Cephalalgia

Migraine is the most prevalent neurological disorder worldwide and ranked sixth among all diseases in years lived with disability. Overall preventive anti-migraine therapies have an effect in one patient out of two at the most, many of them being endowed with disabling adverse effects. No new disease-modifying drugs have come into clinical practice since the application to migraine of topiramate and botulinum toxin, the latter for its chronic form. There is thus clearly a need for more effective treatments that are devoid of, or have acceptable side effects. In recent years, scientific progress in migraine research has led to substantial changes in our understanding of the pathophysiology of migraine and paved the way for novel non-drug pathophysiological-targeted treatment strategies.

Several such non-drug therapies have been tested in migraine, such as oxidative phosphorylation enhancers, diets and non-invasive central or peripheral neurostimulation. All of them are promising for preventive migraine treatment and are quasi-devoid of side effects. Their advantage is that they can in theory be selected for individual patients according to their pathophysiological profile and they can (and probably should) be combined with the classical pharmacological armamentarium.

We will review here how knowledge of the functional anatomy and physiology of migraine mechanisms holds the key for more specific and effective non-pharmacological treatments.

The use of complementary and alternative medicines (CAM) is common among patients with primary headaches. In parallel, CAM research is growing. Diet interventions comprise another category of non-pharmacologic treatment for primary headache that is of increasing clinical and research interest.

A literature search was carried out to identify studies on the efficacy of diet and nutraceutical interviews for primary headache in the pediatric and adult populations. MEDLINE, Embase and EBM Reviews—Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched to identify studies.

There is a growing body of literature on the potential use of CAM and diet interventions for primary headache disorders. This review identified literature on the use of a variety of diet and nutraceutical interventions for headache. Most of the studies assessed the efficacy of these interventions for migraine, though some explored their role in tension-type headache and cluster headache. The quality of the evidence in this area is generally poor.

CAM is becoming more commonplace in the headache world. Several interventions show promise, but caution needs to be exercised in using these agents given limited safety and efficacy data. In addition, interest in exploring diet interventions in the treatment of primary headaches is emerging. Further research into the efficacy of nutraceutical and diet interventions is warranted.

Headache is the medical problem most commonly observed by neurologists. Non-pharmacological treatments are commonly demanded by individuals with headaches, but their evidence of effectiveness is conflicting.

The current review provides an updated discussion on what is supported by current scientific evidence about physical therapies for tension-type headache (TTH), migraine, and cervicogenic headache (CeH), and which gaps there still may be in our understanding of the interventions.

PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, AMED, CINAHL, EBSCO, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Collaboration Trials Register, PEDro, and SCOPUS were searched from their inception through March 2015.

Several physical therapies including spinal joint manipulation/mobilization, soft tissue interventions, therapeutic exercises and needling therapies are proposed to be effective for the management of headaches. Current evidence has shown that the effectiveness of these interventions will depend on proper clinical reasoning since not all interventions are equally effective for all headache pain conditions. For instance, evidence of physical therapy in migraine is more controversial than in TTH, since migraine pathogenesis involves activation of sub-cortical structures and the trigemino-vascular system, whereas pathogenesis of TTH is more associated with musculoskeletal disorders, e.g. muscle pain. It seems that multimodal approaches including different interventions are more effective for patients with TTH, migraine and CeH.

The cluster headache is the most excruciatingly painful primary headache. In some patients, neither preventive treatment nor acute treatment is effective or treatment is poorly tolerated. The sphenopalatine ganglion (SPG) has an important role in the pathophysiology of cluster headache and, for this reason, SPG stimulation has been used to treat cluster headache.

We have reviewed the published literature on the role of the SPG in cluster headache and the use of different treatments targeting the SPG.

Multiple procedures have been used over the SPG to treat pain and trigemino-autonomic symptoms in patients with refractory cluster headache. After obtaining good results in a small number of patients, a miniaturized stimulator was developed. Stimulation of the SPG with this device proved to be efficacious in acute and preventive treatment in a clinical trial involving patients with chronic refractory cluster headache. Implantation of the device is minimally invasive and the most frequent side-effects are mild, such as paraesthesia and pain over the maxillary area. In patients who have used the SPG device for longer than one year, the therapeutic effect remains effective and the side-effects decrease.

