RESUMEN

Introduction: In-office use of the Trendelenburg position has been shown to be a beneficial clinical tool to help decipher if a CSF pressure/volume component is part of the underlying etiologic process for a patient's persistent headache. Utilizing the Trendelenburg position at home could potentially be an additional diagnostic tool for the treating headache physician. Case Series: Our headache practice has been using at-home self-Trendelenburg for the past 2 years and will present the clinical scenarios in which it seems to be the most helpful utilizing a case series of patients. These include (1) in those who just had a lumbar puncture and call for worsening headaches and do not have an obvious orthostatic component; (2) in those who had a spinal epidural blood patch for a presumed CSF leak and state there was no improvement; (3) in those who are on daily preventive CSF volume-lowering medications and call in with worsening headaches; (4) in those with known CSF pressure-dependent headaches high or low but who are not on daily preventive CSF volume modulatory medications; (5) in those with a history of migraine or other primary headache disorder to see if a new type of headache is possibly from a CSF leak or an abnormal reset of CSF pressure to an elevated state; (6) in those with triggered only headaches like cough or exertional headache. Conclusion: Utilizing at-home self-Trendelenburg can provide valuable information for the treating headache physician on possible underlying headache etiology and can guide specific treatment strategies. Its simplicity and quick declaration of results are very patient pleasing.

RESUMEN

Background and purpose:

Discontinua­tion of medication still remains a key element in the treatment of medication overuse headache (MOH), but there is no consensus on the withdrawal procedure. We aimed to share the promising results of anesthetic blockade of greater occipital nerve (GON), which can be an alternative to existing treatments during the early withdrawal period of MOH treatment.

This study was conducted using regular electronic medical records and headache diaries of patients diagnosed with MOH and treated with anesthetic GON blockade with 0.5% bupivacaine solution in a specia­lized headache outpatient clinic. A total of 86 patients who developed MOH while being followed up for chronic migraine were included in the study.

The treatment schemes for MOH are based on expert consensus and withdrawal strategies are the most challenging part of treatment. In our study, numerical rating scale for headache intensity, overused medication consumption per month, headache frequency (day/month) and the duration of each attack (hour/day) decreased significantly in the first month compared to pre-treatment (p < 0.01). 

