Migraine headache. Its diagnosis and treatment

Many theories exist on the pathogenesis of migraine. However, the clinical picture of migraine is agreed on universally as a familial disorder characterized by recurrent attacks of headache that are variable in intensity, frequency, and duration. The attacks are usually unilateral and often associated with anorexia, nausea, and vomiting. Migraine therapy is complex and difficult, focusing on abortive and prophylactic regimens. General therapeutic measures, including diet and establishing schedules for meals and sleeping, may benefit many migraineurs. A variety of medications, including ergotamine, propranolol, the calcium channel blockers, antidepressants, and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) have been beneficial in the prophylactic treatment of migraine. Ergotamine is the drug of choice in the abortive treatment, although other agents, such as the NSAIDs, have been used successfully. Inpatient therapy in a specialized unit for headache patients may be indicated for the recidivist patient, the patient habituated to analgesics or ergotamine, or the patient with the mixed headache syndrome, i.e., migraine occurring with coexistent muscle contraction headaches.     

Management of the acute migraine headache

As many as 30 million Americans have migraine headaches. The impact on patients and their families can be tremendous, and treatment of migraines can present diagnostic and therapeutic challenges for family physicians. Abortive treatment options include nonspecific and migraine-specific therapy. Nonspecific therapies include analgesics (aspirin, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and opiates), adjunctive therapies (antiemetics and sedatives), and other nonspecific medications (intranasal lidocaine or steroids). Migraine-specific abortive therapies include ergotamine and its derivatives, and triptans. Complementary and alternative therapies can also be used to abort the headache or enhance the efficacy of another therapeutic modality. Treatment choices for acute migraine should be based on headache severity, migraine frequency, associated symptoms, and comorbidities.     

Behavioral and nonpharmacologic treatments of headache

Cognitive-behavioral analysis and the multiaxial assessment of relevant behavioral domains (headache frequency and severity, analgesic and abortive use and misuse, behavioral and stress-related risk factors, comorbid psychiatric disorders, and degree of overall functional impairment) help set the stage for CBT of headache disorders. Controlled studies of CBTs for migraine, such as biofeedback and relaxation therapy, have a prophylactic efficacy of about 50%, roughly equivalent to propranolol. Cluster headache responds poorly to behavioral treatment. The persistent overuse of symptomatic medication impedes the effectiveness of behavioral and prophylactic medical therapies. Behavioral treatment can help sustain improvement after analgesic withdrawal, however, and prevent relapse in cases of analgesic overuse. Cognitive factors (e.g., an enhanced sense of self-efficacy and internal locus of control) appear to be important mediators of successful behavioral treatment. Patients with CDH are more likely to overuse symptomatic medication (and in some cases abuse analgesics), have more psychiatric comorbidity; have more functional impairment and disability, and are at least as likely to experience stress-related intensification of headache as patients whose episodic headaches occur less than 15 days per month. Despite the significance of these behavioral factors, patients with CDH (particularly those with migrainous features) are less likely to benefit from behavioral treatment without concomitant prophylactic medication than is the case for episodic TTH and migraine sufferers. Continuous daily pain may be more refractory to behavioral treatment as a solo modality than CDH marked by at least some pain-free days or periods of time. The combination of behavioral therapies with prophylactic medication creates a synergistic effect, increasing efficacy beyond either type of treatment alone. Compliance-enhancement techniques, including behavioral contracts for patients with severe personality disorders, can increase adherence to behavioral recommendations. CBT has earned an important place in the comprehensive treatment of patients with episodic migraine/TTH and severe, treatment-resistant chronic daily headache.     

Naproxen Sodium Versus Ergotamine Tartrate in the Treatment of Acute Migraine Attacks

A double-blind parallel study compared the efficacy and safety of naproxen sodium (NPX) and ergotamine tartrate (ERG) as abortive therapy for acute headache in 79 patients with classical or common migraine. The design study was of the double-blind design. Forty-two patients completed the study. Discontinuation of treatment was generally due to lack of efficacy or adverse reactions. NPX was significantly better than ERG in the overall efficacy of treatment rated by the patients (p less than 004). NPX was comparable to ERG in reducing the severity and duration of the headache and its associated symptoms. In classical migraine, NPX was better than ERG in alleviating the severity of headache. Patients in the NPX group tended to use less rescue medication. There was no significant difference in the frequency of side-effects reported by the patients under NPX or ERG. This study demonstrates that NPX is as safe as ERG, and somewhat more effective in acute migraine attacks (although the difference is not statistically significant) and that migrainous patients tend to prefer NPX to ERG in treating their acute migraine headaches.     

