Non-pharmacological interventions for prophylaxis of vestibular migraine.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Webster KE
PROVIDER: S-EPMC10091802 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Apr
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Non-pharmacological interventions for prophylaxis of vestibular migraine.
Webster Katie E KE Dor Afrose A Galbraith Kevin K Haj Kassem Luma L Harrington-Benton Natasha A NA Judd Owen O Kaski Diego D Maarsingh Otto R OR MacKeith Samuel S Ray Jaydip J Van Vugt Vincent A VA Burton Martin J MJ
The Cochrane database of systematic reviews 20230412
<h4>Background</h4>Vestibular migraine is a form of migraine where one of the main features is recurrent attacks of vertigo. These episodes are often associated with other features of migraine, including headache and sensitivity to light or sound. These unpredictable and severe attacks of vertigo can lead to a considerable reduction in quality of life. The condition is estimated to affect just under 1% of the population, although many people remain undiagnosed. A number of interventions have bee ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:BACKGROUND:Vestibular migraine is a common cause of episodic vertigo. Many preventive treatments have been proposed for this condition, including calcium antagonists, beta-blockers, antidepressants, anticonvulsants, selective 5-HT1 agonists, serotonin antagonists and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). OBJECTIVES:To assess the effects of pharmacological agents for the prevention of vestibular migraine. SEARCH METHODS:The Cochrane Ear, Nose and Throat Disorders Group (CENTDG) Trials Search Co-ordinator searched the CENTDG Trials Register; Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2015, Issue 5); PubMed; EMBASE; CINAHL; Web of Science; Clinicaltrials.gov; ICTRP and additional sources for published and unpublished trials. The date of the search was 5 June 2015. SELECTION CRITERIA:Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in adults (over 18 years) with a diagnosis of vestibular migraine orprobable vestibular migraine according to the Bárány Society/International Headache Society (IHS) criteria, treated in any setting, comparing pharmacological treatments used in the prevention of vestibular migraine, including beta-blockers, calcium antagonists, anticonvulsants, antidepressants, serotonin antagonists and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) against placebo or no treatment. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS:We used the standard methodological procedures expected by The Cochrane Collaboration. MAIN RESULTS:Our literature search identified 558 reports, however only 11 were sufficiently relevant for further assessment. We excluded two studies because they did not use the IHS diagnostic criteria for vestibular migraine. We excluded a further eight studies for various reasons related to their design (e.g. lack of placebo or no treatment comparator), aim (e.g. treatment of vestibular migraine rather than prevention) or conduct (e.g. early termination). We identified one ongoing study comparing metoprolol to placebo. The results of this study are awaited; recruitment of the last patient is expected by the end of 2016. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS:We found no evidence from RCTs to answer the question set out in the review objectives. This review has identified the need for well-designed randomised controlled trials to answer questions about the efficacy of current and new treatments.
| S-EPMC6494480 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Migraine is one of the most common and debilitating neurological disorders. However, the efficacy of pharmacological therapies may have unsatisfactory efficacy and can be poorly tolerated. There is a strong need in clinical practice for alternative approaches for both acute and preventive treatment. Occasionally, this need might arise in the context of low-frequency migraneurs who are not keen to use medication or fear the potential side effects. At the opposite end of the spectrum, clinicians might be faced with patients who have proven refractory to numerous medications. These patients may benefit from invasive treatment strategies. In recent years, promising strategies for migraine therapy have emerged alongside a progressively better understanding of the complex pathophysiology underlying this disease. This review discusses the most recent and evidence-based advances in non-pharmacological therapeutic approaches for migraine, offering alternatives to drug treatment for both the commonly encountered episodic cases as well as the more complex migraine phenotypes, which are capable of challenging even the headache specialist.
