Similarities and differences between chronic migraine and episodic migraine

OBJECTIVE: To quantify and characterize the similarities and the differences between chronic migraine (CM) patients with medication overuse and episodic migraine (EM) patients with only occasional analgesic use. BACKGROUND: Population-level epidemiology, characteristics, mechanisms of chronic daily headache, and medication-overuse headache have been widely studied but patient characteristics have received less attention. Methods.-We compared sociodemographic data, family history, physiological and medical history, health services utilized, drugs taken/prescribed, and outcome of 2 groups of subjects: 150 patients, suffering from CM, complicated by probable medication-overuse headache (CM group), consecutively admitted during 2005 to the inpatients' ward of the Headache Centre of the University Hospital of Modena and Reggio Emilia, Italy, to undergo withdrawal from their overused medications; 100 patients suffering from EM, uncomplicated by medication overuse (EM group), consecutively referred to the outpatients' ward of the Headache Centre during November and December 2005. RESULTS: All sociodemographic characteristics were significantly different between the 2 groups. As a whole, the CM group began to suffer from migraine earlier than the EM group. Drug and/or alcohol abuse was significantly higher among first-degree relatives of CM (19%) than of EM (6%) patients. The most frequent comorbid disorders were psychiatric (67%) and gastrointestinal diseases (43%) in the CM group, and allergies in the EM group (31%). Seventy percent of CM patients and 42% of EM patients were taking daily at least another drug, besides those for headache treatment. Most overused medications in the CM group were triptans (43%); the EM group used above all single NSAIDs (56%). At 3-month follow-up, prophylactic treatments reduced, by at least 50%, the frequency of headache in about three-fourths of patients of both the groups; however, headache remained significantly more frequent in the CM than in EM group: only a minority (15%) of CM patients reverted to a headache frequency comparable to that of the EM group. CONCLUSIONS: CM patients present more multiple comorbid disorders, polypharmacy, and social impediments than EM patients. These associated conditions complicate CM clinical management. Even after withdrawal from medication overuse, CM could not be completely reverted by current prophylactic treatments.     

Chronic migraine plus medication overuse headache: two entities or not?

Chronic migraine (CM) represents migraine natural evolution from its episodic form. It is realized through a chronicization phase that may require months or years and varies from patient to patient. The transition to more frequent attacks pattern is influenced by lifestyle, life events, comorbid conditions and personal genetic terrain, and it often leads to acute drugs overuse. Medication overuse headache (MOH) may complicate every type of headache and all the drugs employed for headache treatment can cause MOH. The first step in the management of CM complicated by medication overuse must be the withdrawal of the overused drugs and a detoxification treatment. The goal is not only to detoxify the patient and stop the chronic headache but also to improve responsiveness to acute or prophylactic drugs. Different methods have been suggested: gradual or abrupt withdrawal; home treatment, hospitalization, or a day-hospital setting; re-prophylaxes performed immediately or at the end of the wash-out period. Up to now, only topiramate and local injection of onabotulinumtoxinA have shown efficacy as therapeutic agents for re-prophylaxis after detoxification in patients with CM with and without medication overuse. Although the two treatments showed similar efficacy, onabotulinumtoxinA is associated with a better adverse events profile. Recently, the Phase III Research Evaluating Migraine Prophylaxis Therapy (PREEMPT) clinical program proved that patients with CM, even those with MOH, are the ones most likely to benefit from onabotulinumtoxinA treatment. Furthermore, it provided an injection paradigm that can be used as a guide for a correct administration of onabotulinumtoxinA.     

