Search

Background: Headache is one of the most frequently reported symptoms in post-COVID patients. The clinical phenotype of COVID-19 headache combines phenotypic features of both tension-type headache (TTH) and migraine. We aimed to assess the effectiveness, side effects and predictors of amitriptyline (AMT) response in a real-world study setting. Methods: We performed an observational multicentric study with a retrospective cohort. All consecutive patients with confirmed COVID-19 infection who received AMT for post-COVID headache from March 2020 to May 2021 were included. Response was evaluated by the reduction in the number of headache days per month (HDM) between weeks 8 and 12, compared with the baseline. We explored which variables were associated with a higher probability of response to AMT. Results: Forty-eight patients were eligible for the study, 40/48 (83.3%) females, aged 46.85 (SD: 13.59) years. Patients had history of migraine 15/48 (31.3%) or TTH 5/48 (10.4%). The mean reduction of HDM was 9.6 (SD: 10.9; 95% CI 6.5, 12.7) days. Only 2/48 (5%) of patients discontinued AMT due to poor tolerability. History of TTH (10.9, 95% CI 1.3, 20.6) and nausea (− 8.5, 95% CI − 14.6, − 2.5) were associated with AMT response. Conclusions: This study provides real-world evidence of the potential benefit of AMT in patients with post-COVID-19 headache, especially in patients with history of TTH and without concomitant nausea. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: This study aims to evaluate the relationship between psychiatric comorbidity (anxiety and depression), somnolence, and quality of life, using validated scales in patients with epilepsy in real-life clinical practice and clinical and demographic variables. Methods: A cross-sectional observational study was conducted. Self-administered scales of anxiety disorders (GAD-7), depression (NDDI-E), somnolence (Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS)), and quality of life (QOLIE-31-P) in patients with epilepsy treated in the refractory epilepsy unit of a tertiary hospital were employed. Results: Eighty-four patients, 44.3 ± 17.4 years, 48.2% women, epilepsy duration 21.5 ± 15.9 years, and number of antiepileptic drugs 1.9 ± 1.2 were included. Severe anxiety was present in 14.3%, depression in 20.2%, and somnolence in 14.3% of patients. QOLIE-31-P score was 62.0 ± 19.2. Depression and focal epilepsy (OR = 4.5[1.3, 20.7], p = 0.029), as well as anxiety and temporal lobe epilepsy (OR = 4.3 [1.0, 18.1], p = 0.044), were associated. Moreover, relationships between worse quality of life and higher scores from NDDI-E (β = − 1.42, adjusted p = 0.006) and GAD-7 (β = − 1.21, adjusted p = 0.006), especially in drug-resistant epilepsy (β = − 8.08, adjusted p = 0.045) and female sex (β = − 7.83, adjusted p = 0.034), were identified. Statistically significant negative associations were observed between problems to fall asleep and overall quality of life score (β = − 11.64, adjusted p = 0.022), sleep disturbance and energy (β = − 14.78, adjusted p = 0.027), and mood (β = 12.40, adjusted p = 0.027) scores. Conclusions: The multidimensional evaluation revealed that higher levels of anxiety and depression are associated with worse quality of life in real clinical practice in patients with epilepsy, especially in females and drug-resistant epilepsy. In addition, sleep disturbances are associated with particular aspects of the quality of life. Further studies with longitudinal follow-up would be useful to adequately manage these comorbidities in patients with epilepsy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Face-to-face procedures have been postponed during COVID-19 pandemic. We aim to evaluate the impact of onabotulinumtoxinA follow-up delay in migraine during COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: Subjective worsening, intensity of migraine attacks, and frequency of headache and migraine were retrospectively compared between patients with unmodified and interrupted onabotulinumtoxinA follow-up in Headache Units. Results: We included 67 patients with chronic migraine or high-frequency episodic migraine under onabotulinumtoxinA treatment, 65 (97.0%) female, 44.5 ± 12.1 years old. Treatment administration was voluntarily delayed in 14 (20.9%) patients and nine (13.4%) were unable to continue follow-up. Patients with uninterrupted follow-up during lockdown presented 7.6 and 8.1 less monthly days with headache (adjusted p = 0.017) and migraine attacks (adjusted p = 0.009) compared to patients whose follow-up was interrupted, respectively. Conclusion: Involuntary delay of onabotulinumtoxinA follow-up in patients with migraine due to COVID-19 pandemic was associated with a higher frequency of headache and migraine attacks. Safe administration of onabotulinumtoxinA during lockdown should be promoted. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Chronic cluster headache (CCH) is a relatively rare primary headache disorder whose management is often challenging. The prevalence of refractory CCH (rCCH) is unknown. Our aim is to describe the frequency of rCCH within a population of CCH, define the clinical profile of the refractory patients and the treatments they underwent.We conducted a cross-sectional study through a review of the medical records of CCH patients in six hospitals in Madrid, Spain. Data on epidemiological, clinical presentation, treatment and disease activity at the moment were collected. The European Headache Federation diagnostic criteria were used for rCCH definition. High disease activity was defined as having at least 3 severe attacks per week that impact quality of life despite treatment. Non-rCCH and rCCH groups were compared.88 CCH patients were