Репозиторий Университета

Background: Migraine and depression are highly prevalent and partly overlapping disorders that cause strong limitations in daily life. Patients tend to respond poorly to the therapies available for these diseases. OnabotulinumtoxinA has been proven to be an effective treatment for both migraine and depression. While many studies have addressed the effect of onabotulinumtoxinA in migraine or depression separately, a growing body of evidence suggests beneficial effects also for patients comorbid with migraine and depression. The current meta-analysis systematically investigates to what extent onabotulinumtoxinA is efficient in migraineurs with depression. Methods: A systematic literature search was performed based on PubMed, Scopus and Web of Science from the earliest date till October 30 th, 2020. Mean, standard deviation (SD) and sample size have been used to evaluate improvement in depressive symptoms and migraine using random-effects empirical Bayes model. Results: Our search retrieved 259 studies, eight of which met the inclusion criteria. OnabotulinumtoxinA injections administered to patients with both chronic migraine and major depressive disorder led to mean reduction of -8.94 points (CI [-10.04,-7.84], p < 0.01) in the BDI scale, of -5.90 points (CI [-9.92,-1.88], p < 0.01) in the BDI-II scale and of -6.19 points (CI [-9.52,-2.86], p < 0.01) in the PHQ-9 scale, when evaluating depressive symptoms. In the case of the migraine-related symptoms, we found mean reductions of -4.10 (CI [-7.31,-0.89], p = 0.01) points in the HIT6 scale, -32.05 (CI [-55.96,-8.14], p = 0.01) in the MIDAS scale, -1.7 (CI [-3.27,-0.13], p = 0.03) points in the VAS scale and of -6.27 (CI [-8.48,-4.07], p < 0.01) migraine episodes per month. Comorbid patients showed slightly better improvements in BDI, HIT6 scores and migraine frequency compared to monomorbid patients. The latter group manifested better results in MIDAS and VAS scores. Conclusion: Treatment with onabotulinumtoxinA leads to a significant reduction of disease severity of both chronic migraine and major depressive disorder in patients comorbid with both diseases. Comparative analyses suggest an equivalent strong effect in monomorbid and comorbid patients, with beneficial effects specifically seen for certain migraine features.

Background: There is currently a wide therapeutic arsenal for migraine patients, without a single first-line preventive drug and we choose the different available alternatives taking into account comorbidities, national guidelines, previous treatments and personal experiences. Our objective was to evaluate the differences in the use of migraine treatments between neurologists from different countries. Methods: This is a multi-centre observational study carried out by neurologists from specialized headache units in seven countries, retrospective with consecutive inclusion of all patients presenting with a migraine diagnosis, over a period of three months. Results: A total of 734 patients were recruited but only 600 were considered in the analysis in order to homogenize the patient cohorts from countries: 200 Spain (ES), 100 Italy (IT), 85 Russia (RUS), 80 Germany (DE), 60 Portugal (PT), 45 Poland (PL) and 30 Australia (AU). 85.4 % of patients were women with a mean age of 42.6 ± 11.8 years. Considering previous and current preventive treatment, the order of use was: antidepressants (69.3 %), antiepileptic drugs (54.7 %), beta-blockers and antihypertensive drugs (49.7 %), OnabotulinumtoxinA (44.0 %) and others (36.2 %). Statistically significant differences were found between all pharmacological classes: antidepressants were commonly used in all countries, with the exception of Poland (AU: 76.7 %, IT: 71.0 %, DE: 60.0 %, PL: 31.1 %, PT: 71.7 %, RUS: 70.6 %, ES: 78.5 %; p < 0.0001); antiepileptic drugs were more frequently prescribed in Portugal, Australia and Spain (AU: 73.3 %, IT: 40.0 %, DE: 37.5 %, PL: 48.9 %, PT: 85.0 %, RUS: 29.4 % and ES: 69.0 %; p < 0.0001); beta-blockers and antihypertensive drugs were frequently used in all countries except Italy (AU: 60.0 %, IT: 14.0 %, DE: 53.8 %, PL: 48.9 %, PT: 68.3 %, RUS: 49.4 % and ES: 59.0 %; p < 0.0001); BTX-A were predominately used in Spain, Italy and Australia (AU:56.7 %, IT:58.0 %, DE:20.0 %, PL: 42.2 %, PT: 26.7 %, RUS: 24.7 % and ES: 58.5 %; p < 0.0001) and others were most frequently used in Poland (AU: 0.0 %, IT: 19.0 %, DE: 42.5 %, PL: 95.6 %, PT: 31.7 %, RUS: 3.5 % and ES: 49.5 %; p < 0.0001). If only patients without comorbidities are considered (200/600), statistically differences between countries persist in all preventive treatments. Conclusions: There is heterogeneity in the choice of preventive treatment between different countries. Prospective comparative studies of the different oral and subcutaneous alternatives would help to create a global therapeutic algorithm that would guarantee the best option for our patients.