Establishing principles for migraine management in primary care

Published guidelines for the management of migraine in primary care were evaluated by an international advisory board of headache specialists, to establish evidence-based principles of migraine management that could be recommended for international use. Twelve principles of migraine management were identified, covering screening, diagnosis, management and treatments: Almost all headaches are benign/primary and can be managed by all practising clinicians. Use questions/a questionnaire to assess the impact on daily living and everyday activities, for diagnostic screening and to aid management decisions. Share migraine management between the clinician and the patient. Provide individualised care for migraine and encourage patients to manage their migraine. Follow up patients, preferably with migraine calendars or diaries. Regularly re-evaluate the success of therapy using specific outcome measures and monitor the use of acute and prophylactic medications regularly. Adapt migraine management to changes that occur in the illness and its presentation over the years. Provide acute medication to all migraine patients and recommend it is taken at the appropriate time, during the attack. Provide rescue medication/symptomatic treatment for when the initial therapy fails. Offer to prescribe prophylactic medications, as well as lifestyle changes, to patients who have four or more migraine attacks per month or who are resistant to acute medications. Consider concurrent co-morbidities in the choice of appropriate prophylactic medication. Work with the patient to achieve comfort with mutually agreed upon treatment and ensure that it is practical for their lifestyle and headache presentation. Using these principles, practising clinicians can screen and diagnose their headache patients effectively and manage their migraine patients over the long-term natural history of the migraine process. In this way, the majority of migraine patients can be well treated in primary care, ensuring a structured and individualised approach to headache management, and conserving valuable healthcare resources.     

Preliminary results of a withdrawal and detoxification therapeutic regimen in patients with probable chronic migraine and probable medication overuse headache

Chronic migraine (CM) is an invalidating condition affecting a significant population of headache sufferers, frequently associated with medication overuse headache (MOH). Controlled trials and guidelines for the treatment of MOH are currently not available. We studied the efficacy of a therapeutic regimen for the withdrawal of the overused drug and detoxification in a sample of patients suffering from probable CM and probable MOH during admission in eight hospitals of Piemonte–Liguria–Valle d’Aosta. Fifty patients, 42 females (84%) and 8 males (16%), mean age at observation 50.66±13.08 years, affected by probable CM and daily medication overuse following IHS diagnostic criteria were treated as inpatients or in a day hospital. Headache index (HI) and daily drug intake (DDI) were used for evaluating the severity of headache and medication overuse. The patients were treated by abrupt discontinuation of the overused drug and by a therapeutic protocol including i.v. hydration, dexamethasone, metoclopramide and benzodiazepines for 7–10 days. Prophylactic medication was started immediately after admission. Analgesics or triptans were used under medical control only in cases of severe rebound headache. Diagnostic protocol included routine blood tests (at admission and at discharge), dosage of B12 and folic acid. Patients underwent follow-up controls one, three and six months after discharge. The initial diagnosis was probable CM in almost all patients included in the study (41 patients); in nine patients the diagnosis was not specified (coded only as CDH). The overused medications were simple analgesics in 17 cases (34%), combination analgesics in 19 cases (38%), triptans alone or with analgesics in 13 cases (26%) and ergotamine in 2 cases (4%). We collected data from 39 patients at first follow–up (1 month), 32 after 3 months and 14 after 6 months. Mean HI was 0.91 at admission, 0.22 at discharge, 0.38 after 30 days, 0.46 after 3 months and 0.48 after 6 months. Mean DDI was 2.80 at admission, 0.39 at discharge, 0.41 after 1 month, 0.52 after 3 months and 0.59 after 6 months. These results are on average positive and tend to remain stable with time. Although preliminary and obtained on a limited number of patients at 6–month follow–up, our results seem to be encouraging about the use of the proposed therapeutic protocol.     

The International Classification of Headache Disorders revised criteria for chronic migraine—field testing in a headache specialty clinic

In the absence of a biological marker and expert consensus on the best approach to classify chronic migraine (CM), recent revised criteria for this disease has been proposed by the Headache Classification Committee of the International Headache Society. This revised criteria for CM is now presented in the Appendix. Herein we field test the revised criteria for CM. We included individuals with transformed migraine with or without medication overuse (TM+ and TM–), according to the criteria proposed by Silberstein and Lipton, since this criterion has been largely used before the Second Edition of the International Classification of the Headache Disorders (ICHD-2). We assessed the proportion of subjects that fulfilled ICHD-2 criteria for CM or probable chronic migraine with probable medication overuse (CM+), as well as the revised ICHD-2 (ICHD-2R) criteria for CM (15 days of headache, 8 days of migraine or migraine-specific acute medication use—ergotamine or triptans). We also tested the ICHD-2R vs. three proposals. In proposal 1, CM/CM+ would require at least 15 days of migraine or probable migraine per month. Proposal 2 required 15 days of headache per month and at least 50% of these days were migraine or probable migraine. Proposal 3 required 15 days of headache and at least 8 days of migraine or probable migraine per month. Of the 158 patients with TM–, just 5.6% met ICHD-2 criteria for CM. According to the ICHD-2R, a total of 92.4% met criteria for CM (P < 0.001 vs. ICHD-2). The ICHD-2R criterion performed better than proposal 1 (47.8% of agreement, P < 0.01) and was not statistically different from proposals 2 (87.9%) and 3 (94.9%). Subjects with TM+ should be classified as medication overuse headache (MOH), and not CM+, according to the ICHD-2R. Nonetheless, we assessed the proportion of them who had 8 days of migraine per month. Of the 399 individuals with TM+, just 10.2% could be classified as CM+ in the ICHD-2. However, most (349, 86.9%) had 8 days of migraine per month and could be classified as MOH and probable CM in the ICHD-2R(P < 0.001 vs. ICHD-2). We conclude that the ICHD-2R addresses most of the criticism towards the ICHD-2 and should be adopted in clinical practice and research. In the population where use of specific acute migraine medications is less common, the agreement between ICHD-2R CM and TM may be less robust.     

