Retrograde diastolic flow occurs in arteries near roughly a third (31%) of palpably normal upper-trapezius sites in patients who have trigger points elsewhere in the muscle.

Ballyns et al. (2011) explicitly documented retrograde diastolic flow in 15 of 49 (31%) palpably normal upper-trapezius sites among patients presenting with trigger points, compared to 55% at active sites and 40% at latent sites. The strongest opposing consideration is that because all subjects were symptomatic neck-pain patients, this 31% baseline rate cannot be conclusively distinguished from regional microvascular spillover or normal physiological variation.

This measurement is directly extracted from the quantitative findings of Ballyns et al. (VASO-E022), which reported retrograde diastolic flow in 15 of 49 (31%) palpably normal sites within symptomatic patients. The strongest opposing consideration is that this reflects a within-patient baseline in symptomatic individuals with acute cervical pain rather than healthy, pain-free controls (VASO-E026).

Ballyns et al. (2011) explicitly reported that retrograde diastolic flow was observed in arteries near 15 of 49 (31%) palpably normal upper-trapezius sites in patients presenting with active trigger points elsewhere in the muscle. The strongest opposing consideration is that because these 'normal' sites were located within clinically symptomatic patients, the retrograde flow might reflect regional muscular pathology rather than a true healthy baseline.

VASO-E022 quotes the exact figures (15/49, 31%) directly from the source's Doppler results. The strongest opposing consideration is VASO-E026: all "normal" sites were in symptomatic patients with trigger points elsewhere, so the 31% could be spillover rather than baseline — the claim as stated is about precisely that patient population and is accurately supported.

The primary reports retrograde diastolic flow in 15 of 49 (31%) palpably normal sites versus 55% at active and 40% at latent sites, matching the claim's figure exactly (VASO-E022). The strongest opposing consideration is the source's own limitation: all sites were in symptomatic patients at least 5 cm from trigger points, so the 31% rate at "normal" sites is either a true baseline in symptomatic muscle or spillover from neighbouring points — the study cannot distinguish these, and the graded signature supports a vascular gradient, not a knot-specific marker.

VASO-E022 anchors the exact figures: 31% of palpably normal sites showed retrograde diastolic flow versus 55% at active sites. The claim as stated is just the occurrence at normal sites, which the source states plainly. Its interpretation is genuinely ambiguous — within- patient normal sites in symptomatic muscle may reflect spillover rather than baseline, per VASO-E026 — but that caps interpretation, not the measurement itself.

VASO-E022 directly reports retrograde diastolic flow at 31% of palpably normal sites in patients with trigger points elsewhere in the muscle. This is a clear source-anchored observation and is reinforced by the source's explicit warning that such sites do not establish normal-population variation. The strongest opposing consideration is that the result comes from one symptomatic sample without pain-free controls, so the approximate rate cannot yet be generalized.

VASO-E022 directly records retrograde diastolic flow at 15 palpably normal sites, corresponding to 31%, in symptomatic patients with trigger points elsewhere. This is a clear descriptive result from the reported sample. The strongest opposing consideration is VASO-E026, because these “normal” sites were within symptomatic patients and therefore cannot establish the prevalence in genuinely healthy muscle.

VASO-E022 directly reports retrograde diastolic flow at 15 palpably normal sites, corresponding to 31%, in patients with trigger points elsewhere in the muscle. This supports the descriptive claim as stated. The strongest opposing consideration is that these were not healthy control muscles, so the percentage cannot be interpreted as a general-population normal rate.

Ballyns 2011 states retrograde diastolic flow in 15 of 49 (31%) palpably normal upper-trapezius sites in patients who have trigger points elsewhere, versus 55% active and 40% latent. The figure is directly measured. Strongest opposing consideration is the absence of pain-free controls, so the 31% may partly reflect spillover.

