Metoclopramide for acute migraine: a dose-finding randomized clinical trial

Evidence-based guidelines for the pharmacological treatment of migraine

We here present evidence-based guidelines for the pharmacological treatment of migraine. These guidelines, created by the Italian Society for the Study of Headache and the International Headache Society, aim to offer clear, actionable recommendations to healthcare professionals. They incorporate evidence-based recommendations from randomized controlled trials and expert-based opinions. The guidelines follow the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach for assessing the quality of evidence. The guideline development involved a systematic review of literature across multiple databases, adherence to Cochrane review methods, and a structured framework for data extraction and interpretation. Although the guidelines provide a robust foundation for migraine treatment, they also highlight gaps in current research, such as the paucity of head-to-head drug comparisons and the need for long-term outcome studies. These guidelines serve as a resource to standardize migraine treatment and promote high-quality care across different healthcare settings.

Effectiveness and Safety of Pharmacologic Therapies for Migraine in the Emergency Department: A Systematic Review and Bayesian Network Meta-analysis

STUDY OBJECTIVE

We performed a systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis to determine which pharmacologic therapies are relatively more effective and safer for migraine in adult patients who present to the emergency department (ED).

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science from inception to February 9, 2024. Eligible studies were randomized controlled trials that enrolled adult participants presenting to ED with migraine and compared one pharmacologic therapy to another or placebo. Outcomes were as follows: 1) adequate pain relief at 2 hours, 2) change in pain intensity at 1 hour, 3) need for rescue drug at 2 hours, and 4) significant adverse reaction. We extracted data according to PRISMA-network meta-analysis and appraised trials using Cochrane RoB 2. For dichotomous outcomes, we performed Bayesian network meta-analysis to calculate odds ratios with 95% credible intervals; for continuous outcomes, we performed frequentist network meta-analysis to calculate mean differences with 95% confidence intervals. We assessed confidence using Confidence in Network Meta-analysis. We used Surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) to rank agents.

RESULTS

Chlorpromazine intravenous (IV)/intramuscular (IM) (SUCRA=87.3%) was most likely to be superior for "adequate pain relief at 2 hours" (24 trials; n=2,361); metoclopramide IV-ibuprofen IV (SUCRA=94.6%) was most likely to be superior for "need for rescue drug" (not needing rescue drug) at 2 hours (27 trials; n=2,942); dexamethasone IV (SUCRA=79.5%) was most likely to be superior for "significant adverse reaction" (not causing adverse reaction) (22 trials; n=2,450). The network for change in pain intensity demonstrated statistically significant incoherence at the overall level. Confidence in network meta-analysis estimates (certainty of evidence) varied and was mostly "low" or "very low," limiting the validity of the probabilistic analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

According to Bayesian network meta-analysis, ibuprofen IV is definitely among the least effective for adequate pain relief; chlorpromazine IV/IM is definitely among the most effective; valproate IV is definitely among the least effective, and ketorolac IV/IM is possibly among the least effective as single agents. The relative safety of the pharmacologic therapies cannot be determined with sufficient certainty.

Examining the Effect of Intramuscular versus Intravenous Metoclopramide for Treatment of Acute Headaches to Expedite Throughput in the Emergency Department

BACKGROUND

Numerous therapies exist for both prophylactic and abortive treatments of migraine headache symptoms. Although many of these treatments are nonspecific to migraine headache, they show sufficient evidence and have garnered significant medical professional consensus for off-label use to treat acute migraine headache. One antiemetic known to be particularly effective in ceasing migraine headache symptoms is metoclopramide.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study is to examine the difference between intramuscular (i.m.) vs. intravenous (i.v.) metoclopramide on emergency department (ED) length of stay (LOS) and pain relief in patients presenting with presumed migraine headache. As a secondary outcome, we also assess the efficacy in treating subjective pain between these groups.

METHODS

This was a single-center, retrospective study of adult ED patients presenting between January 2020 and September 2022 with a principal diagnosis of acute migraine or nonspecific headache and receiving i.m. or i.v. metoclopramide during their visit. Propensity matching was utilized to balance covariates between the i.m. and i.v. groups and adjust for confounding factors, including adjuvant therapies.