Elimination of menstrual-related migraine beneficially impacts chronification and medication overuse

Objectives.— This study seeks to determine whether menstrual‐related migraine (MRM) has a discrete, attributable impact on migraine chronicity and medication overuse. Background.— Menstrual‐related migraine can be a disabling headache on its own; but when seen in headache clinics, it is often enmeshed in the setting of chronic migraine (CM) and medication overuse headache (MOH). Whereas nonspecific migraine preventives bestow their benefit uniformly, hormonal preventives (HPs)—when they are successful—address a discrete hormonal mechanism. They confer no known benefit to migraines that are not hormonally triggered. This selective property of HPs could potentially isolate MRM and segregate its effect on the overall clinical picture. Methods.— This is a retrospective review of 229 consecutive women seen in follow‐up for hormonal prevention of MRM at an academic headache center. Patients kept standardized diaries from which separate menstrual‐week (MW) and non‐menstrual week (nonMW) headache indices were calculated and compared. Resolution of MRM was defined by reduction of the MW headache index to a score not exceeding the nonMW headache indices. Consumption of all acute and preventive agents used in the preceding month was tallied. We performed post‐treatment comparisons of medication usage and headache characteristics among subjects in whom MRM was resolved and those in whom it was not resolved. Results.— At baseline, CM was present in 92% of subjects, 72% of whom also met criteria for MOH. Resolution of MRM was achieved in 81% of subjects who were compliant with HP and was associated with reversion to episodic migraine (59% vs 18%, P < .001) and resolution of medication overuse (54% vs 20%, P < .001). Resolution of MRM was associated with significant decreases in per capita consumption of triptans, opioids, all acute agents, and migraine preventive medications. Conclusions.— Resolution of MRM correlated not only with conversion of CM to an episodic pattern, but also with a significant reduction in medication usage. It offers preliminary evidence that hormonal regimens may have a beneficial role in prevention of MRM.     

Guideline on the use of onabotulinumtoxinA in chronic migraine: a consensus statement from the European Headache Federation

OnabotulinumtoxinA is being increasingly used in the management of chronic migraine (CM). Treatment with onabotulinumtoxinA poses challenges compared with traditional therapy with orally administered preventatives. The European Headache Federation identified an expert group that was asked to develop the present guideline to provide recommendations for the use of onabotulinumtoxinA in CM. The expert group recommend onabotulinumtoxinA as an effective and well-tolerated treatment of CM. Patients should preferably have tried two to three other migraine prophylactics before start of onabotulinumtoxinA. Patients with medication overuse should be withdrawn from the overused medication before initiation of onabotulinumtoxinA if feasible, if not onabotulinumtoxinA can be initiated from the start or before withdrawal. OnabotulinumtoxinA should be administered according to the PREEMPT injection protocol, i.e. injecting 155 U–195 U to 31–39 sites every 12-weeks. We recommend that patients are defined as non-responders, if they have less than 30% reduction in headache days per month during treatment with onabotulinumtoxinA. However other factors such as headache intensity, disability and patient preferences should also be considered when evaluating response. Treatment should be stopped, if the patient does not respond to the first two to three treatment cycles. Response to continued treatment with onabotulinumtoxinA should be evaluated by comparing the 4 weeks before with the 4 weeks after each treatment cycle. It is recommended that treatment is stopped in patients with a reduction to less than 10 headache days per month for 3 months and that patients are re-evaluated 4–5 months after stopping onabotulinumtoxinA to make sure that the patient has not returned to CM. Questions regarding efficacy and tolerability of onabotulinumtoxinA could be answered on the basis of scientific evidence. The other recommendations were mainly based on expert opinion. Future research on the treatment of CM with onabotulinumtoxinA may further improve the management of this highly disabling disorder.     