| S-EPMC5935652 | biostudies-literature
Project description:We analysed the immune profile of individuals with MI, VM, and MD using scRNAseq and scATACseq in PBMCs and to determine active biochemical pathways to identify new potential druggable molecular targets
2024-09-15 | GSE269117 | GEO
Project description:Introduction: Migraine is a chronic paroxymal neurological disorder characterized by attacks of moderate to severe headache and reversible neurological and systemic symptoms. Treatment of migraine includes acute therapies, that aim to reduce the intensity of pain of each attack, and preventive therapies that should decrease the frequency of headache recurrence. The objective of this systematic review was to assess the efficacy and safety of acupuncture for the prophylaxis of episodic or chronic migraine in adult patients compared to pharmacological treatment. Methods: We included randomized-controlled trials published in western languages that compared any treatment involving needle insertion (with or without manual or electrical stimulation) at acupuncture points, pain points or trigger points, with any pharmacological prophylaxis in adult (≥18 years) with chronic or episodic migraine with or without aura according to the criteria of the International Headache Society. Results: Nine randomized trials were included encompassing 1,484 patients. At the end of intervention we found a small reduction in favor of acupuncture for the number of days with migraine per month: (SMD: -0.37; 95% CI -1.64 to -0.11), and for response rate (RR: 1.46; 95% CI 1.16-1.84). We found a moderate effect in the reduction of pain intensity in favor of acupuncture (SMD: -0.36; 95% CI -0.60 to -0.13), and a large reduction in favor of acupuncture in both the dropout rate due to any reason (RR 0.39; 95% CI 0.18 to 0.84) and the dropout rate due to adverse event (RR 0.26; 95% CI 0.09 to 0.74). Quality of evidence was moderate for all these primary outcomes. Results at longest follow-up confirmed these effects. Conclusions: Based on moderate certainty of evidence, we conclude that acupuncture is mildly more effective and much safer than medication for the prophylaxis of migraine.
| S-EPMC7773012 | biostudies-literature
Project description:We analysed the immune profile of individuals with MI, VM, and MD using scRNAseq and scATACseq in PBMCs and to determine active biochemical pathways to identify new potential druggable molecular targets
2024-09-15 | GSE269114 | GEO
Project description:Migraine is the most common neurological disorder and can be associated with a high degree of disability. In addition to non-pharmacological approaches to reduce migraine frequency, pharmacological migraine preventatives are available. Evidence-based guidelines from the German Migraine and Headache Society (DMKG), and German Society for Neurology (DGN), Austrian Headache Society (ÖKSG), and Swiss Headache Society (SKG) are available for indication and application. For therapy-relevant questions such as the duration of a pharmacological migraine prevention, no conclusions can be drawn from currently available study data. The aim of this review is to present a therapy consensus statement that integrates the current data situation and, where data are lacking, expert opinions. The resulting current recommendations on the duration of therapy for pharmacological migraine prophylaxis are shown here.
| S-EPMC9607745 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Migraine is the most common neurological disorder and can be associated with a high degree of disability. In addition to non-pharmacological approaches to reduce migraine frequency, pharmacological migraine preventatives are available. Evidence-based guidelines from the German Migraine and Headache Society (DMKG), and German Society for Neurology (DGN), Austrian Headache Society (ÖKSG), and Swiss Headache Society (SKG) are available for indication and application. For therapy-relevant questions such as the duration of a pharmacological migraine prevention, no conclusions can be drawn from currently available study data. The aim of this review is to present a therapy consensus statement that integrates the current data situation and, where data are lacking, expert opinions. The resulting current recommendations on the duration of therapy for pharmacological migraine prophylaxis are shown here.
| S-EPMC9607711 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesThe aim of this Delphi survey was to establish an international consensus on the most useful outcome measures for research on the effectiveness of non-pharmacological interventions for migraine. This is important, since guidelines for pharmacological trials recommend measuring the frequency of headaches with 50% reduction considered a clinically meaningful effect. It is unclear whether the same recommendations apply to complementary (or adjunct) non-pharmacological approaches, whether the same cut-off levels need to be considered for effectiveness when used as an adjunct or stand-alone intervention, and what is meaningful to patients.SettingUniversity-initiated international survey.ParticipantsThe expert panel was chosen based on publications on non-pharmacological interventions in migraine populations and from personal contacts. 35 eligible researchers were contacted, 12 agreed to participate and 10 completed all 3 rounds of the survey. To further explore how migraine patients viewed potential outcome measures, four migraine patients were interviewed and presented with the same measurement tools as the researchers.ProceduresThe initial Delphi round was based on a systematic search of the literature for outcome measures used in non-pharmacological interventions for headache. Suggested outcome measures were rated by each expert, blinded towards the other members of the panel, for its usefulness on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from definitely not useful to extremely useful. Results were combined using median values and IQRs. Tools rated overall as definitely or probably not useful were excluded from subsequent rounds. Experts further suggested additional outcome measures that were presented to the panel in subsequent rounds. Additionally, experts were asked to rank the most useful tools and provide information on feasible cut-off levels for effectiveness for the three highest ranked tools.ResultsResults suggest the use of the Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS), Headache Impact Test (HIT-6) and headache frequency as primary outcome measures. Patient experts suggested the inclusion of a measure of quality of life and evaluation of associated symptoms and fear of attacks.ConclusionsRecommendations are for the use of the MIDAS, the HIT-6 and headache frequency, in combination with an outcome measure for quality of life. Associated symptoms and fear of attacks should also be considered as secondary outcomes, if relevant for the individual target population. The cut-off level for effectiveness should be lower for non-pharmacological interventions, especially when used as an adjunct to medication.Trial registration numberGerman Register of Clinical Trials (DRKS00011777).