Background: New treatments are currently offering new opportunities and challenges in clinical management and research in the migraine field. There is the need of homogenous criteria to identify candidates for treatment escalation as well as of reliable criteria to identify refractoriness to treatment. To overcome those issues, the European Headache Federation (EHF) issued a Consensus document to propose criteria to approach difficult-to-treat migraine patients in a standardized way. The Consensus proposed well-defined criteria for resistant migraine (i.e., patients who do not respond to some treatment but who have residual therapeutic opportunities) and refractory migraine (i.e., patients who still have debilitating migraine despite maximal treatment efforts). The aim of this study was to better understand the perceived impact of resistant and refractory migraine and the attitude of physicians involved in migraine care toward those conditions. Methods: We conducted a web-questionnaire-based cross-sectional international study involving physicians with interest in headache care. Results: There were 277 questionnaires available for analysis. A relevant proportion of participants reported that patients with resistant and refractory migraine were frequently seen in their clinical practice (49.5% for resistant and 28.9% for refractory migraine); percentages were higher when considering only those working in specialized headache centers (75% and 46% respectively). However, many physicians reported low or moderate confidence in managing resistant (8.1% and 43.3%, respectively) and refractory (20.7% and 48.4%, respectively) migraine patients; confidence in treating resistant and refractory migraine patients was different according to the level of care and to the number of patients visited per week. Patients with resistant and refractory migraine were infrequently referred to more specialized centers (12% and 19%, respectively); also in this case, figures were different according to the level of care. Conclusions: This report highlights the clinical relevance of difficult-to-treat migraine and the presence of unmet needs in this field. There is the need of more evidence regarding the management of those patients and clear guidance referring to the organization of care and available opportunities.

© 2019 The Author(s). Background: Resting-state functional connectivity (FC) MRI has widely been used to understand migraine pathophysiology and to identify an imaging marker of the disorder. Here, we review what we have learned from FC studies. Methods: We performed a literature search on the PubMed website for original articles reporting data obtained from conventional resting-state FC recording in migraine patients compared with healthy controls or during and outside of migraine attacks in the same patients. Results: We found 219 articles and included 28 in this review after screening for inclusion and exclusion criteria. Twenty-five studies compared migraine patients with healthy controls, whereas three studies investigated migraine patients during and outside of attacks. In the studies of interictal migraine more alterations of more than 20 FC networks (including amygdala, caudate nucleus, central executive, cerebellum, cuneus, dorsal attention network, default mode, executive control, fronto-parietal, hypothalamus, insula, neostriatum, nucleus accumbens, occipital lobe, periaqueductal grey, prefrontal cortex, salience, somatosensory cortex I, thalamus and visual) were reported. We found a poor level of reproducibility and no migraine specific pattern across these studies. Conclusion: Based on the findings in the present review, it seems very difficult to extract knowledge of migraine pathophysiology or to identify a biomarker of migraine. There is an unmet need of guidelines for resting-state FC studies in migraine, which promote the use of homogenous terminology, public availability of protocol and the a priori hypothesis in line with for instance randomized clinical trial guidelines.

