Search

Objective To assess cervical musculoskeletal impairments during the 4 phases of a migraine cycle in episodic migraine patients, controlling for the presence of concomitant neck pain. Methods Differences in cervical musculoskeletal impairments were assessed during the 4 migraine phases in episodic migraine patients and compared with healthy controls controlling for concomitant neck pain. Cervical musculoskeletal impairments were assessed as follow: cervical active range of motion; flexion rotation test; craniocervical flexion test and calculation of activation pressure score; the total number of myofascial trigger points in head/neck muscles; the number of positivevertebral segments (headache’s reproduction) during passive accessory intervertebral movement; pressure pain thresholds over C1, C2, C4, C6 vertebral segments bilaterally, trigeminal area, hand, and leg. Signs of pain sensitization were assessed by evaluating mechanical pain threshold over trigeminal area and hand, pressure pain thresholds, and the wind-up ratio. The Bonferroni-corrected p-value (05/4 = 0.013) was adopted to assess the difference between groups, while a p-value of 0.05 was considered significant for the correlation analysis. Results A total of 159 patients and 52 controls were included. Flexion rotation test and craniocervical flexion test were reduced in all 4 phases of the migraine cycle versus healthy controls (p Conclusion In all phases of the migraine cycle, independent of the presence of concomitant neck pain, episodic migraine patients showed reduced flexion rotation test and craniocervical flexion test and an increased number of myofascial trigger points and passive accessory vertebral segments. These impairments are correlated with enhanced headache duration, headache-related disability, and signs of widespread pain sensitization. Reduction in active cervical movement and increased mechanical hyperalgesia of the cervical was consistent in ictal episodic migraine patients and the subgroups of episodic migraine patients with more pronounced widespread sensitization.

ImportanceThere is a need for better recognition and more extensive research into menstrual migraine (MM) in the general population, and a revision of the diagnostic criteria for MM is warranted to move the field forward. Increased understanding of MM is crucial for improving clinical care, diagnosis, and therapy for MM.ObjectivesTo assess the clinical characteristics of MM, including severity and treatment response, and to propose new diagnostic criteria for pure MM and menstrually related migraine.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThis is a case-control study of Danish individuals with migraine. All individuals completed a 105-item validated diagnostic migraine questionnaire, sent via the Danish electronic mailing system (e-Boks) between May and August 2020, allowing diagnosis of pure MM and menstrually related migraine by the International Classification of Headache Disorders, Third Edition (ICHD-3). Data analysis was performed from September 2021 to November 2022.ExposureDiagnosis of migraine.Main Outcomes and MeasuresClinical characteristics of women with MM and women with nonmenstrual migraine (non-MM) were compared using the ICHD-3 diagnostic criteria. A simulation of the risk of randomly misclassifying MM was based on number of migraine attacks during 3 menstrual cycles (3 × 28 days), and simulation analyses were performed using 100 000 permutations of random migraine attacks in migraine patients.ResultsA total of 12 618 individuals, including 9184 women, with migraine participated in the study. Among the women with migraine, the prevalence of MM was 16.6% (1532 women), and the prevalence of non-MM was 45.9% (4216 women). The mean (SD) age was 38.7 (8.7) years for women with MM and 37.0 (9.2) years for women with non-MM. Of the 1532 women with MM, 410 (26.8%) fulfilled ICHD-3 diagnostic criteria for pure MM, 1037 (67.7%) fulfilled ICHD-3 diagnostic criteria for menstrually related migraine, and 152 (9.9%) fulfilled proposed diagnostic criteria for rare pure MM. MM was associated with a higher frequency of migraine-accompanying symptoms (odds ratio [OR], 1.98; 95% CI, 1.71-2.29), more frequent (OR, 7.21; 95% CI, 5.77-9.03) and more severe (OR, 1.17; 95% CI, 1.13-1.21) migraine attacks, lower frequency of nonmigraine headache (OR, 0.31; 95% CI, 0.18-0.49), an overall greater response to treatment with triptans (OR, 1.66; 95% CI, 1.24-2.24), better improvement of migraine attacks during late pregnancy (OR, 5.10; 95% CI, 2.17-14.00), and faster reappearance of migraine attacks post partum (OR, 3.19; 95% CI, 2.40-4.25). Hormonal contraceptive–related MM was associated with a higher prevalence of migraine without aura than migraine related to spontaneous menstruation (OR, 1.82; 95% CI, 1.62-2.06). Otherwise, no differences between hormonal and spontaneous MM were observed. The risk of random diagnostic misclassification of ICHD-3 menstrually related migraine in women with high frequency episodic migraine was 43%. This risk was reduced to 3% when applying the proposed criteria for menstrually related migraine.Conclusions and RelevanceIn this case-control study, MM in the general population had clinical characteristics that were quantitively different from those of non-MM. Detailed descriptive data and suggested improved diagnostic criteria for pure MM and menstrually related migraine were provided.