Conclusion – Our study suggests that GON blockade can be used as a good alternative therapy in the treatment of MOH.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Status migrainosus is one of the recognized complications of migraine with or without aura, defined as a persistent debilitating migraine attack lasting for more than 72h with little reprieve, leading to functional disability. The individual impact of status migrainosus and the substantial healthcare burden are highlighted. Current case series which inform our understanding of this condition are examined with two groups emergent, those with classic status migrainosus and those with episodic status migrainosus. The question as to whether status migrainosus is a distinct biological state beyond the established migraine pathophysiology is examined. With the underlying pathophysiology not fully understood, attention is turned to therapeutic considerations and the available evidence informing practice. A practical approach to treatment of status migrainosus is presented. Given the severity and need for emergency care, options detailed are in line with recommendations for acute migraine care: with a staged approach initially combining subcutaneous sumatriptan with parenteral options including dopamine receptor antagonists, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatories and acetaminophen. The place of combination treatment with parenteral magnesium sulfate, dihydroergotamine, antiepileptics, corticosteroids, and anesthetic agents is outlined. With a paucity of high-quality evidence to consolidate current clinical approaches, consideration of future therapies and research questions is raised.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The aim was to provide insights to the characteristics of headache in the context of COVID-19 on behalf of the Headache Scientific Panel and the Neuro-COVID-19 Task Force of the European Academy of Neurology (EAN) and the European Headache Federation (EHF). METHODS: Following the Delphi method the Task Force identified six relevant questions and then conducted a systematic literature review to provide evidence-based answers and suggest specific diagnostic criteria. RESULTS: No data for facial pain were identified in the literature search. (1) Headache incidence during acute COVID-19 varies considerably, with higher prevalence rates in prospective compared to retrospective studies (28.9%-74.6% vs. 6.5%-34.0%). (2) Acute COVID-19 headache is usually bilateral or holocranial and often moderate to severe with throbbing pain quality lasting 2-14 days after first signs of COVID-19; photo-phonophobia, nausea, anosmia and ageusia are common associated features; persistent headache shares similar clinical characteristics. (3) Acute COVID-19 headache is presumably caused by immune-mediated mechanisms that activate the trigeminovascular system. (4) Headache occurs in 13.3%-76.9% following SARS-CoV-2 vaccination and occurs more often amongst women with a pre-existing primary headache; the risk of developing headache is higher with the adenoviral-vector-type vaccines than with other preparations. (5) Headache related to SARS-CoV-2 vaccination is mostly bilateral, and throbbing, pressing, jolting or stabbing. (6) No studies have been conducted investigating the underlying mechanism of headache attributed to SARS-CoV-2 vaccines. CONCLUSION: The results of this joint EAN/EHF initiative provide a framework for a better understanding of headache in the context of SARS-CoV-2 infection and vaccination.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Management of chronic daily headaches (CDH) remains challenging due to the limited efficacy of standard prophylactic pharmacological measures. Several studies have reported that repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) can effectively treat chronic headaches. The objective was to determine the utility of rTMS for immediate post-treatment and sustained CDH prophylaxis. RECENT FINDINGS: All procedures were conducted per PRISMA guidelines. PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and ProQuest databases were searched for controlled clinical trials that have tested the efficacy of rTMS on populations with CDH. DerSimonian-Laird random-effects meta-analyses were performed using the 'meta' package in R to examine the post- vs. pre-rTMS changes in standardized headache intensity and frequency compared to sham-control conditions. Thirteen trials were included with a combined study population of N = 538 patients with CDH (rTMS, N = 284; Sham, N = 254). Patients exposed to rTMS had significantly reduced standardized CDH intensity and frequency in the immediate post-treatment period (Hedges' g = -1.16 [-1.89, -0.43], p = 0.002 and Δ = -5.07 [-10.05, -0.11], p = 0.045 respectively). However, these effects were sustained marginally in the follow-up period (Hedges' g = -0.43 [-0.76, -0.09], p = 0.012 and Δ = -3.33 [-5.52, -1.14], p = 0.003). Significant between-study heterogeneity was observed, at least partially driven by variations in rTMS protocols. Despite the observed clinically meaningful and statistically significant benefits in the immediate post-treatment period, the prophylactic effects of rTMS on CDH do not seem to sustain with discontinuation. Thus, the cost-effectiveness of the routine use of rTMS for CDH prophylaxis remains questionable. REGISTRATION: Protocol preregistered in PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42021250100).

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Galcanezumab has shown efficacy and effectiveness in the treatment of episodic and chronic migraine (CM), however, the population represented in randomized clinical trials (RCTs) differs from the population observed in real-world setting. To describe the long-term effectiveness and tolerability of galcanezumab in clinical practice in patients excluded from RCTs. METHODS: Multicenter prospective cohort study of consecutive patients with chronic and high-frequency episodic migraine (HFEM) with prior failure to three or more migraine preventive drugs, treated with galcanezumab and followed up for 12 months. RESULTS: We enrolled 1055 patients, aged 50 (IQR: 42-58), 82.9% female, 76.4% chronic migraine, 69% with at least one exclusion criteria for RCTs, including age > 65 (n = 121), concomitant use of onabotulinumtoxinA (n = 185), daily headache at baseline (n = 347), chronic painful syndromes (n = 206), fibromyalgia (n = 101) or treatment resistance (n = 957). The median number of prior preventive treatments was 4 (IQR: 3-5). The retention rate was 90.8%, 76.8% and 71.4% at 3, 6 and 12 months. The main reasons for treatment discontinuation were lack of effectiveness (21.1%) and inadequate tolerability (6.6%). The 30%, 50% and 75% responder rates were 62.6%, 49.8% and 24.2% between weeks 8-12; 60.9%, 48.8% and 24.6% between weeks 20-24; and 59.7%, 48.3% and 24.6% between weeks 44-48. Daily headache at baseline (OR: 0.619; 95%CI: 0.469-0.817) and patient's age (OR: 1.016; 95%CI: 1.005-1.026) were associated with 50% response at weeks 20-24. The variables that were associated with a higher reduction of headache days between weeks 20-24 were patient's age (0.068; 95% CI: 0.018-0.119) and headache days per month at baseline (0.451; 95% CI: 0.319-0.583), while psychiatric comorbidity (-1.587; 95% CI: -2.626-0.538) and daily headache at baseline (-2.718; 95% CI: -4.58-0.869) were associated with fewer reduction in the number of headache days between weeks 20-24. CONCLUSION: This study provides class III evidence of effectiveness and tolerability of galcanezumab in patients with HFEM and CM with comorbidities that would result in exclusion of the pivotal RCTs. Nonetheless, the clinical results over a 12-month period were similar to the efficacy observed in randomized controlled trials. Few patients discontinued the drug due to inadequate tolerability.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