© 2019 American Headache Society Background: The International Classification of Headache Disorders lists different subtypes of medication overuse headache (MOH), according to the medication overused. The aim of this study is to evaluate whether the different subtypes correspond to clinically distinguishable phenotypes in a large population. Method: This descriptive cross-sectional observational study included 660 patients with MOH referred to headache centers in Europe and Latin America as a part of the COMOESTAS project. Information about clinical features was collected with structured patient interviews and with self-administered questionnaires for measuring disability, anxiety, and depression. Results: Female/male ratio, body mass index, marital status, and level of education were similar among in subjects enrolled in the 5 centers. The mean age was higher among subjects overusing triptans (T-MOH) with respect to subjects overusing simple analgesic (A-MOH). Duration of headache before chronification was longer in T-MOH (19.2 ± 11.9 years) and in subjects overusing ergotamines (E-MOH, 17.8 ± 11.7 years) with respect to the A-MOH group (13.1 ± 10.9; P <.001 and P =.017, respectively) and in T-MOH with respect multiple drug classes (M-MOH, 14.9 ± 11.7; P =.030). Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS) score was significantly lower in E-MOH group (33.6 ± 41.6), while T-MOH group (56.8 ± 40.6) had a significant lower MIDAS score with respect to M-MOH (67.2 ± 62.5; P =.016 and P =.037, respectively). Prevalence of depression and anxiety was lower in patients overusing T with respect to other groups of patients (χ2 = 10.953, P =.027 and χ2 = 25.725, P <.001, respectively). Conclusion: In this study on a large and very well characterized population of MOH, we describe the distinctive clinical characteristics of MOH subtypes. These findings contribute to more clearly define the clinical picture of a poorly delineated headache disorder. They also provide some insights in the possible trajectories leading to this highly disabling chronic headache, that is classified as a secondary form, but whose occurrence is entirely dependent on an underlying primary headache.

© 2018, Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature. Recommendations for the diagnosis and treatment of migraine based on the principles of evidence-based medicine are presented. The latest edition of the International Classification of Migraine is provided. Diagnostic methods and criteria are oriented to discriminating different types of migraine. Recommendations are given on the basis of data on the epidemiology and pathophysiological mechanisms of migraine. The most effective medication-based and non-medication-based approaches to the management of migraine patients are discussed.

© 2018, © International Headache Society 2018. Background: Calcitonin gene-related peptide plays an important role in migraine pathophysiology. Erenumab, a human monoclonal antibody that inhibits the calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor, is being evaluated for migraine prevention. Methods: In this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 study, 577 adults with episodic migraine were randomized to placebo or 70 mg erenumab; 570 patients were included in efficacy analyses. Primary endpoint was change in monthly migraine days. Secondary endpoints were ≥50% reduction in monthly migraine days, change in acute migraine-specific medication treatment days, and ≥5-point reduction in Physical Impairment and Impact on Everyday Activities domain scores measured by the Migraine Physical Function Impact Diary. All endpoints assessed change from baseline at month 3. Results: Patients receiving erenumab experienced −2.9 days change in monthly migraine days, compared with −1.8 days for placebo, least-squares mean (95% CI) treatment difference of −1.0 (−1.6, −0.5) (p < 0.001). A ≥ 50% reduction in monthly migraine days was achieved by 39.7% (erenumab) and 29.5% (placebo) of patients (OR:1.59 (95% CI: 1.12, 2.27) (p = 0.010). Migraine-specific medication treatment days were reduced by −1.2 (erenumab) and −0.6 (placebo) days, a treatment difference of −0.6 (−1.0, −0.2) (p = 0.002). The ≥5-point reduction rates in Migraine Physical Function Impact Diary – Physical Impairment were 33.0% and 27.1% (OR:1.33 (0.92, 1.90) (p = 0.13) and in Migraine Physical Function Impact Diary – Everyday Activities were 40.4% and 35.8% (OR:1.22 (0.87, 1.71) (p = 0.26). Safety and adverse event profiles of erenumab were similar to placebo. Most frequent adverse events were upper respiratory tract infection, injection site pain, and nasopharyngitis. Conclusions: As a preventive treatment of episodic migraine, erenumab at a dosage of 70 mg monthly significantly reduced migraine frequency and acute migraine-specific medication use. (Funded by Amgen). Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02483585.

© 2018, Media Sphera Publishing Group. All rights reserved. The authors describe manifestations of chronic cerebral ischemia (CCI) and present the cases of a combination of primary headache and CCI. Management of patients with CCI and headache and the use of vazobral and its efficacy in treatment of such patients are discussed.

