Spontaneous cervical artery dissection: a fluoroquinolone induced connective tissue disorder?
Chiropractic & Manual Therapies, July 2018
James S. Demetrious
Spontaneous cervical artery dissections more often manifest in young people and have been associated with catastrophic consequences. Some indeterminate risk factors have been identified, making the diagnosis of developing dissections quite difficult. Fluoroquinolone antibiotics have been recognized for their degradative effects on connective tissue. Recent studies have implicated fluoroquinolones in the genesis of aortic artery aneurysms. It is the purpose of this paper to provide reasoning for a testable hypothesis of whether fluoroquinolones constitute a risk factor associated with cervical artery dissections. A PubMed search was conducted to investigate whether cervical artery dissection has been associated with fluoroquinolone use. An assessment of risk factors was made of hereditary connective tissue disorders, infection, and seasonal predisposition related to cervical artery dissection. These factors were considered in conjunction with reports of connective tissue toxicity associated with fluoroquinolone medications. It appears that no reported cases of cervical artery dissection have previously been correlated with fluoroquinolone use. Heritable connective tissue disorders, infection, seasonal predisposition and condition latencies are associated with fluoroquinolone medications. Several recent articles have implicated fluoroquinolones with aortic dissections and aneurysm. A causal relationship of fluoroquinolone antibiotics to cervical artery dissection is plausible. The suppositions developed in this paper are insufficient to suggest that fluoroquinolones currently represent an established risk factor in the development of cervical artery dissections. Fluoroquinolones may indeed be a novel and previously unrecognized cause of cervical artery dissections.
|Members of the public||13||81%|
|Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors)||2||13%|
|Readers by professional status||Count||As %|
|Student > Ph. D. Student||1||20%|
|Student > Master||1||20%|
|Readers by discipline||Count||As %|
|Nursing and Health Professions||1||20%|