The authors have published on a unique subset of patients whose headaches worsened in the Trendelenburg position and who on time-resolved MR angiography demonstrated left renal vein compression (nutcracker physiology) with retrograde left second lumbar vein (L2LV) flow and regional spinal epidural venous plexus (EVP) congestion. We hypothesized that the spinal EVP congestion subsequently causes a secondary congestion of the cerebral venous system, which then leads to an elevation of CSF pressure above that individuals CSF pressure set point. This results in a daily headache from onset. Thus, eliminating the spinal EVP could conceivably improve or eliminate the manifested headache syndrome. We now present a case series of four patients with long-term follow-up utilizing lumbar vein coil embolization as a new therapeutic approach. In each patient, the MR angiography findings were verified by catheter-based venography. Treatment consisted of endovascular embolization of the second lumbar vein. Four patients have had coil embolization of which three are 1 year or longer from their procedure while one is 10 months posttreatment. All patients were women. Duration of daily headache prior to embolization ranged from 4 to 8 years. Post-embolization: Three patients are either headache free or 90-95% improved with substantial pain free time. There were no procedure-related complications. Our results suggest that embolization of L2LV in a specific patient population with nutcracker physiology may substantially improve head pain issues. This is a minimally invasive outpatient technique with no apparent side effects.

RESUMEN

Background: Refractory migraine is a poorly described complication of migraine in which migraine has chronified and become resistant to standard treatments. The true prevalence is unknown, but medication resistance is common in headache clinic patient populations. Given the lack of response to treatment, this patient population is extremely difficult to treat with limited guidance in the literature. Objective: To review the diagnostic, pathophysiological, and management challenges in the refractory migraine population. Discussion: There are no accepted, or even ICHD-3 appendix, diagnostic criteria for refractory migraine though several proposed criteria exist. Current proposed criteria often have low bars for refractoriness while also not meeting the needs of pediatrics, lower socioeconomic status, and developing nations. Pathophysiology is unknown but can be hypothesized as a persistent "on" state as a progression from chronic migraine with increasing central sensitization, but there may be heterogeneity in the underlying pathophysiology. No guidelines exist for treatment of refractory migraine; once all guideline-based treatments are tried, treatment consists of n-of-1 treatment trials paired with non-pharmacologic management. Conclusion: Refractory migraine is poorly described diagnostically, its pathophysiology can only be guessed at by extension of chronic migraine, and treatment is more the art than science of medicine. Navigating care of this refractory population will require multidisciplinary care models and an emphasis on future research to answer these unknowns.