| S-EPMC7044826 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesTo investigate the auditory features of patients with vestibular migraine (VM) and to analyze the possible relevant factors of hearing loss.MethodsA total of 166 patients with VM were enrolled. Demographic variables, age of onset, disease course, distribution of vestibular attacks, characteristics of hearing loss, and the coexistence of related disorders, such as visual aura, familial history, motion sickness, nausea, headache, photophobia, otalgia, tinnitus, aural fullness, and phonophobia, were analyzed and compared.ResultsPatients with VM can manifest otalgia (8.4%), tinnitus (51.8%), aural fullness (41%), and phonophobia (31.9%). Of 166 patients, the prevalence of VMw was 21.1% (n = 35). Patients with VMw mainly manifested mild and easily reversible low-frequency hearing loss. The proportions of tinnitus and aural fullness were significantly larger in patients with VMw than that in patients with VMo (P < 0.05). The duration of vestibular symptoms was significantly shorter in patients with VMw (P < 0.05). However, the age of onset, disease course, gender, frequency of vestibular attacks, the coexistence of visual aura, familial history, motion sickness, nausea, headache, photophobia, otalgia, and phonophobia had no significant difference between the two groups.ConclusionAuditory symptoms were common in patients with VM. The hearing loss of VM was characterized by a mild and easily reversible low-frequency hearing loss, accompanied by higher proportions of tinnitus and aural fullness, and a shorter duration of vestibular symptoms compared with patients with VMo.
| S-EPMC9334870 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAcupuncture is often used for migraine prophylaxis but its effectiveness is still controversial. This review (along with a companion review on 'Acupuncture for tension-type headache') represents an updated version of a Cochrane review originally published in Issue 1, 2001, of The Cochrane Library.ObjectivesTo investigate whether acupuncture is a) more effective than no prophylactic treatment/routine care only; b) more effective than 'sham' (placebo) acupuncture; and c) as effective as other interventions in reducing headache frequency in patients with migraine.Search strategyThe Cochrane Pain, Palliative & Supportive Care Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Complementary Medicine Field Trials Register were searched to January 2008.Selection criteriaWe included randomized trials with a post-randomization observation period of at least 8 weeks that compared the clinical effects of an acupuncture intervention with a control (no prophylactic treatment or routine care only), a sham acupuncture intervention or another intervention in patients with migraine.Data collection and analysisTwo reviewers checked eligibility; extracted information on patients, interventions, methods and results; and assessed risk of bias and quality of the acupuncture intervention. Outcomes extracted included response (outcome of primary interest), migraine attacks, migraine days, headache days and analgesic use. Pooled effect size estimates were calculated using a random-effects model.Main resultsTwenty-two trials with 4419 participants (mean 201, median 42, range 27 to 1715) met the inclusion criteria. Six trials (including two large trials with 401 and 1715 patients) compared acupuncture to no prophylactic treatment or routine care only. After 3 to 4 months patients receiving acupuncture had higher response rates and fewer headaches. The only study with long-term follow up saw no evidence that effects dissipated up to 9 months after cessation of treatment. Fourteen trials compared a 'true' acupuncture intervention with a variety of sham interventions. Pooled analyses did not show a statistically significant superiority for true acupuncture for any outcome in any of the time windows, but the results of single trials varied considerably. Four trials compared acupuncture to proven prophylactic drug treatment. Overall in these trials acupuncture was associated with slightly better outcomes and fewer adverse effects than prophylactic drug treatment. Two small low-quality trials comparing acupuncture with relaxation (alone or in combination with massage) could not be interpreted reliably.Authors' conclusionsIn the previous version of this review, evidence in support of acupuncture for migraine prophylaxis was considered promising but insufficient. Now, with 12 additional trials, there is consistent evidence that acupuncture provides additional benefit to treatment of acute migraine attacks only or to routine care. There is no evidence for an effect of 'true' acupuncture over sham interventions, though this is difficult to interpret, as exact point location could be of limited importance. Available studies suggest that acupuncture is at least as effective as, or possibly more effective than, prophylactic drug treatment, and has fewer adverse effects. Acupuncture should be considered a treatment option for patients willing to undergo this treatment.
| S-EPMC3099267 | biostudies-literature