© 2018, Media Sphera Publishing Group. All rights reserved. Differential diagnosis of migraine, can be difficult, especially of migraine with aura. On the one hand, some diseases can produce symptoms similar to migraine (cerebral aneurysm before rupture, reversible cerebral vasoconstriction syndrome). On the other hand, migraine with aura and some other disorders are conditions that have common pathophysiological mechanisms (e.g., CADASIL and MELAS syndrome, antiphospholipid syndrome). Thirdly, clinical presentations of migraine are often difficult to distinguish from features of other headache conditions (migraine with aura - transient ischemic attack, migraine with visual aura - occipital epilepsy). The author discusses the differential diagnosis of acute headache, especially thunderclap headache, and main strategies of effective treatment of migraine attacks.

© Ima-Press Publishing House. All rights reserved. Cognitive impairment (CI) is common in patients with migraine; its causes and pathogenesis continue to be discussed. Some authors consider that migraine proper does not lead to decreased cognitive functions, neuroimaging changes in the brain white matter are asymptomatic in migraine; and CI in patients with this condition is caused by comorbidities (depression, anxiety disorder) and/or concurrent cerebrovascular and neurodegenerative diseases. Other authors report the pathogenetic role of migraine in the development of CI and the importance of the frequency of headache attacks and neuroimaging changes in the brain matter in migraine. The paper reviews clinical trials dealing with the prevalence, causes, and pathogenesis of CI in patients with migraine. It sets forth the current principles of prevention and treatment of CI in patients with this condition.

© 2018 ABV-Press Publishing House. All rights reserved. Background. Patients with the chronic migraine frequently present with memory and attention complaints. However, the prevalence and phenotype of such impairment in chronic migraine have not been studied. Objective-to evaluate the prevalence of the objective cognitive deficit in patients with chronic migraine and factors underlying its etiology. Materials and methods. We recruited 62 subjects with chronic migraine and 36 gender-and age-matched controls with low-frequency episodic migraine (not more, then 4 headache days per month) aged 18-59. All patients filled in the Hospital Anxiety and Depres sion Scale (HADS) and Sheehan Disability Scale. Cognitive function was assessed with the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), Digital Symbol Substitution Test (DSST), Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test (RAVLT), and the Perceived Deficits Questionnaire (PDQ-20). Results. In this study 58 % of patients with chronic migraine complained of memory loss. Cognitive impairment was also found with PDQ-20. Objectively, we found a significant decrease in 90-second DSST results and RAVLT total recall and learning rate. In 40 % of subjects with chronic migraine scored lower than 26 points on MoCA. Patients with chronic migraine more frequently had lower DSST rates as compared to episodic migraine (odds ratio 5.07 (95 % confidence interval-1.59-16.17); p = 0.003). Depression and anxiety did not correlate with performance on cognitive tests. Chronic migraine (frequent headache) and longer headache history, but not depression, anxiety or medication overuse were independent predictors of cognitive impairment. Conclusion. Subjective and objective cognitive deficits are prevalent in the chronic migraine population. Most often memory and attention are impaired. Longer headache history and presence of chronic migraine are independent risk factors for cognitive impairment in patients with chronic migraine.

© 2018 ABV-Press Publishing House. All rights reserved. Background. Memory and attention deficits are prevalent in the chronic pain population. There are multiple common mechanisms in chronic pain and cognitive impairment. However, the presence, prevalence and clinical burden of such impairment are frequently underestimated. Objective: to evaluate subjective and objective cognitive deficits in patients with chronic migraine (CM). Materials and methods. We recruited 53 subjects with CM and 22 gender- and age-matched controls with low-frequency episodic migraine (a maximum of 4 headache days per month) aged 18-59. All patients filled in the HADS (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale) anxiety and depression scale and Pittsburg Sleep Quality Inventory (PSQI). Cognitive function was assessed with Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), Digital Symbol Substitution Test (DSST), Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test (RAVLT) and the Perceived Deficits Questionnaire (PDQ-20). Results. 56 % of patients with CM complained of memory problems. Decreased cognitive function was also observed during self-assessment using the PDQ-20 questionnaire. Objectively, we found a significant decrease in 90-second DSST results and RAVLT total recall and learn ing rates. 44 % of subjects with CM scored lower than 26 points on MoCA. Most frequently we found impairments in attention (75 %), memory/delayed recall (50 %), language (50 %) and executive function (37 %). Depression and sleep quality correlated with only several parameters of cognitive tests. Conclusion. Subjective and objective cognitive deficits are prevalent in the CM population. Most often memory and attention are impaired. Cognitive complaints need to be carefully assessed, and treatment of such impairment may improve quality of life and decrease disability in CM.