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Dihydroergotamine (DHE), like triptans, is contraindicated in patients with ischemic heart disease or coronary vasospasm. Its true safety, tolerability, and efficacy in patients with cardiovascular risk without ischemic heart disease or coronary vasospasm remain unclear. OBJECTIVES: To assess the safety, tolerability, and effectiveness of repetitive intravenous DHE in patients with cardiovascular risk factors. METHODS: A single-center, retrospective cohort study was conducted at the Jefferson Headache Center inpatient unit for refractory chronic migraine patients treated with our intravenous DHE protocol between January 1, 2019, and October 15, 2019. We evaluated tolerability and effectiveness outcomes based on atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease 10-year calculated risk scores, stratified into low (<5.0%) and elevated (≥5.0%) risk. Data were presented in mean ± standard deviation or median (25th percentile, 75th percentile) if non-normally distributed. RESULTS: Among 347 patients (median age of 46 [36, 57], female n = 278 [80.1%]), who received inpatient intravenous DHE, 227 patients (age 53 [45, 60], female 81.1%) had calculable risk scores, 64 (28.2%) had elevated risk, and 38 (16.7%) had cardiology consultations. There were no clinically significant electrocardiogram abnormalities or cardiovascular adverse events. The median hospital length of stay was 6 (5, 7) days. Compared to the low-risk group, those with elevated risk had higher nausea (31.3% vs. 14.1%, p = 0.008), but similar initial DHE dose (0.5 [0.25, 0.5] vs. 0.5 [0.25, 0.5], p = 0.009), lower final DHE dose (0.75 [0.5, 1] vs. 1 [0.75, 1] p < 0.001), and lower pain reduction after admission (-3.8 [2.1, 6] vs. -5 [3, 7] p = 0.037). CONCLUSION: Patients receiving intravenous DHE by the Jefferson Headache Center inpatient headache protocol had significantly reduced pain severity at discharge. No clinically significant cardiac or electrocardiogram abnormalities were detected in patients with elevated (or low) atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease risk. Repetitive intravenous DHE used by our protocol was safe in refractory chronic migraine patients.

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: In managing chronic daily headaches (CDH), a comprehensive approach is necessary to evaluate stress, a closely linked factor. However, limited time and costs often lead to the use of a simple stress question in clinical settings. This study aims to assess the validity of using a simple stress question for CDH patients and explore its implications for clinical practice. METHODS: We recruited 103 patients with CDH who completed structured self-administered questionnaires, including a simple stress question ("Have you had any stress or concerns in the last 4 weeks?") and validated Korean versions of questionnaires for depression, anxiety, insomnia, and the Brief Encounter Psychosocial Instrument (BEPSI). A headache specialist conducted clinical interviews. The stress group consisted of patients who acknowledged overt stress (answering "yes" to the simple question) and covert stress (initially answering "no" but later admitting during the interview). Results showed no statistical difference between the subgroups, so they were combined as the "acknowledged stress" group. RESULTS: Out of 103 patients, 54.4% had chronic migraine, 45.6% had chronic tension-type headache, and 66 patients (64.1%) acknowledged experiencing stress. No significant differences were found in demographic and clinical characteristics, BEPSI stress assessment, or depression, anxiety, and insomnia profiles between patients with overt stress (n = 51) and covert stress (n = 15). The average BEPSI score was 2.3 ± 0.9, with 45.6% of patients exceeding the criteria (>2.4). Two (5.4%) patients in denial of stress had scores above the BEPSI criteria. Among patients below the criteria of BEPSI, 21 acknowledged stress, while 35 denied stress, with no significant differences observed. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests the limitations of relying solely on a simple stress question for assessing stress in patients with CDH in clinical practice. It is possible to encounter covert stress, include individuals who do not exhibit noticeable stress, and misclassify stress levels. To overcome these limitations, it is necessary to foster a supportive environment for open communication on stress and implement a comprehensive assessment strategy when needed.