Cluster headache: relation to and comparison with migraine.

Numerous factors, such as location of pain, sex, frequency and pattern of occurrence, and symptoms, distinguish cluster headache from migraine. Cluster headache is characterized by severe unilateral periorbital pain. Attacks lasting from several minutes to several hours occur many times a day over a period of weeks to months. Opinions differ as to whether cluster headache is a variant of migraine or a completely different disorder. For relatively mild attacks, abortive treatment with ergotamine tartrate is usually successful. Cases which do not respond to abortive measures require prophylaxis.     

Probable migraine in the United States: results of the American Migraine Prevalence and Prevention (AMPP) study

Probable migraine (PM) is a prevalent migraine subtype fulfilling all but one criterion for migraine with or without aura. The aims of this study were: (i) to describe the epidemiology, medical recognition and patterns of treatment for PM in the USA; (ii) to compare the patterns of preventive PM treatment in the population with expert panel guidelines for preventive treatment. A validated self-administered headache questionnaire was mailed to a random sample of 120,000 US households. Subjects were classified as PM according to the second edition of the International Classification of Headache Disorders (ICHD-2). The questionnaire also assessed patterns of migraine treatment. Guidelines for preventive medication use were developed by a panel of headache experts, who used headache frequency and impairment to assess the need for preventive therapy and the gap between current and ideal use. Our sample consisted of 162 576 individuals aged > or = 12 years. The 1-year period prevalence of PM was 4.5% (3.9% in men and 5.1% in women). In women and men, prevalence was higher in middle life, between the ages of 30 and 59 years. The prevalence of PM was significantly higher in African-Americans than in Whites (female 7.4% vs. 4.8%; male 4.8% vs. 3.7%) and inversely related to household income. During their headaches, most (48.2%) had at least some impairment, while 22.1% were severely disabled. The vast majority (97%) of PM sufferers used acute treatments, although 71% usually treated with over-the-counter medication. Most PM sufferers (52.8%) never used a migraine-preventive treatment and only 7.9% were currently using preventive medication. According to the expert panel guidelines, prevention should be offered (16.9%) or considered (11.5%) for 28.4% of the PM sufferers in the survey. We conclude that PM is a frequent, undertreated, sometimes disabling disorder. It has an epidemiological profile similar to migraine. In contrast to migraine, which is less prevalent in African-Americans than in Whites, PM is more prevalent in African-Americans than in Whites. In the USA, many with PM do not receive adequate treatment.     

Prophylaxis of migraine,transformed migraine,and cluster headache with topiramate

OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy and tolerability of topiramate for prophylaxis of migraine and cluster headache via a retrospective chart analysis. BACKGROUND: Topiramate has multiple mechanisms of action that could potentially contribute to migraine prophylaxis. We conducted a retrospective chart review to assess the efficacy of topiramate as add-on therapy in patients with transformed migraine or cluster headache, and as first-line therapy in patients with episodic migraine. METHODS: Patients diagnosed with transformed migraine, episodic migraine, or cluster headache, who received topiramate either as add-on therapy or monotherapy were selected via retrospective chart review. Patients had begun topiramate therapy at 25 mg/day for the first week and increased their dosage by 25 mg/week to a maximum of 200 mg/day. Topiramate was used as add-on therapy for patients with transformed migraine and cluster headache, and as a first-line monotherapy in patients with episodic migraine who had no previous prophylactic therapy. The outcome parameters examined included a mean 28-day migraine frequency, migraine severity, number of headache days/month, number of abortive medication tablets/month, patient global evaluation, and the MIDAS scale. RESULTS: One hundred seventy-eight patients (transformed migraine: n = 96; episodic migraine: n = 70; and cluster headache: n = 12) were included in the retrospective analysis. The mean dose of topiramate for all patients was 87.5 mg/day. For patients with transformed migraine, mean migraine frequency decreased from 6.3/28 days to 3.7 (P = 0.005). Mean severity decreased from 7.1 to 3.8 on a 10-point scale, with 10 representing the most severe pain (P = 0.003). The mean number of headache days/month decreased from 22.1 to 9.6 (P = 0.001), and the mean number of abortive medication tablets decreased from 28.7/month to 10.6 (P = 0.001). Patient global evaluation indicated substantial or moderate improvement in 53% of patients with transformed migraine who used topiramate as add-on therapy. Mean MIDAS scale values decreased from 90.2 to 24.9 (P< 0.0001). The 70 episodic migraine patients who were administered topiramate as first-line therapy exhibited a decrease in mean migraine frequency (5.8/28 days to 1.9, P = 0.001), while mean migraine severity decreased from 8.1 to 2.0 (P = 0.003). Sixty-one percent of patients reported marked improvement. Nine of the 12 cluster headache patients exhibited substantial or moderate improvement in symptoms, whereas three had no improvement. The most common adverse effects were paresthesias (12%), cognitive effects (11%), and dizziness (6%). Eight patients discontinued topiramate due to adverse effects; cognitive effects were the most common reason. No patient discontinued topiramate treatment due to lack of efficacy. Twelve percent of patients lost more than 5 lbs during treatment (a range of 5-120 lbs). CONCLUSION: For both patients with transformed migraine (add-on therapy) and patients with episodic migraine (first-line monotherapy), topiramate yielded significant reductions in migraine frequency, migraine severity, number of headache days/month, and use of abortive medications. Topiramate also appears to be well tolerated and useful in the adjunctive treatment of cluster headache. Prospective double-blind, placebo-controlled trials will be required to confirm our results.     

Practice and Economics Cost Considerations in Headache Treatment Part 2: Acute Migraine Treatment

Today's physician has many useful medication options available for acute migraine treatment. There is a wide cost range among these drugs and today's health care environment demands that cost be factored into the decision process. Effective migraine abortive treatment decreases the costs of repeat dosing and disability. Early use of migraine abortive medication can increase its rapidity of action and effectiveness. Adjunctive medication such as metoclopramide ($0.10) is inexpensive and may improve the effectiveness of the primary abortive medication.
Over-the-counter medications such as aspirin ($0.02/325 mg), Excadrin· ($0.09/tablet), ibuprofen ($0.04/200 mg), or naproxen sodium ($0.09/220 mg) are inexpensive and effective. "Triple therapy" combining metoclopramide, a nonsteroidal ant-inflammatory agent, and an ergotamine preparation may improve tolerance and effectiveness of the ergot. Locally compounded dihydroergotamine nasal spray is inexpensive ($0.78/1 mg spray). The cost of using oral sumatriptan can be almost halved by prescribing half of a 50-mg tablet.
Emergency department services are expensive. Huge cost savings occur through self-controlled administration of oral, rectal, or even intramuscular narcotic medications. Oral narcotic agents such as hydromorphone ($0.42/4 mg) and meperidine ($0.92/200 mg) are generally used in inadequate doses to be effective for severe migraine. Guidelines are given for more effective use of these agents.
Sophisticated comparative studies are needed to evaluate, not only the direct costs of medications, but all costs of treatment of an acute migraine attack, as well as Indirect costs to the patient, family, and society.     

Subcutaneous Sumatriptan in a Clinical Setting: The First 100 Consecutive Patients With Acute Migraine in a Tertiary Care Center