The reported studies have demonstrated that SPG stimulation is a safe and effective treatment for chronic cluster headache. Long-term studies have shown that the effect remains over time and this treatment could be a good choice in patients with chronic refractory headache. We need more data about its potential use in other forms of headache, such as other trigemino-autonomic headaches or migraine.

In many patients suffering from primary headaches, the available pharmacological and behavioural treatments are not satisfactory. This is a review of (minimally) invasive interventions targeting pericranial nerves that could be effective in refractory patients.

The interventions we will cover have in common pericranial nerves as targets, but are distinct according to their rationale, modality and invasiveness. They range from nerve blocks/infiltrations to the percutaneous implantation of neurostimulators and surgical decompression procedures. We have critically analysed the published data (PubMed) on their effectiveness and tolerability.

There is clear evidence for a preventative effect of suboccipital injections of local anaesthetics and/or steroids in cluster headache, while evidence for such an effect is weak in migraine. Percutaneous occipital nerve stimulation (ONS) provides significant long-term relief in more than half of drug-resistant chronic cluster headache patients, but no sham-controlled trial has tested this. The evidence that ONS has lasting beneficial effects in chronic migraine is at best equivocal. Suboccipital infiltrations are quasi-devoid of side effects, while ONS is endowed with numerous, though reversible, adverse events. Claims that surgical decompression of multiple pericranial nerves is effective in migraine are not substantiated by large, rigorous, randomized and sham-controlled trials.

Migraine is one of the most disabling neurological disorders. The current pharmacological armamentarium is not satisfying for a large proportion of patients because the responder rate does not exceed 50% on average and the most effective drugs often induce intolerable side effects. During recent years, noninvasive central and peripheral neuromodulation methods have been explored for migraine treatment.

A review of the available evidence suggests that noninvasive neuromodulation techniques could be beneficial for migraine patients. The transcranial stimulation methods allow modulating selectively cortical activity and can thus be curtailed to the patient’s pathophysiological profile, while transcutaneous stimulation of pericranial nerves likely modulates central pain control centers. Occipital single-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation and transcutaneous supraorbital stimulation have the strongest evidence respectively for acute and preventive treatment. Transcranial direct current stimulation and repetitive magnetic stimulation are promising in pilot studies, but large sham-controlled trials are not yet available.

The noninvasive neurostimulation methods are promising for migraine treatment and devoid of serious adverse effects allowing their combination with drug therapies. Their application in clinical practice will depend on the industry’s capacity to develop portable and user-friendly devices, and on the scientists’ capacity to prove their efficacy in randomized sham-controlled trials.

Recent evidence shows that multidisciplinary treatment is effective in chronic pain syndromes, especially in headache disorders.

The aim of this review is to summarize current knowledge on integrative care concepts in headache patients regarding the optimal and necessary treatment parts, optimal duration and setting.

We present a narrative review reporting current literature and personal experience.

Based on current knowledge, multidisciplinary treatment programs appear to be reasonable and efficient in headache disorders. Sufficient controlled studies regarding the need for individual parts of the integrative care approach are missing as yet. Recommendations are therefore at least partly based on personal experiences. It seems to be unambiguous that patients should be referred to a specialized headache center offering such a program instead of being sent sequentially to various medical specialists. The extent and kind of required therapy (e.g. personal consultation versus group sessions) is not known yet. All patients should learn relaxation training, although it is unclear yet which training is the best for which patient. Physiotherapy with guidance on more activity and individual exercises should be used in all patients. Some patients might benefit from cognitive behavioral therapy. However, therapies often depend more on country-specific health care systems than on clinical needs or scientific data.

Mindfulness refers to a host of procedures that have been practiced for centuries, but only recently have begun to be applied to varied pain conditions, with the most recent being headache.

We reviewed research that incorporated components of mindfulness for treating pain, with a more in depth focus on headache disorders. We also examined literature that has closely studied potential physiological processes in the brain that might mediate the effects of mindfulness. We report as well preliminary findings of our ongoing trial comparing mindfulness alone to pharmacological treatment alone for treating chronic migraine accompanied by medication overuse.

Although research remains in its infancy, the initial findings support the utility of varied mindfulness approaches for enhancing usual care for headache management. Our preliminary findings suggest mindfulness by itself may produce effects comparable to that of medication alone for patients with chronic migraine and medication overuse.

Much work remains to more fully document the role and long term value of mindfulness for specific headache types. Areas in need of further investigation are discussed.