analyzed, 68.2% (60/88) met rCCH criteria at some point in their evolution. A longer diagnostic delay (4.6 ± 7.1 vs. 3.2 ± 3.7 years, p = 0.017) was observed in rCCH. All rCCH patients tried therapies without established evidence from randomized clinical trials. OnabotulinumtoxinA and galcanezumab were initiated in 77.3% (68/88) and 5.7% (5/88), but discontinued in 52.9% (36/68) and 60.0% (3/5), respectively. Occipital nerve stimulation (ONS) was implanted in 29.6% (26/88), with 50.0% (13/26) still active. Other treatment options are described and discussed. Despite treatment, 60.2% (53/88) still have high disease activity.CCH is a disorder with poor prognosis, meeting refractoriness criteria in more than half. OnabotulinumtoxinA and ONS could be the effective in refractory patients.Methods: Chronic cluster headache (CCH) is a relatively rare primary headache disorder whose management is often challenging. The prevalence of refractory CCH (rCCH) is unknown. Our aim is to describe the frequency of rCCH within a population of CCH, define the clinical profile of the refractory patients and the treatments they underwent.We conducted a cross-sectional study through a review of the medical records of CCH patients in six hospitals in Madrid, Spain. Data on epidemiological, clinical presentation, treatment and disease activity at the moment were collected. The European Headache Federation diagnostic criteria were used for rCCH definition. High disease activity was defined as having at least 3 severe attacks per week that impact quality of life despite treatment. Non-rCCH and rCCH groups were compared.88 CCH patients were analyzed, 68.2% (60/88) met rCCH criteria at some point in their evolution. A longer diagnostic delay (4.6 ± 7.1 vs. 3.2 ± 3.7 years, p = 0.017) was observed in rCCH. All rCCH patients tried therapies without established evidence from randomized clinical trials. OnabotulinumtoxinA and galcanezumab were initiated in 77.3% (68/88) and 5.7% (5/88), but discontinued in 52.9% (36/68) and 60.0% (3/5), respectively. Occipital nerve stimulation (ONS) was implanted in 29.6% (26/88), with 50.0% (13/26) still active. Other treatment options are described and discussed. Despite treatment, 60.2% (53/88) still have high disease activity.CCH is a disorder with poor prognosis, meeting refractoriness criteria in more than half. OnabotulinumtoxinA and ONS could be the effective in refractory patients.Results: Chronic cluster headache (CCH) is a relatively rare primary headache disorder whose management is often challenging. The prevalence of refractory CCH (rCCH) is unknown. Our aim is to describe the frequency of rCCH within a population of CCH, define the clinical profile of the refractory patients and the treatments they underwent.We conducted a cross-sectional study through a review of the medical records of CCH patients in six hospitals in Madrid, Spain. Data on epidemiological, clinical presentation, treatment and disease activity at the moment were collected. The European Headache Federation diagnostic criteria were used for rCCH definition. High disease activity was defined as having at least 3 severe attacks per week that impact quality of life despite treatment. Non-rCCH and rCCH groups were compared.88 CCH patients were analyzed, 68.2% (60/88) met rCCH criteria at some point in their evolution. A longer diagnostic delay (4.6 ± 7.1 vs. 3.2 ± 3.7 years, p = 0.017) was observed in rCCH. All rCCH patients tried therapies without established evidence from randomized clinical trials. OnabotulinumtoxinA and galcanezumab were initiated in 77.3% (68/88) and 5.7% (5/88), but discontinued in 52.9% (36/68) and 60.0% (3/5), respectively. Occipital nerve stimulation (ONS) was implanted in 29.6% (26/88), with 50.0% (13/26) still active. Other treatment options are described and discussed. Despite treatment, 60.2% (53/88) still have high disease activity.CCH is a disorder with poor prognosis, meeting refractoriness criteria in more than half. OnabotulinumtoxinA and ONS could be the effective in refractory patients.Conclusion: Chronic cluster headache (CCH) is a relatively rare primary headache disorder whose management is often challenging. The prevalence of refractory CCH (rCCH) is unknown. Our aim is to describe the frequency of rCCH within a population of CCH, define the clinical profile of the refractory patients and the treatments they underwent.We conducted a cross-sectional study through a review of the medical records of CCH patients in six hospitals in Madrid, Spain. Data on epidemiological, clinical presentation, treatment and disease activity at the moment were collected. The European Headache Federation diagnostic criteria were used for rCCH definition. High disease activity was defined as having at least 3 severe attacks per week that impact quality of life despite treatment. Non-rCCH and rCCH groups were compared.88 CCH patients were analyzed, 68.2% (60/88) met rCCH criteria at some point in their evolution. A longer diagnostic delay (4.6 ± 7.1 vs. 3.2 ± 3.7 years, p = 0.017) was observed in rCCH. All rCCH patients tried therapies without established evidence from randomized clinical trials. OnabotulinumtoxinA and galcanezumab were initiated in 77.3% (68/88) and 5.7% (5/88), but discontinued in 52.9% (36/68) and 60.0% (3/5), respectively. Occipital nerve stimulation (ONS) was implanted in 29.6% (26/88), with 50.0% (13/26) still active. Other treatment options are described and discussed. Despite treatment, 60.2% (53/88) still have high disease activity.CCH is a disorder with poor prognosis, meeting refractoriness criteria in more than half. OnabotulinumtoxinA and ONS could be the effective in refractory patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]