Field testing alternative criteria for chronic migraine

The criteria for chronic migraine (CM), as proposed by the Second Edition of the International Classification of Headache Disorders (ICHD-2) is very restrictive, excluding most patients that evolve from episodic migraine. In this study we empirically tested three recent proposals for revised criteria for CM. We included individuals with transformed migraine (TM) with or without medication overuse, according to the criteria proposed by Silberstein and Lipton. All individuals had headache calendars for at least three consecutive months. We assessed the proportion of subjects that fulfilled ICHD-2 criteria for CM or probable chronic migraine with probable medication overuse (CM+). We also tested three proposals for making the CM criteria more inclusive. In proposal 1, CM/CM + would require at least 15 days of migraine or probable migraine per month. Proposal 2 suggests that CM/CM + would be classified in those with >or= 15 days of headache per month, where at least 50% of these days are migraine or probable migraine. Proposal 3 suggests that CM/CM + would be classified in those with chronic daily headache and at least 8 days of migraine or probable migraine per month. Among TM sufferers, 399 (62.5%) had TM with medication overuse, and just 10.2% were classified as CM+ 158 (37.5%) had TM without medication overuse; just nine (5.6%) met current ICHD-2 criteria for CM. Using the alternative criteria, proposal 1 included 48.7% of patients with TM without medication overuse; proposal 2 captured 88%, and proposal 3 classified 94.9% of these patients. For TM with medication overuse, the proportions for proposals 1-3 were, respectively, 37%, 81% and 91%. The differences were statistically significant, favouring proposal 3. Consistently, criteria for CM and CM+ should be revised to require at least 8 days of migraine or probable migraine per month, in individuals with 15 or more days of headache per month.     

How to Apply the AHS Evidence Assessment of the Acute Treatment of Migraine in Adults to your Patient with Migraine

The “Acute Treatment of Migraine in Adults: The American Headache Society Evidence Assessment of Migraine Pharmacotherapies” provides levels of evidence for medication efficacy for acute treatment of migraine. The goal of this companion paper is to provide guidance on how to choose between evidence‐based treatment options, and, based on the clinical characteristics of the patient and their migraine attacks, to provide guidance on designing an individualized strategy for managing migraine attacks. The acute pharmacological treatments described in the American Headache Society evidence assessment can be divided into those initially taken by the patient during the headache phase of the migraine attack, those taken by the patient later in the attack when initial treatments fail, and those administered intravenously or intramuscularly in urgent care settings. Medications taken initially by patients in the headache phase include nonspecific analgesics such as acetaminophen and nonsteroidal anti‐inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), triptans, and dihydroergotamine (DHE). A stratified approach to treatment is advised, with the choice of medication based on the patient's treatment needs, taking into consideration the attack severity, presence of associated symptoms such as nausea and vomiting, and the degree of migraine‐related disability. Individuals with migraine may find reassurance in having a “back‐up plan” in the event of an initial acute treatment failure. For those individuals who had a partial response to the initial acute treatment, a second dose might be indicated. When the initial treatment does not provide meaningful and sustained benefits, a treatment from a different medication class is typically chosen. Depending upon the initial treatment used, this might include NSAIDs, triptans, or DHE. Opioids or acetaminophen in combination with codeine or tramadol can be considered as part of the “back‐up plan,” provided they are used infrequently. When all patient administered treatments have failed and moderate to severe migraine symptoms remain, some individuals seek treatment in urgent care settings. The intravenous administration of antiemetics with or without an intravenous or intramuscular NSAID or DHE, or an intramuscular opioid can be considered. Patients with migraine should be encouraged to treat migraine pain early, and avoid overuse of medications.     