Ballyns 2011 states retrograde diastolic flow in 15 of 49 (31 %) palpably normal sites, versus 55 % active and 40 % latent (E022). The figure is a primary result, not an inference. Strongest opposing consideration is that “normal” sites still lie in symptomatic muscle and may reflect spillover rather than true baseline.

Ballyns 2011 directly states retrograde diastolic flow in 15 of palpably normal sites (31%) versus 55% active and 40% latent, with higher occurrence at active/latent than normal. The claim reports that figure accurately. Strongest opposing consideration: “normal” sites in symptomatic muscle may reflect spillover, so 31% is not a pain-free baseline.

The figure is directly reported in the source: retrograde diastolic flow at 15 of 49 palpably normal sites (31%), against 40% at latent and 55% at active sites (VASO-E022). The claim is carefully worded to specify that the subjects were patients with trigger points elsewhere in the muscle, which is exactly what the study provides. The strongest opposing consideration is interpretive rather than factual: the authors state they had no pain-free controls and that their normal sites, marked at least 5 cm from trigger points, may not represent normal variation (VASO-E026) — so this 31% is not established as a population baseline, and the ledger cannot say whether it is spillover or background.

The 31% figure is directly quoted from the source in VASO-E022 and is a plain reported measurement, so local truth is high; the uncertainty is single-study and interpretive. VASO-E026 records the authors' own caveat that with no pain-free control group they cannot say whether 31% is a normal baseline rate or spillover from trigger points 5 cm away. Worth noting the claim is structurally awkward for the featured hypothesis rather than supportive: a "signature" present at nearly a third of normal sites is a gradient across symptomatic muscle, not a marker of a discrete lesion.

The 31% figure is quoted verbatim from the source in VASO-E022, and the claim is scoped precisely to the population studied — palpably normal sites in patients who have trigger points elsewhere. Its interest is negative for the case: nearly a third of "normal" sites show the waveform the essay reads as the latch's footprint, making it a gradient rather than a marker. The strongest opposing consideration is the one the authors state themselves in VASO-E026: because pain-free sites were only 5 cm from trigger points and no pain-free cohort was studied, this may be spillover from neighbouring points rather than a baseline rate, and the source cannot distinguish the two.

Ballyns 2011 (VASO-E022, moderate) reports retrograde diastolic flow at 15 of 49 (31%) palpably normal sites, against 55% of active and 40% of latent sites. Because all patients had trigger points elsewhere in the muscle and there was no pain-free group (VASO-E026), the 31% may be a true baseline rate or spillover from neighbouring points; the source cannot say which.

Ballyns 2011 reports retrograde diastolic flow at 15 of 49 (31%) palpably normal sites in patients with trigger points elsewhere (VASO-E022), with the authors unable to say whether this is baseline or spillover from neighbouring points because no pain-free group was included (VASO-E026).

VASO-E022 supports (15 of 49 palpably normal sites, 31%); VASO-E026 qualifies. Recorded because it caps the flow signature as a marker.

VASO-E022 (supports): retrograde diastolic flow at 55% of active, 40% of latent and 31% of palpably normal sites. VASO-E026 (qualifies): the 31% may be a true baseline or spillover from neighbouring points; the source cannot say which.

Retrograde diastolic flow at 15 of 49 palpably normal sites (31%), against 40% of latent and 55% of active sites, in the same blinded Doppler series (VASO-E022); 'normal' sites were five centimeters from a trigger point in symptomatic muscle (VASO-E026).

Retrograde diastolic flow at 15 of 49 palpably normal sites (31%), against 55% of active and 40% of latent (VASO-E022). Those normal sites lie in symptomatic muscle at least 5 cm from a trigger point; whether 31% is a true baseline or spillover cannot be said (VASO-E026).

Ballyns 2011 reports retrograde diastolic flow at 15 of 49 palpably normal sites, 31% (VASO-E022, moderate), with the caveat that these sites lie in symptomatic muscle (VASO-E026).