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: It is unknown whether new daily persistent headache (NDPH) is a single disorder or heterogenous group of disorders, and whether it is a unique disorder from chronic migraine and chronic tension-type headache. We describe a large group of patients with primary NDPH, compare its phenotype to transformed chronic daily headache (T-CDH), and use cluster analysis to reveal potential sub-phenotypes in the NDPH group. METHODS: We performed a case-control study using prospectively collected clinical data in patients with primary NDPH and T-CDH (encompassing chronic migraine and chronic tension-type headache). We used logistic regression with propensity score matching to compare demographics, phenotype, comorbidities, and treatment responses between NDPH and T-CDH. We used K-means cluster analysis with Gower distance to identify sub-clusters in the NDPH group based on a combination of demographics, phenotype, and comorbidities. RESULTS: We identified 366 patients with NDPH and 696 with T-CDH who met inclusion criteria. Patients with NDPH were less likely to be female (62.6% vs. 73.3%, p < 0.001). Nausea, vomiting, photophobia, phonophobia, motion sensitivity, vertigo, and cranial autonomic symptoms were all significantly less frequent in NDPH than T-CDH (p value for all < 0.001). Acute treatments appeared less effective in NDPH than T-CDH, and medication overuse was less common (16% vs. 42%, p < 0.001). Response to most classes of oral preventive treatments was poor in both groups. The most effective treatment in NDPH was doselupin in 45.7% patients (95% CI 34.8-56.5%). Cluster analysis identified three subgroups of NDPH. Cluster 1 was older, had a high proportion of male patients, and less severe headaches. Cluster 2 was predominantly female, had severe headaches, and few associated symptoms. Cluster 3 was predominantly female with a high prevalence of migrainous symptoms and headache triggers. CONCLUSIONS: Whilst there is overlap in the phenotype of NDPH and T-CDH, the differences in migrainous, cranial autonomic symptoms, and vulnerability to medication overuse suggest that they are not the same disorder. NDPH may be fractionated into three sub-phenotypes, which require further investigation.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of the epidemiology, precipitants, phenotype, comorbidities, pathophysiology, treatment, and prognosis of primary new daily persistent headache. METHODS: We searched PubMed/Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane, and clinicaltrials.gov until 31 December 2022. We included original research studies with any design with at least five participants with new daily persistent headache. We assessed risk of bias using National Institutes of Health Quality Assessment Tools. We used random-effects meta-analysis where suitable to calculate pooled estimates of proportions. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis compliant study is registered with PROSPERO (registration number CRD42022383561). RESULTS: Forty-six studies met inclusion criteria, predominantly case series, including 2155 patients. In 67% (95% CI 57-77) of cases new daily persistent headache has a chronic migraine phenotype, however new daily persistent headache has been found to be less likely than chronic migraine to be associated with a family history of headache, have fewer associated migrainous symptoms, be less vulnerable to medication overuse, and respond less well to injectable and neuromodulatory treatments. CONCLUSIONS: New daily persistent headache is a well described, recognisable disorder, which requires further research into its pathophysiology and treatment. There is a lack of high-quality evidence and, until this exists, we recommend continuing to consider new daily persistent headache a distinct disorder.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Background Accumulating evidence suggests various specific triggers may lead to new daily persistent headache (NDPH)-like presentations, suggesting that new daily persistent headache is a heterogenous syndrome, and challenging the concept that new daily persistent headache is a primary headache disorder.Method We searched the PubMed database up to August 2022 for keywords including persistent daily headache with both primary and secondary etiologies. We summarized the literature and provided a narrative review of the clinical presentation, diagnostic work-ups, possible pathophysiology, treatment response, and clinical outcomes.Results and conclusion New daily persistent headache is a controversial but clinically important topic. New daily persistent headache is likely not a single entity but a syndrome with different etiologies. The issue with past studies of new daily persistent headache is that patients with different etiologies/subtypes were pooled together. Different studies may investigate distinct subsets of patients, which renders the inter-study comparison, both positive and negative results, difficult. The identification (and removal) of a specific trigger might provide the opportunity for clinical improvement in certain patients, even when the disease has lasted for months or years. Nonetheless, if there is a specific trigger, it remains unknown or unidentified for a great proportion of the patients. We need to continue to study this unique headache population to better understand underlying pathogenesis and, most importantly, to establish effective treatment strategies that hopefully resolve the continuous cycle of pain.