Effects of Distinct Force Magnitude of Spinal Manipulative Therapy on Blood Biomarkers of Inflammation: A Proof of Principle Study in Healthy Young Adults.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this preliminary study was to determine the influence of thoracic spinal manipulation therapy (SMT) of different force magnitudes on blood biomarkers of inflammation in healthy adults. METHODS: Nineteen healthy young adults (10 female, age: 25.6 ± 1.2 years) were randomized into the following 3 groups: (1) control (preload only), (2) single thoracic SMT with a total peak force of 400N, and (3) single thoracic SMT with a total peak force of 800N. SMT was performed by an experienced chiropractor, and a force-plate embedded treatment table (Force Sensing Table Technology) was used to determine the SMT force magnitudes applied. Blood samples were collected at pre intervention (baseline), immediately post intervention, and 20 minutes post intervention. A laboratory panel of 14 different inflammatory biomarkers (pro, anti, dual role, chemokine, and growth factor) was assessed by multiplex array. Change scores from baseline of each biomarker was used for statistical analysis. Two-way repeated-measures analysis of variance was used to investigate the interaction and main effects of intervention and time on cytokines, followed by Tukey's multiple comparison test (P ≤ .05). RESULTS: A between-group (800N vs 400N) difference was observed on interferon-gamma, interleukin (IL)-5, and IL-6, while a within-group difference (800N: immediately vs 20 minutes post-intervention) was observed on IL-6 only. CONCLUSION: In this study, we measured short-term changes in plasma cytokines in healthy young adults and found that select plasma pro-inflammatory and dual-role cytokines were elevated by higher compared to lower SMT force. Our findings aid to advance our understanding of the potential relationship between SMT force magnitude and blood cytokines and provide a healthy baseline group with which to compare similar studies in clinical populations in the future.

Assessment of Studies Evaluating Spinal Manipulative Therapy and Infectious Disease and Immune System Outcomes: A Systematic Review.

Importance: Claims that spinal manipulative therapy (SMT) can improve immune function have increased substantially during the COVID-19 pandemic and may have contributed to the rapid spread of both accurate and inaccurate information (referred to as an infodemic by the World Health Organization). Objective: To identify, appraise, and synthesize the scientific literature on the efficacy and effectiveness of SMT in preventing the development of infectious disease or improving disease-specific outcomes in patients with infectious disease and to examine the association between SMT and selected immunological, endocrine, and other physiological biomarkers. Evidence Review: A literature search of MEDLINE, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, the Index to Chiropractic Literature, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Embase was conducted from inception to April 15, 2020. Randomized clinical trials and cohort studies were included. Eligible studies were critically appraised, and evidence with high and acceptable quality was synthesized using the Synthesis Without Meta-Analysis guideline. Findings: A total of 2593 records were retrieved; after exclusions, 50 full-text articles were screened, and 16 articles reporting the findings of 13 studies comprising 795 participants were critically appraised. The literature search found no clinical studies that investigated the efficacy or effectiveness of SMT in preventing the development of infectious disease or improving disease-specific outcomes among patients with infectious disease. Eight articles reporting the results of 6 high- and acceptable-quality RCTs comprising 529 participants investigated the effect of SMT on biomarkers. Spinal manipulative therapy was not associated with changes in lymphocyte levels or physiological markers among patients with low back pain or participants who were asymptomatic compared with sham manipulation, a lecture series, and venipuncture control groups. Spinal manipulative therapy was associated with short-term changes in selected immunological biomarkers among asymptomatic participants compared with sham manipulation, a lecture series, and venipuncture control groups. Conclusions and Relevance: In this systematic review of 13 studies, no clinical evidence was found to support or refute claims that SMT was efficacious or effective in changing immune system outcomes. Although there were limited preliminary data from basic scientific studies suggesting that SMT may be associated with short-term changes in immunological and endocrine biomarkers, the clinical relevance of these findings is unknown. Given the lack of evidence that SMT is associated with the prevention of infectious diseases or improvements in immune function, further studies should be completed before claims of efficacy or effectiveness are made.

Elevated Production of Nociceptive CC Chemokines and sE-Selectin in Patients With Low Back Pain and the Effects of Spinal Manipulation: A Nonrandomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: The involvement of inflammatory components in the pathophysiology of low back pain (LBP) is poorly understood. It has been suggested that spinal manipulative therapy (SMT) may exert anti-inflammatory effects. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to determine the involvement of inflammation-associated chemokines (CC series) in the pathogenesis of nonspecific LBP and to evaluate the effect of SMT on that process. METHODS: Patients presenting with nonradicular, nonspecific LBP (minimum pain score 3 on 10-point visual analog scale) were recruited according to stringent inclusion criteria. They were evaluated for appropriateness to treat using a high velocity low amplitude manipulative thrust in the lumbar-lumbosacral region. Blood samples were obtained at baseline and following the administration of a series of 6 high velocity low amplitude manipulative thrusts on alternate days over the period of 2 weeks. The in vitro levels of CC chemokine ligands (CCL2, CCL3, and CCL4) production and plasma levels of an inflammatory biomarker, soluble E-selectin (sE-selectin), were determined at baseline and at the termination of treatments 2 weeks later. RESULTS: Compared with asymptomatic controls baseline production of all chemokines was significantly elevated in acute (P=0.004 to <0.0001), and that of CCL2 and CCL4 in chronic LBP patients (P<0.0001). Furthermore, CCL4 production was significantly higher (P<0.0001) in the acute versus chronic LBP group. sE-selectin levels were significantly higher (P=0.003) in chronic but not in acute LBP patients. Following SMT, patient-reported outcomes showed significant (P<0.0001) improvements in visual analog scale and Oswestry Disability Index scores. This was accompanied by a significant decline in CCL3 production (P<0.0001) in both groups of patients. Change scores for CCL4 production differed significantly (P<0.0001) only for the acute LBP cohort, and no effect on the production of CCL2 or plasma sE-selectin levels was noted in either group. CONCLUSIONS: The production of chemotactic cytokines is significantly and protractedly elevated in LBP patients. Changes in chemokine production levels, which might be related to SMT, differ in the acute and chronic LBP patient cohorts.