Characteristics,impact and treatment of 6000 headache attacks: The PAMINA study

The aim of this study was to prospectively evaluate the characteristics of headache attacks, their impact on daily activities as well as the type and efficacy of acute medication in patients with migraine. We included 281 patients with episodic migraine (87% females, aged 41.2±12.1). All patients kept a headache diary for 3 months covering headache characteristics, therapy and questions adopted from the Headache Impact Test (HIT‐6) for rating the impact of each single headache attack (HIT‐6 s). For evaluating the efficacy of acute medication we compared triptans with other compounds using headache duration as outcome parameter. Of 6051 headache attacks 52.8% fulfilled the ICHD‐II criteria of migraine. The HIT‐6 s score was 2.4±2.2 (range 0–6). It was lowest in untreated headaches (2.0±2.1) and highest in those treated with a combination of triptans and other compounds (4.1±2.0, p <0.001). Patients used triptans on 8.0% of all headache days, other compounds on 33.1%, a combination of both on 1.5% and no medication on 57.3% of the headache days. Migraine attacks of moderate or severe intensity treated with triptans alone lasted significantly shorter than those treated with other compounds (5.1±3.6 vs. 6.9±5.3 h, p <0.001). In conclusion, almost 50% of the headaches occurring in patients with migraine do not fulfill migraine criteria. Use of triptans is associated with a shorter duration of moderate and severe migraine attacks compared to use of other compounds.     

Behavioral dependence in patients with medication overuse headache: a cross-sectional study in consulting patients using the DSM-IV criteria

Objective.— The aim of this study was to assess behavioral dependence on migraine abortive drugs in medication‐overuse headache (MOH) patients and identify the predisposing factors. Background.— It is common occurrence that MOH patients relapse after medication withdrawal. Behavioral determinants of medication overuse should therefore be identified in MOH patients. Methods.— This was a cross‐sectional, multicenter study that included 247 MOH patients (according to International Classification of Headache Disorders, 2nd edition criteria) consulting in French headache specialty centers. Face‐to‐face interviews were conducted by senior neurologists using a structured questionnaire including the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th edition (DSM‐IV) criteria for the evaluation of dependence, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale for the evaluation of anxiety and depression, and 6‐item short‐form Headache Impact Test scale for the determination of functional impact. Results.— Most MOH patients had pre‐existing primary migraine (87.4%) and current migraine‐type headaches (83.0%). Treatments overused included triptans (45.8%), opioid analgesics alone or in combination (43.3% of patients), and analgesics (27.9%). Nonmigraine abortive substances (tobacco, caffeine, sedatives/anxiolytics) were overused by 13.8% of patients. Two‐thirds of MOH patients (66.8%) were considered dependent on acute treatments of headaches according to the DSM‐IV criteria. Most dependent MOH patients had migraine as pre‐existing primary headache (85.7%) and current migraine‐type headaches (87.9%), and most of them overused opioid analgesics. More dependent than nondependent MOH patients were dependent on psychoactive substances (17.6% vs 6.1%). Multivariate logistic analysis indicated that risk factors of dependence on acute treatments of headaches pertained both to the underlying disease (history of migraine, unilateral headaches) and to drug addiction (opioid overuse, previous withdrawal). Affective symptoms did not appear among the predictive factors of dependence. Conclusion.— In some cases, MOH thus appears to belong to the spectrum of addictive behaviors. In clinical practice, behavioral management of MOH should be undertaken besides pharmacological management.     

Management of primary chronic headache in the general population: the Akershus study of chronic headache

Primary chronic headaches cause more disability and necessitate high utilisation of health care. Our knowledge is based on selected populations, while information from the general population is largely lacking. An age and gender-stratified cross-sectional epidemiological survey included 30,000 persons aged 30–44 years. Respondents with self-reported chronic headache were interviewed by physicians. The International Classification of Headache Disorders was used. Of all primary chronic headache sufferers, 80% had consulted their general practitioner (GP), of these 19% had also consulted a neurologist and 4% had been hospitalised. Co-occurrence of migraine increased the probability of contact with a physician. A high Severity of Dependence Scale score increased the probability for contact with a physician. Complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) was used by 62%, most often physiotherapy, acupuncture and chiropractic. Contact with a physician increased the probability of use of CAM. Acute headache medications were taken by 87%, while only 3% used prophylactic medication. GPs manage the majority of those with primary chronic headache, 1/5 never consults a physician for their headache, while approximately 1/5 is referred to a neurologist or hospitalised. Acute headache medication was frequently overused, while prophylactic medication was rarely used. Thus, avoidance of acute headache medication overuse and increased use of prophylactic medication may improve the management of primary chronic headaches in the future.     