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to determine the association between iron deficiency anemia and chronic daily headache. METHODS: This case-control study was conducted in a tertiary care center in Dehradun, India. One hundred patients with chronic daily headache were randomly selected for the study with an equal number of controls. Subsets of chronic daily headache were diagnosed as per the 3rd edition of the International Classification of Headache Disorders. The study participants were assessed for iron deficiency anemia. RESULTS: The mean age of the patients was 51.1 ± 22.1 years. Male: female ratio was 1:1.08. Chronic migraine was present in 62 (62%), tension-type headache in 23 (23%), and new daily persistent headache in 15 (15%) patients. The majority (96%) of patients had chronic daily headache of mild to moderate severity. Chronic daily headache was of long duration in all patients. Sixty-four (64%) patients had anemia of which 51 (51%) patients had iron deficiency anemia. Iron deficiency anemia showed a significant association with chronic daily headache (p < 0.001), but not with its type, subtype, and duration. Severe iron deficiency anemia had a significant association with the severity of chronic daily headache (p = 0.021). Serum iron, ferritin, total iron-binding capacity, and transferrin saturation also had a significant association with chronic daily headache (p < 0.05 for each), but not with its type, subtype, duration, and severity. Logistic regression analysis showed that iron deficiency anemia, total iron-binding capacity, and transferrin saturation had an independent association with chronic daily headache (p < 0.05 for each). CONCLUSIONS: Iron deficiency anemia had an independent association with chronic daily headache. Severe iron deficiency anemia was related to the severity of chronic daily headache.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of eptinezumab for the treatment of chronic refractory headache in adolescents. BACKGROUND: Chronic refractory headache can lead to school absences and impaired quality of life in adolescents, and currently there are no pharmacologic treatments with level A evidence for headache prevention for this population. While observational data suggest that monoclonal antibodies to calcitonin gene-related peptide or its receptor may be helpful for adolescents who have refractory primary headache disorders, evidence is lacking for the use of eptinezumab. METHODS: This was a single-center, retrospective chart review. Demographic and headache phenotypic data were collected. Outcome measures included headache intensity and frequency pre- and post-infusion(s), and improvement in function or in associated symptoms. Adverse events were also collected. RESULTS: Nine patients with chronic migraine and two with new daily persistent headache received a first dose of 100 mg of eptinezumab. All of them had daily headache and nine had continuous headache at baseline. After the first infusion of 100 mg, two patients were no longer having daily headache, one patient stopped having continuous headache, and four patients noted headache intensity reduction. Additionally, one patient described a reduction in nausea and vomiting, and another patient noted improvement in function. Six patients received a second eptinezumab infusion of 100 mg, three had a third one, and one patient had four infusions of 100 mg. After the second infusion, one patient noted reduction in headache frequency, one experienced lower headache intensity, and two described pain "improving." With the third and fourth infusions, patients continued to report improvement in headache intensity. Subsequent infusions of 300 mg resulted in further reductions in headache frequency and intensity for some patients. Eptinezumab was overall well tolerated. CONCLUSION: While this was a small sample, findings suggest that eptinezumab may be a safe and effective treatment for chronic, refractory headache in adolescents.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: In the setting of acute COVID-19 infection, headache occurs in 10-60% of patients and may last for days and, in a smaller proportion of patients, weeks (about 10%). However, it is less recognized that headache may also occur after vaccination with a short latency and may persist for a longer period in a still unclear number of patients. METHODS: Retrospective description of headache and course in a case series of 32 outpatients with headache that changed or recurred after COVID-19 vaccination. RESULTS: The majority of patients experienced an exacerbation of migraine headache; rare headache syndromes such as intracranial hypertension or thunderclap headache occurred in 2 patients. Headache manifested in more than 50% of patients within the first 48 h after vaccination. Over 50% of patients who received a triptan improved. CONCLUSION: The pathophysiological relationship between vaccination and persistent headache is not yet clearly understood. The short latency, partial efficacy of cortisone, and initial findings showing an increase of various inflammatory markers during the course of headache in COVID infection suggest a possible involvement of the innate immune system and here the inflammasome. Furthermore, the response to triptan in a proportion of patients also indicates activation of the trigeminovascular system.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