Migraine is highly prevalent and carries a significant personal, social and economic burden. It is the second cause of disability (years living with disability) worldwide and the first cause under 50 years of age. Chronic migraine (occurring for more than 15 days a month) and refractory migraine (treatment resistant), especially when there is also analgesic overuse, are the most disabling forms of migraine. These three disorders (chronic migraine, refractory migraine and medication overuse headache) are particularly difficult to treat. This article reviews their epidemiology, clinical presentation, diagnostic criteria, risk factors, comorbidities and social and personal impact. The therapeutic options available are discussed and focused on a multidisciplinary approach, non-pharmacological interventions treatment of comorbidities and avoiding analgesic overuse. Prophylactic treatments are mandatory and include the oral prophylactic treatments (topiramate), botulinum toxin type A and the novel monoclonal antibodies against calcitonin gene related peptide or its receptor, which are the first migraine preventive medicines developed specifically to target migraine pathogenesis. In refractory cases, multiple therapies are required including neurostimulation.A enxaqueca é uma cefaleia muito prevalente na população com importantes custos pessoais, sociais e económicos e é a segunda causa a nível mundial de anos vividos com incapacidade. As suas variantes, crónica (aquela que ocorre mais de 15 dias por mês) e refratária (resistente ao tratamento), sobretudo quando se complicam de uso excessivo de analgésicos, embora mais raras, constituem as formas que causam maior incapacidade. Os autores revêm estes três tipos de cefaleias (enxaqueca refratária, enxaqueca crónica e cefaleia secundária a utilização excessiva de analgésicos) que constituem um grupo de cefaleias de difícil terapêutica. São revistos a epidemiologia, os aspetos clínicos, os critérios de diagnóstico, as comorbilidades, os fatores de agravamento e o impacto destas cefaleias sobre a qualidade de vida dos doentes. O tratamento de cada uma destas entidades é abordado, ressalvando a importância de uma abordagem abrangente, considerando o tratamento das comorbilidades, a utilidade de medidas não farmacológicas, o imperativo de evitar o abuso de analgésicos e a necessidade absoluta de tratamento profilático. São revistos os diferentes tratamentos profiláticos disponíveis (e a evidência científica da sua eficácia), tais como os fármacos preventivos orais (neuromodeladores como o topiramato), a toxina botulínica tipo A e os novos medicamentos preventivos para a enxaqueca (anticorpos monoclonais que atuam sobre o péptido relacionado com o gene da calcitonina ou o seu recetor, e que são os primeiros medicamentos preventivos desenvolvidos especificamente para atuar na fisiopatogenia da enxaqueca. Para os casos refratários são consideradas outras alternativas terapêuticas como a neuroestimulação.