Medication overuse headache and chronic migraine in a specialized headache centre: field-testing proposed new appendix criteria

The classification subcommittee of the International Headache Society (IHS) has recently suggested revised criteria for medication overuse headache (MOH) and chronic migraine (CM). We field tested these revised criteria by applying them to the headache population at the Danish Headache Centre and compared the results with those using the current criteria. For CM we also tested two alternative criteria, one requiring > or = 4 migraine days/month and > or = 15 headache days/month, the second requiring > or = 15 headache days/month and > or = 50% migraine days. We included 969 patients with migraine or tension-type headache (TTH) among 1326 patients treated and dismissed in a 2-year period. Two hundred and eighty-five patients (30%) had TTH, 265 (27%) had migraine and 419 (43%) had mixed migraine and TTH. The current criteria for MOH classified 86 patients (9%) as MOH, 98 (10%) as probable MOH and 785 (81%) as not having MOH after a 2-month drug-free period. Using the appendix criteria, 284 patients (29%) were now classified as MOH, no patients as probable MOH and 685 (71%) as not having MOH. For CM only 16 patients (3%) fulfilled the current diagnostic criteria. This increased to 42 patients (7%) when we applied the appendix criteria. Using the less restrictive criteria of > or = 4 migraine days and > or = 15 headache days, 88 patients (14%) had CM, whereas the more restrictive criteria of > or = 15 headache days and > or = 50% migraine days resulted in 24 patients (4%) with CM. Our data suggest that the IHS has succeeded in choosing new criteria for CM which are neither too strict, nor too loose. For MOH, a shift to the appendix criteria will increase the number of MOH patients, but take into account the possibility of permanent changes in pain perception due to medication overuse and the possibility of a renewed effect of prophylactic drugs due to medication withdrawal. We therefore recommend the implementation of the appendix criteria for both MOH and CM into the main body of the International Classification of Headache Disorders.     

Management of Chronic Daily Headache: Challenges in Clinical Practice

Chronic daily headache (CHD) refers to a category of headache disorders that are characterized by headaches occurring on more than 15 days per month. This category is subdivided into long- and short-duration (>4 or <4 hours) CDH disorders based on the duration of individual headache attacks. Examples of long-duration CDH include transformed migraine (TM), chronic migraine (CM), new daily persistent headache (NDPH), acute medication overuse headache, and hemicrania continua (HC). The goal of this review is to enable clinicians to accurately diagnose and effectively manage patients with long-duration CDH. Patients with CDH often require an aggressive and comprehensive treatment approach that includes a combination of acute and preventive medications, as well as nondrug therapies.     

Cortical Excitability in Chronic Migraine

A proportion of episodic migraine patients experiences a progressive increase in attack frequency leading to chronic migraine (CM). The most frequent external factor that leads to headache chronification is medication overuse. The neurobiological bases of headache chronification and of the vicious circle of medication overconsumption are not completely elucidated. More recently, the same neurophysiological methods used to study episodic migraine were applied to CM and medication-overuse headache (MOH). Studies of cortical responsivity tend overall to indicate an increase in excitability, in particular of somatosensory and visual cortices, reflected by increased amplitude of evoked responses, decreased activity of inhibitory cortical interneurons reflected in the smaller magnetic suppression of perceptual accuracy, and, at least for visual responses, an increase in habituation. In MOH, overconsumption of triptans or NSAIDs influences cortical excitability differently. Generalized central sensitization is suggested to play an important role in the pathophysiology of headache chronification.     

