexist with radiculopathy before
becoming clinically evident. It is critical to recognize and
institute timely intervention for cervical myelopathy. It is
of paramount importance to adequately counsel, reassure,
and explain to the patient about this phenomenon as this
can place the physician at legal risk.
Financial support and sponsorship
Nil.
Conflicts of interest
None.
References
1. Baron EM, Young WF. Cervical spondylotic myelopathy:  a brief
review of its pathophysiology, clinical course, and diagnosis.
Neurosurgery 2007;60:S35-41.
2. Baptiste DC, Fehlings MG. Pathophysiology of cervical myelopathy.
Spine J 2006;6:190S-7S.
3. Voorhies RM. Cervical spondylosis:  recognition, differential
diagnosis, and management. Ochsner J 2001;3:78-84.
4. Dolan RT, Butler JS, O’Byrne JM, Poynton AR. Mechanical and
cellular processes driving cervical myelopathy. World J Orthop
2016;7:20-9.
5. Emery SE. Cervical spondylotic myelopathy:  diagnosis and
treatment. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 2001;9:376-88.
6. Vitzthum HE, Dalitz K. Analysis of five specific scores for cervical
spondylogenic myelopathy. Eur Spine J 2007;16:2096-103.
7. Taylor JA, Bussieres A. Diagnostic imaging for spinal disorders in
the elderly: a narrative review. Chiropr Man Therap 2012;20:16.
8. Destee A, Lesoin F, Di Paola F, Warot P. Intradural herniated
cervical disc associated with chiropractic spinal manipulation. J
Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1989;52:1113.
9. Tseng SH, Chen Y, Lin SM, Wang CH. Cervical epidural
hematoma after spinal manipulation therapy: case report. J Trauma
2002;52:585-6.
10. Tseng SH, Lin SM, Chen Y, Wang CH. Ruptured cervical disc after
spinal manipulation therapy:  report of two cases. Spine (Phila Pa
1976) 2002;27:E80-2.
11. Lebl DR, Hughes A, Cammisa FP Jr, O’Leary PF. Cervical
spondylotic myelopathy: pathophysiology, clinical presentation, and
treatment. HSS J 2011;7:170-8.
12. Malone DG, Baldwin NG, Tomecek FJ, Boxell CM, Gaede SE,
Covington CG, et al. Complications of cervical spine manipulation
therapy:  5-year retrospective study in a single-group practice.
Neurosurg Focus 2002;13:ecp1.
13. Leboeuf-Yde C, Rasmussen LR, Klougart N. The risk of over-
reporting spinal manipulative therapy-induced injuries: a description
of some cases that failed to burden the statistics. J Manipulative
Physiol Ther 1996;19:536-8.
14. Oppenheim JS, Spitzer DE, Segal DH. Nonvascular complications
following spinal manipulation. Spine J 2005;5:660-6; discussion 6-7.
200  Indian Journal of Pain ¦ Volume 31 ¦ Issue 3 ¦ September-December 2017