The prevalence of chronic daily headache (CDH) worldwide is 4−5%. Treatment for CDH with prophylaxis and abortive medications is often delayed, increasing disease severity. Consequently, increased usage of over-the-counter (OTC) analgesics can lead to medication overuse headache (MOH). This study aimed to assess factors affecting OTC analgesic overuse causing headaches. Methodology: A cross-sectional structured survey was conducted using voluntary response sampling. Among 1177 respondents, 459 individuals with headache were enrolled in the study. Results: Most participants were female (73.5%), almost half were aged 20−39 years (48.1%), and over half used OTC analgesics (56%). A significant association was found between OTC analgesic overuse and factors, such as chronic disease (p = 0.007), working status (p = 0.015), smoking (p = 0.02), headache frequency >15 days per month (p = 0.000), migraine-type headache (p = 0.01), preventive medicine use (p = 0.018), and emergency department visit (p = 0.018). Conclusion: OTC analgesic overuse among individuals with headache is affected by several factors, including the presence of chronic diseases, working status, smoking, and migraine-type headaches. However, preventive medicine and emergency department visits were considered to have protective effects. Health care providers should screen patients for MOH, increase their awareness, and follow MOH guidelines to treat chronic headache.

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: The prevalence of headache disorders, migraine, chronic daily headache (CDH), and medication-overuse headache (MOH) among the elderly in Japan has not been sufficiently investigated. We performed a questionnaire-based survey and revealed 3-month headache prevalence and headaches' characteristics. METHODS: The population aged over 64 was investigated in Itoigawa during their third coronavirus disease 2019 vaccination. Migraine, MOH was defined as The International Classification of Headache Disorders Third edition. CDH was defined as a headache occurring at least 15 days per month. K-means++ were used to perform clustering. RESULTS: Among 2858 valid responses, headache disorders, migraine, CDH, and MOH prevalence was 11.97%, 0.91%, 1.57%, and 0.70%, respectively. Combined-analgesic and non-opioid analgesic were widely used. Only one migraineur used prophylactic medication. We performed k-means++ to group the 332 MOH patients into four clusters. Cluster 1 seemed to have tension-type headache-like headache characteristics, cluster 2 seemed to have MOH-like headache characteristics, cluster 3 seemed to have severe headaches with comorbidities such as dyslipidemia, stroke, and depression, and cluster 4 seemed to have migraine-like headache characteristics with photophobia and phonophobia. CONCLUSIONS: This is the largest prevalence survey in the Japanese elderly. Headache disorders are still the elderly's burden. Clustering suggested that severe headaches associated with some comorbidities may be unique to the elderly.

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to explore brain morphological and functional connectivity alterations in adolescents with new daily persistent headache (NDPH) compared to pain-free, healthy controls. BACKGROUND: NDPH is one of the most disabling and least understood primary headache conditions. To date, no studies have considered the role of brain function and structure in pediatric patients with NDPH. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, resting-state functional and structural images were acquired for 13 patients with NDPH (M age = 15.9, standard deviation [SD] ± 1.4) and 13 age- and sex-matched controls (M age = 16.2, SD ± 1.8) using magnetic resonance imaging. Participants were recruited from the Pediatric Headache Program at Boston Children's Hospital and from the Greater Boston area. In patients, clinical features of NDPH, including disease duration, pain intensity ratings, pain sensitivity, and functional disability were also assessed, and their associations with functional and structural brain alterations were explored. RESULTS: Compared to controls, patients with NDPH demonstrated reduced cortical thickness in the bilateral superior temporal gyrus, left superior, and middle frontal gyrus areas (p < 0.05, Monte Carlo corrected for multiple comparisons). Furthermore, reduced cortical thickness of the left superior frontal gyrus was related to elevated pain sensitivity in NDPH (r = -0.79, p = 0.006). Patients showed altered functional connectivity between regions involved in emotional and cognitive networks of pain, including the amygdala, insula, frontal regions, and cerebellar subregions. CONCLUSION: The present study provides the first preliminary evidence of functional and structural brain differences in pediatric patients with NDPH compared to controls. Identifying alterations in cortical thickness and resting-state connectivity between specific brain regions could provide characteristics of NDPH and probable mechanisms that may guide personalized therapeutic interventions.

Asunto(s)