BackgroundTriptans are migraine-specific acute treatments. A well-accepted definition of triptan failure is needed in clinical practice and for research. The primary aim of the present Consensus was to provide a definition of triptan failure. To develop this definition, we deemed necessary to develop as first a consensus definition of effective treatment of an acute migraine attack and of triptan-responder.Main bodyThe Consensus process included a preliminary literature review, a Delphi round and a subsequent open discussion. According to the Consensus Panel, effective treatment of a migraine attack is to be defined on patient well-being featured by a) improvement of headache, b) relief of non-pain symptoms and c) absence of adverse events. An attack is considered effectively treated if patient’s well-being, as defined above, is restored within 2 hours and for at least 24 hours. An individual with migraine is considered as triptan-responder when the given triptan leads to effective acute attack treatment in at least three out of four migraine attacks. On the other hand, an individual with migraine is considered triptan non-responder in the presence of failure of a single triptan (not matching the definition of triptan-responder). The Consensus Panel defined an individual with migraine as triptan-resistant in the presence of failure of at least 2 triptans; triptan refractory, in the presence of failure to at least 3 triptans, including subcutaneous formulation; triptan ineligibile in the presence of an acknowledged contraindication to triptan use, as specified in the summary of product characteristics.ConclusionsThe novel definitions can be useful in clinical practice for the assessment of acute attack treatments patients with migraine. They may be helpful in identifying people not responding to triptans and in need for novel acute migraine treatments. The definitions will also be of help in standardizing research on migraine acute care. Background: Triptans are migraine-specific acute treatments. A well-accepted definition of triptan failure is needed in clinical practice and for research. The primary aim of the present Consensus was to provide a definition of triptan failure. To develop this definition, we deemed necessary to develop as first a consensus definition of effective treatment of an acute migraine attack and of triptan-responder. Main body: The Consensus process included a preliminary literature review, a Delphi round and a subsequent open discussion. According to the Consensus Panel, effective treatment of a migraine attack is to be defined on patient well-being featured by a) improvement of headache, b) relief of non-pain symptoms and c) absence of adverse events. An attack is considered effectively treated if patient’s well-being, as defined above, is restored within 2 hours and for at least 24 hours. An individual with migraine is considered as triptan-responder when the given triptan leads to effective acute attack treatment in at least three out of four migraine attacks. On the other hand, an individual with migraine is considered triptan non-responder in the presence of failure of a single triptan (not matching the definition of triptan-responder). The Consensus Panel defined an individual with migraine as triptan-resistant in the presence of failure of at least 2 triptans; triptan refractory, in the presence of failure to at least 3 triptans, including subcutaneous formulation; triptan ineligibile in the presence of an acknowledged contraindication to triptan use, as specified in the summary of product characteristics. Conclusions: The novel definitions can be useful in clinical practice for the assessment of acute attack treatments patients with migraine. They may be helpful in identifying people not responding to triptans and in need for novel acute migraine treatments. The definitions will also be of help in standardizing research on migraine acute care.

Migraine and tension-type headache are common in children and adolescents, but several other headache disorders may pose a great challenge in diagnosis and management to families and attending clinicians. In this review, we highlight several of these disorders, which need appropriate assessment to make the right diagnosis and appropriate investigations where necessary. Timely recognition and implementation of appropriate management strategies can improve the health of children with some disorders, and is vital in achieving improvement in the quality of life.

Background Pressure pain thresholds (PPTs) are commonly assessed to quantify mechanical sensitivity in various conditions, including migraine. Digital and analogue algometers are used, but the concurrent validity between these algometers is unknown. Therefore, we assessed the concurrent validity between a digital and analogue algometer to determine PPTs in healthy participants and people with migraine. Methods Twenty-six healthy participants and twenty-nine people with migraine participated in the study. PPTs were measured interictally and bilaterally at the cephalic region (temporal muscle, C1 paraspinal muscles, and trapezius muscle) and extra-cephalic region (extensor carpi radialis muscle and tibialis anterior muscle). PPTs were first determined with a digital algometer, followed by an analogue algometer. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC3.1) and limits of agreement were calculated to quantify concurrent validity. Results The concurrent validity between algometers in both groups was moderate to excellent (ICC3.1 ranged from 0.82 to 0.99, with 95%CI: 0.65 to 0.99). Although PPTs measured with the analogue algometer were higher at most locations in both groups (p Conclusion The concurrent validity between the digital and analogue algometer is excellent in healthy participants and moderate in people with migraine. Both types of algometer are well-suited for research and clinical practice but are not exchangeable within a study or patient follow-up.