Retrograde diastolic flow at 15 of 49 palpably normal sites (31%), against 55% active and 40% latent (VASO-E022, moderate); VASO-E026 qualifies that these sites sit in symptomatic muscle, so the figure may be baseline or spillover.

Reported directly by the primary (VASO-E022): retrograde diastolic flow at 15 of 49 palpably normal sites (31%), against 55% of active sites. VASO-E026 qualifies: the normal sites were five centimetres from a trigger point in symptomatic muscle, so this may be baseline or spillover.

Retrograde diastolic flow at 15 of 48 (31%) palpably normal sites (VASO-E022), which the source cannot separate from spillover because no pain-free group was examined (VASO-E026).

Ballyns 2011 reports retrograde diastolic flow near 15 of 48 palpably normal sites (31%) against 55% of active sites (VASO-E022); the normal sites lay 5 cm from a trigger point in symptomatic muscle, so the source cannot say whether 31% is baseline or spillover (VASO-E026).

Ballyns 2011 reports retrograde diastolic flow at 55% of active, 40% of latent and 31% of palpably normal sites (VASO-E022, moderate); the 'normal' sites sat at least 5 cm from trigger points in symptomatic muscle with no pain-free group, so the source cannot say whether 31% is baseline or spillover (VASO-E026).

Ballyns 2011 (VASO-E022): retrograde diastolic flow at 15 of 49 (31%) palpably normal sites, against 55% of active and 40% of latent sites. The same paper (VASO-E026) notes the normal sites lay within 5 cm of trigger points in symptomatic muscle, so the 31% may be a true baseline or spillover; the source cannot say which.

In Ballyns et al. 2011 (VASO-E022), retrograde diastolic flow was explicitly observed in 15 of 49 palpably normal sites (31%) in patients who presented with active or latent trigger points elsewhere in the muscle. The strongest opposing consideration is that these normal sites were located within symptomatic muscle (VASO-E026), leaving it ambiguous whether the 31% prevalence reflects normal physiology or collateral hemodynamic disturbance radiating from nearby trigger points.

The 31% figure (15 of 49 normal sites) is anchored verbatim in the source (E022) and the claim restates it faithfully. The strongest opposing consideration is the source's own limitation: all subjects had trigger points, so retrograde flow at "normal" sites may be spillover from neighbouring points rather than a true baseline, and the observation interrogates vessels >1 mm, far from the microvasculature the featured hypothesis names.

VASO-E022 directly reports retrograde diastolic flow at 15 normal sites, corresponding to 31 percent, in patients with trigger points elsewhere in the muscle. The claim is a narrowly framed descriptive result from that study and is accurately supported. The strongest opposing consideration is interpretive rather than factual: these “normal” sites were in symptomatic patients and therefore do not establish a normal population baseline.

Ballyns 2011 reports retrograde diastolic flow at 31 % of palpably normal sites (versus 55 % active, 40 % latent) with significant elevation at active/latent versus normal (E022). The 31 % figure itself shows the signature is a gradient, not a binary marker. Strongest opposing consideration is spillover within symptomatic muscle and absence of pain-free controls.

The claim accurately renders Ballyns et al.'s count: 15 palpably normal sites (31%) showed retrograde diastolic flow, against 55% of active and 40% of latent sites (E022). As a general rate it rests on one sample of roughly fifty sites, so "roughly a third" carries a wide uncertainty band and has not been replicated. Strongest opposing consideration: every "normal" site sat in symptomatic muscle with no pain-free control group, and the source itself cannot say whether the figure is a baseline rate or spillover from nearby trigger points (E026). It cannot be read as the waveform's prevalence in normal muscle, though as stated, limited to patients with trigger points elsewhere in the muscle, it is what was found.

Backward diastolic flow near 31% of palpably normal sites (VASO-E022), within symptomatic muscle and with no pain-free controls (VASO-E026). It makes the waveform a gradient rather than a marker of a knot.