BACKGROUND:

The 2013 International Classification of Headache Disorders-3 (ICHD-3) was published in a beta version to allow the clinicians to confirm the validity of the criteria or to suggest improvements based on field studies. The aim of this work was to review the Primary Headache Disorders Section of ICHD-3 beta data on children and adolescents (age 0-18 years), and to suggest changes, additions, and amendments.
METHODS:

Several experts in childhood headache across the world applied different aspects of ICHD-3 beta in their normal clinical practice. Based on their personal experience and the literature available on pediatric headache, they made observations and proposed suggestions for the primary headache disorders section of ICHD-3 beta data on children and adolescents.
RESULTS:

Some headache disorders in children have specific features which are different from those seen in adults and which should be acknowledged and considered. Some features in children were found to be age-dependent: clinical characteristics, risks factors and etiologies have a strong bio psycho-social basis in children and adolescents making primary headache disorders in children distinct from those in adults.
CONCLUSIONS:

Several recommendations are presented in order to make ICHD-3 more appropriate for use with children.

BACKGROUND:

The 2013 International Classification of Headache Disorders-3 (ICHD-3) was published in a beta version to allow the clinicians to confirm the validity of the criteria or to suggest improvements based on field studies. The aim of this work was to review the Primary Headache Disorders Section of ICHD-3 beta data on children and adolescents (age 0-18 years), and to suggest changes, additions, and amendments.

METHODS:

Several experts in childhood headache across the world applied different aspects of ICHD-3 beta in their normal clinical practice. Based on their personal experience and the literature available on pediatric headache, they made observations and proposed suggestions for the primary headache disorders section of ICHD-3 beta data on children and adolescents.

RESULTS:

Some headache disorders in children have specific features which are different from those seen in adults and which should be acknowledged and considered. Some features in children were found to be age-dependent: clinical characteristics, risks factors and etiologies have a strong bio psycho-social basis in children and adolescents making primary headache disorders in children distinct from those in adults.

CONCLUSIONS:

Several recommendations are presented in order to make ICHD-3 more appropriate for use with children.

BACKGROUND:

The 2013 International Classification of Headache Disorders-3 (ICHD-3) was published in a beta version to allow the clinicians to confirm the validity of the criteria or to suggest improvements based on field studies. The aim of this work was to review the Primary Headache Disorders Section of ICHD-3 beta data on children and adolescents (age 0-18 years), and to suggest changes, additions, and amendments.
METHODS:

Several experts in childhood headache across the world applied different aspects of ICHD-3 beta in their normal clinical practice. Based on their personal experience and the literature available on pediatric headache, they made observations and proposed suggestions for the primary headache disorders section of ICHD-3 beta data on children and adolescents.
RESULTS:

Some headache disorders in children have specific features which are different from those seen in adults and which should be acknowledged and considered. Some features in children were found to be age-dependent: clinical characteristics, risks factors and etiologies have a strong bio psycho-social basis in children and adolescents making primary headache disorders in children distinct from those in adults.
CONCLUSIONS:

Several recommendations are presented in order to make ICHD-3 more appropriate for use with children.

BACKGROUND:

The 2013 International Classification of Headache Disorders-3 (ICHD-3) was published in a beta version to allow the clinicians to confirm the validity of the criteria or to suggest improvements based on field studies. The aim of this work was to review the Primary Headache Disorders Section of ICHD-3 beta data on children and adolescents (age 0-18 years), and to suggest changes, additions, and amendments.

METHODS:

Several experts in childhood headache across the world applied different aspects of ICHD-3 beta in their normal clinical practice. Based on their personal experience and the literature available on pediatric headache, they made observations and proposed suggestions for the primary headache disorders section of ICHD-3 beta data on children and adolescents.

RESULTS:

Some headache disorders in children have specific features which are different from those seen in adults and which should be acknowledged and considered. Some features in children were found to be age-dependent: clinical characteristics, risks factors and etiologies have a strong bio psycho-social basis in children and adolescents making primary headache disorders in children distinct from those in adults.

CONCLUSIONS:

Several recommendations are presented in order to make ICHD-3 more appropriate for use with children.