Acute Migraine Treatment in Adults

There are many options for acute migraine attack treatment, but none is ideal for all patients. This study aims to review current medical office‐based acute migraine therapy in adults and provides readers with an organized approach to this important facet of migraine treatment. A general literature review includes a review of several recent published guidelines. Acetaminophen, 4 nonsteroidal anti‐inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) (ibuprofen, acetylsalicylic acid [ASA], naproxen sodium, and diclofenac potassium), and 7 triptans (almotriptan, eletriptan, frovatriptan, naratriptan, rizatriptan, sumatriptan, and zolmitriptan) have good evidence for efficacy and form the core of acute migraine treatment. NSAID–triptan combinations, dihydroergotamine, non‐opioid combination analgesics (acetaminophen, ASA, and caffeine), and several anti‐emetics (metoclopramide, domperidone, and prochlorperazine) are additional evidence‐based options. Opioid containing combination analgesics may be helpful in specific patients, but should not be used routinely. Clinical features to be considered when choosing an acute migraine medication include usual headache intensity, usual rapidity of pain intensity increase, nausea, vomiting, degree of disability, patient response to previously used medications, history of headache recurrence with previous attacks, and the presence of contraindications to specific acute medications. Available acute medications can be organized into 4 treatment strategies, including a strategy for attacks of mild to moderate severity (strategy one: acetaminophen and/or NSAIDs), a triptan strategy for patients with severe attacks and for attacks not responding to strategy one, a refractory attack strategy, and a strategy for patients with contraindications to vasoconstricting drugs. Acute treatment of migraine attacks during pregnancy, lactation, and for patients with chronic migraine is also discussed. In chronic migraine, it is particularly important that medication overuse is eliminated or avoided. Migraine treatment is complex, and treatment must be individualized and tailored to the patient's clinical features. Clinicians should make full use of available medications and formulations in an organized approach.     

Combined pharmacological and short-term psychodynamic psychotherapy for probable medication overuse headache: a pilot study

We studied the effects of short-term psychodynamic psychotherapy (STPP) and pharmacological therapy in 26 consecutive patients with probable medication overuse headache (pMOH). Patients underwent a standard in-patient detoxification protocol, lasting a mean of 7 days. Eleven patients overused non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), five a combination of NSAIDs and triptans, four triptans, four a combination of NSAIDs, and three triptans and ergot derivates. Preventive therapy was initiated during detoxification. The STPP protocol comprised the Brief Psychodynamic Investigation (BPI) and psychoanalysis-inspired psychotherapy. All patients (groups A and B) underwent the BPI and pharmacological therapy. Half of the patients (group B) also not randomly underwent psychoanalysis-inspired psychotherapy. We found a significant interaction between time and group for headache frequency and medication intake. At 12-month follow-up, a statistically greater decrease in headache frequency and medication intake was observed in group B than in group A ( P  = 0.0108 and P  = 0.0097, respectively). The relapse rate was much lower in group B patients at both 6 and 12 months [15.3%, odds ratio (OR) 0.11, P  = 0.016, and 23%, OR 0.18, P  = 0.047, respectively] than in group A. The risk of developing chronic migraine (CM) during follow-up was higher in group A than in group B at 6 (OR 2.0, P  = 0.047) and 12 months (OR 2.75, P  = 0.005). Our study suggests that STPP in conjunction with drug withdrawal and prophylactic pharmacotherapy relieves headache symptoms in pMOH, reducing both long-term relapses and the burden of CM.     

Identifying cutaneous allodynia in chronic migraine using a practical clinical method

Cutaneous allodynia is common in migraine. In the majority of previous studies on allodynia in migraine, only patients with episodic migraine (EM) were included. Little is known on patterns of allodynia in chronic migraine (CM). Since the presence of allodynia is associated with a poor response to triptans, a clinically practical method to test migraine patients for allodynia would be useful to the clinician. The aim of this study was to assess the prevalence of dynamic mechanical (brush) allodynia (BA) in CM, using a clinically practical method. Eighty-nine CM patients were prospectively recruited. Patients were given a structured questionnaire regarding demographic data and migraine characteristics. Allodynia was tested using a 10 x 10-cm gauze pad to brush various areas of the skin lightly. The prevalence of BA in the entire study population and in different patient subgroups was calculated. BA was present in 42.7% (38/89) of the patients. The presence of allodynia was unrelated to age, disease duration or to the occurrence of an acute headache exacerbation at the time of testing. Allodynia was positively associated with a history of migraine aura. BA was most common in the cephalic area, but was also seen in cervical dermatomes. BA is common in CM and, unlike in EM, is not significantly affected by the occurrence of an acute headache exacerbation. This suggests that central trigeminovascular neurons are chronically sensitized in patients experiencing migraine headache >15 days per month. The testing of BA in the clinical setting is possible using a simple and brief approach. It allows the clinician to determine whether the patient is sensitized, a diagnosis that affects treatment decisions.