SYNOPSIS
The first 100 consecutive patients at our center receiving subcutaneous sumatriptan (6 mg) were evaluated over a total of 455 migraine attacks. Parameters included overall efficacy, average time to relief, recurrence rate, average time to recurrence, adverse events, comparison to previous abortive agents, and subjective global ratings. Overall efficacy (defined as headache severity reduction from severe or moderate to mild or none) was 84%. Average time to relief was 40 minutes. Nine percent failed to respond at all. Recurrence rate was 46.5% with 36% of patients having no recurrence. Fourteen percent of patients reported 100% recurrence (minimum 3 attacks; average 5.4 attacks). Time to recurrence varied widely, but averaged 9.1 hours. Eighty-one percent rated the drug better or much better than previous abortive medications in terms of sumatriptan's ability to abort the attack. Seventy-seven percent reported some adverse event (generally mild and transient) with 23% reporting no adverse events, Sixty-nine percent reported a global rating of Good to Excellent and 31% rated Poor or Fair. The rate of recurrence and average time to recurrence were the most significant factors affecting the global ratings.
These parameters were further evaluated with respect to a variety of subgroups: 1) migraine alone 2) migraine with coexistent tension-type headache 3) drug-induced headache (analgesic rebound headache) 4) posttraumatic headache 5) preventive versus no preventive medication 6) presence or absence of adverse events 7) presence or absence of recurrence and 8) average duration of migraine with no medication.     

Validation of criterion-based patient assignment and treatment effectiveness of a multidisciplinary modularized managed care program for headache

This prospective observational study evaluates the validity of an algorithm for assigning patients to a multidisciplinary modularized managed care headache treatment program. N = 545 chronic headache sufferers [migraine (53.8 %), migraine + tension type (30.1 %), tension type (8.3 %) or medication overuse headache (6.2 %), other primary headaches (1.5 %)] were assigned to one of four treatment modules differing with regard to the number and types of interventions entailed (e.g., medication, psychological intervention, physical therapy, etc.). A rather simple assignment algorithm based on headache frequency, medication use and psychiatric comorbidity was used. Patients in the different modules were compared with regard to the experienced burden of disease. 1-year follow-up outcome data are reported (N = 160). Headache frequency and analgesic consumption differed significantly among patients in the modules. Headache-related disability was highest in patients with high headache frequency with/without medication overuse or psychiatric comorbidity (modules 2/3) compared to patients with low headache frequency and medication (module 0). Physical functioning was lowest in patients with chronic headache regardless of additional problems (modules 1/2/3). Psychological functioning was lowest in patients with severe chronicity with/without additional problems (module 2/3) compared to headache suffers with no/moderate chronicity (module 0/1). Anxiety or depression was highest in patients with severe chronicity. In 1-year follow-up, headache frequency (minus 45.3 %), consumption of attack-aborting drugs (minus 71.4 %) and headache-related disability decreased (minus 35.9 %). Our results demonstrate the clinical effectiveness and the criterion validity of the treatment assignment algorithm based on headache frequency, medication use and psychiatric comorbidity.     

Comorbidity of headache and gastrointestinal complaints. The Head-HUNT Study

Associations between headache, including migraine, and gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms were studied in a large questionnaire-based cross-sectional study (the Head-HUNT Study). The headache questionnaire was completed by 43 782 individuals, who answered all the questions concerning nausea, reflux symptoms, diarrhoea and constipation. In the multivariate analyses, adjusting for age, sex, educational level, medication use, depression and anxiety, a higher prevalence of headache was found in individuals with much reflux [odds ratio (OR) 2.4, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.2, 2.6], diarrhoea (OR 2.4, 95% CI 2.1, 2.8), constipation (OR 2.1, 95% CI 1.9, 2.4) and nausea (OR 3.2, 95% CI 2.6, 3.8) compared with those without such complaints. All the GI symptoms investigated seemed to be approximately as common among persons with non-migrainous headache as among migraine sufferers, but the association between headache and GI complaints increased markedly with increasing headache frequency. This may suggest that headache sufferers generally are predisposed to GI complaints.     