BACKGROUND: A myofascial trigger point is defined as a hyperirritable spot in skeletal muscle that is associated with a hypersensitive palpable nodule in a taut band. It has been suggested that myofascial trigger points take part in chronic pain conditions including primary headache disorders. The aim of this narrative review is to present an overview of the current imaging modalities used for the detection of myofascial trigger points and to review studies of myofascial trigger points in migraine and tension-type headache.FINDINGS: Different modalities have been used to assess myofascial trigger points including ultrasound, microdialysis, electromyography, infrared thermography, and magnetic resonance imaging. Ultrasound is the most promising of these modalities and may be used to identify MTrPs if specific methods are used, but there is no precise description of a gold standard using these techniques, and they have yet to be evaluated in headache patients. Active myofascial trigger points are prevalent in migraine patients. Manual palpation can trigger migraine attacks. All intervention studies aiming at trigger points are positive, but this needs to be further verified in placebo-controlled environments. These findings may imply a causal bottom-up association, but studies of migraine patients with comorbid fibromyalgia syndrome suggest otherwise. Whether myofascial trigger points contribute to an increased migraine burden in terms of frequency and intensity is unclear. Active myofascial trigger points are prevalent in tension-type headache coherent with the hypothesis that peripheral mechanisms are involved in the pathophysiology of this headache disorder. Active myofascial trigger points in pericranial muscles in tension-type headache patients are correlated with generalized lower pain pressure thresholds indicating they may contribute to a central sensitization. However, the number of active myofascial trigger points is higher in adults compared with adolescents regardless of no significant association with headache parameters. This suggests myofascial trigger points are accumulated over time as a consequence of TTH rather than contributing to the pathophysiology.CONCLUSIONS: Myofascial trigger points are prevalent in both migraine and tension-type headache, but the role they play in the pathophysiology of each disorder and to which degree is unclarified. In the future, ultrasound elastography may be an acceptable diagnostic test.

Plaguing humans for more than two millennia, manifest on every continent studied, and with more than one billion patients having an attack in any year, migraine stands as the sixth most common cause of disability on the planet. The pathophysiology of migraine has emerged from a historical consideration of the “humors” through mid-20th century distraction of the now defunct Vascular Theory to a clear place as a neurological disorder. It could be said there are three questions: why, how, and when? Why: migraine is largely accepted to be an inherited tendency for the brain to lose control of its inputs. How: the now classical trigeminal durovascular afferent pathway has been explored in laboratory and clinic; interrogated with immunohistochemistry to functional brain imaging to offer a roadmap of the attack. When: migraine attacks emerge due to a disorder of brain sensory processing that itself likely cycles, influenced by genetics and the environment. In the first, premonitory, phase that precedes headache, brain stem and diencephalic systems modulating afferent signals, light-photophobia or sound-phonophobia, begin to dysfunction and eventually to evolve to the pain phase and with time the resolution or postdromal phase. Understanding the biology of migraine through careful bench-based research has led to major classes of therapeutics being identified: triptans, serotonin 5-HT1B/1Dreceptor agonists; gepants, calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) receptor antagonists; ditans, 5-HT1Freceptor agonists, CGRP mechanisms monoclonal antibodies; and glurants, mGlu5modulators; with the promise of more to come. Investment in understanding migraine has been very successful and leaves us at a new dawn, able to transform its impact on a global scale, as well as understand fundamental aspects of human biology.

Background Chronic headache (CrH) occurs commonly in the population, and chronic migraine (CM) accounts for much of the CrH. Diagnostic criteria for CM remain controversial, and this could lead to undertreatment of CM. The purpose of this study was to analyze the clinical profiles of CM and to field test the International Classification of Headache Disorders-3β criteria (ICHD-3β) and Expert Opinion criteria (EO) for CM application. Methods We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of CrH patients in our headache clinic during the period. Eligible patients were selected from CrH population based on Silberstein and Lipton criteria (S-L) for CM, and meanwhile fulfilled with migraine days at least 8 days/month. Then we evaluated the characteristics of clinic profiles and outcomes between patients diagnosed CM using ICHD-3β and EO criteria. Field tested the CM criteria Of ICHD-3β and EO. Results In a total of 710 CrH patients , 261 (36.8 %) were recruited with CM based on both S-L criteria and fulfilled at least 8 migraine days/month. Be understandable, all the 261 patients met the EO criteria, and only 185 (70.9 %) met ICHD-3β for CM. For the 76 patients who met EO but not ICHD-3β, 70 had atypical migraine attacks (probable migraine, PM), and another 6 had typical migraine attacks but less than a total history of 5 attacks. Although 173 (66.3 %) were concurrent with medication overuse, just one patient overused triptans and none used ergot agents. Clinical features were not significantly different between the ICHD-3β and EO criteria groups (P > 0.05), and neither were outcomes of prophylaxis (P = 0.966). Total migraine prophylaxis effectiveness was 73 %. Conclusion Migraine-specific analgesics are rarely used in China, permitting patients with PM to avail themselves of “migraine days” is a reasonable accommodation for this difficult condition. In our hands, use of the new EO criteria for diagnosis of CM increases the sensitivity and maintains the specificity of decision making, and therefore should be adopted in CM management practice.

Am J Emerg Med