Behavioral facilitation of medical treatment for headache--part I: Review of headache treatment compliance

Noncompliance or nonadherence with medical regimens represents a major challenge to the practice of medicine including the treatment of headache. Indeed, medication use patterns are particularly relevant to headache because of the potential for headache therapies to induce medication-overuse headache. Previous research has demonstrated that adherence to long-term medication therapy for various chronic illnesses averages only about 50%. The rate of adherence among headache patients has been found to be similarly poor. Misuse or overuse of symptomatic medication has been demonstrated to contribute to treatment failure, and one-fourth to one-half of patients are noncompliant with prophylactic headache medications and at least 40% nonadherent with appointment-keeping. Adherence declines with more frequent and complex dosing regimens, side effects, and costs, and is subject to a wide range of psychosocial influences. Subjective reports of adherence are likely not only to overestimate but also to be discordant with more objective measurements. As the first of 2 articles, this paper describes the problem of noncompliance in medical practice and reviews literature addressing compliance specific to headache management. A companion paper (Behavioral Facilitation of Medical Treatment for Headache--Part II: Theoretical Models and Behavioral Strategies for Improving Adherence) summarizes social learning models proposed to characterize the multiple determinants of adherence and guide behavioral adherence-enhancing interventions, and then presents cognitive and behavioral strategies that may facilitate treatment adherence with headache patients.     

Factors associated with triptan use in episodic migraine: results from the American Migraine Prevalence and Prevention Study

Background.— Though triptans are considered the standard of acute therapy for migraine attacks with headache‐related disability, they are used by the minority of potentially eligible persons. Understanding the socio‐demographic and headache features that predict triptan use may help to clarify barriers to optimal treatment. Objective.— To assess the sociodemographic and headache features associated with triptan use in a US population sample of persons with episodic migraine. Methods.— The American Migraine Prevalence and Prevention Study (AMPP) is a longitudinal study conducted in a representative sample of US headache sufferers. Episodic migraineurs (n = 11,388) who provided treatment data in 2005 were included in the current analyses. We assessed factors associated with triptan use through univariate and multivariate analyses. Multivariate analyses were adjusted for sociodemographic factors, headache‐related disability, cutaneous allodynia, depression, and preventive headache medication use. Results.— Among persons with episodic migraine, 18.31% reported current use of triptans for acute headache treatment. In univariate analyses, triptan use was most common in midlife (ages 30‐59), among females, and was more common in Caucasians than in African Americans. Triptan use increased with headache frequency, headache‐related disability and allodynia, but decreased among persons with depression. In multivariate analyses, female gender, Caucasian race, age 40‐49, higher levels of education (college or higher), annual household income of ≥$40,000, having health insurance, the presence of cutaneous allodynia, greater headache‐related disability, and preventive medication use for migraine were significantly associated with triptan use. Conclusions.— Less than 1 in 5 persons with migraine in the United States who were respondents to this survey used triptans for acute headache treatment over the course of a year. Several markers of severe headache, including disability and allodynia, were associated with increased triptan use. Groups less likely to get triptans included males, African Americans, older adults, and the uninsured. Predictors of use provide insight into groups with unmet treatment needs.     

Ergotamine Dependency- a Review

SYNOPSIS
Ergotamine tartrate has been recognized as the drug of first choice for the treatment of acute attacks of migraine. This paper draws attention to a common but poorly delineated state of addiction that can develop when ergotamine tartrate usage exceeds two or three days per week. This syndrome is characterized by a self-sustaining, rhythmic headache/medication cycle, with daily or almost daily migraine headaches and the irresistible and predictable use of ergotamine tartrate as the only means of alleviating the headache attacks. This report further delineates the clinical features, criteria for recognition, and treatment alternatives for this syndrome. In order to avoid this condition, usage should be restricted to 2 days per week.     

Ergotamine and dihydroergotamine: a review

The ergot alkaloids were the first specific antimigraine therapy available. However, with the advent of the triptans, their use in the treatment of migraine has declined and their role has become less clear. This review discusses the pharmacology, efficacy, and safety of the ergots. In randomized clinical trials, oral ergotamine was found to be superior to placebo, but inferior to 100 mg of oral sumatriptan. In contrast, rectal ergotamine was found to have higher efficacy (73% headache relief) than rectal sumatriptan (63% headache relief). Intranasal dihydroergotamine was found to be superior to placebo, but less effective than subcutaneous and intranasal sumatriptan. Ergotamine is still widely used in some countries for the treatment of severe migraine attacks. It is generally regarded as a safe and useful drug if prescribed for infrequent use, in the correct dose, and in the absence of contraindications; however, safer and more effective options do exist in the triptans. In patients with status migrainous and patients with frequent headache recurrence, ergotamine is still probably useful.