RESULTS

LOS was decreased when i.m. metoclopramide was utilized as opposed to i.v. metoclopramide, both prior to and after propensity matching. Prior to propensity score matching, patients who received i.m. metoclopramide had a median LOS of 67 min (interquartile range [IQR] 42.50, 99.50), and patients with i.v. administration had a median LOS of 168 min (IQR 137, 234) (median difference = 102, 95% confidence interval [CI] 93-112, r = 0.44, p < 0.001). After propensity matching, median LOS for i.m. administration was 73 min (IQR 47, 103) and i.v. administration was 166 min (IQR 129, 259) (median difference = 97, 95% CI 81-144, r = 0.68, p < 0.001). A 95% CI was utilized for all outcomes. There was no significant difference in pain reduction between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

Intramuscular administration of metoclopramide for the treatment of acute headache in the ED is associated with a decreased median LOS compared with i.v. administration with similar clinical efficacy.

Pain relief effect of metoclopramide vs. sumatriptan for acute migraine attack: A single-center, open-label, cluster-randomized controlled non-inferiority trial

Triptans are recommended as a treatment for moderate to severe migraines; however, barriers to administration include contraindications or possible side effects. In contrast, metoclopramide, which is frequently used as an antiemetic in the emergency department setting, has shown efficacy in alleviating migraine pain. This study investigated the non-inferiority of intravenously (IV) administered metoclopramide 10 mg compared with subcutaneously (SQ) administered sumatriptan 3 mg for alleviating migraine pain. In this single-center, open-label, cluster-randomized controlled trial, patients presenting to the emergency department with migraine attacks were allocated to either the IV metoclopramide 10 mg group or the SQ sumatriptan 3 mg group. The primary outcome was change in numerical rating scale (NRS) score for headache at 1 h after baseline. The non-inferiority margin was set as -1.0 NRS points. Thirty-six patients were enrolled over a period of 3 years, starting from July 2019. Reduction in NRS at 1 h was 4.1 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.8, 5.4) in the metoclopramide group and 5.2 (95% CI: 4.2, 6.1) in the sumatriptan group, with a mean difference of -1.1 (95% CI: -2.7, 0.4), indicating that metoclopramide was not non-inferior to sumatriptan. Four patients required rescue medication: 3 (18%) in the metoclopramide group and 1 (7%) in the sumatriptan group (p = 0.34). There were no serious adverse events in either group. One hour after metoclopramide administration, migraine pain was reduced compared with baseline, but metoclopramide did not demonstrate non-inferiority for alleviating acute migraine pain compared with sumatriptan.

Managing and Preventing Migraine in the Emergency Department: A Review

Migraine is a leading cause of disability worldwide, and acute migraine attacks are a common reason for patients to seek care in the emergency department (ED). There have been recent advancements in the care of patients with migraine, specifically emerging evidence for nerve blocks and new pharmacological classes of medications like gepants and ditans. This article serves as a comprehensive review of migraine in the ED, including diagnosis and management of acute complications of migraine (eg, status migrainosus, migrainous infarct, persistent aura without infarction, and aura-triggered seizure) and use of evidence-based migraine-specific treatments in the ED. It highlights the role of migraine preventive medications and provides a framework for emergency physicians to prescribe them to eligible patients. Finally, it evaluates the evidence for nerve blocks in the treatment of migraine and introduces the possible role of gepants and ditans in the care of patients with migraine in the ED.

All Roads Lead to the Gut: The Importance of the Microbiota and Diet in Migraine

Migraine, a prevalent neurological condition and the third most common disease globally, places a significant economic burden on society. Despite extensive research efforts, the precise underlying mechanism of the disease remains incompletely comprehended. Nevertheless, it is established that the activation and sensitization of the trigeminal system are crucial during migraine attacks, and specific substances have been recognized for their distinct involvement in the pathomechanism of migraine. Recently, an expanding body of data indicates that migraine attacks can be prevented and treated through dietary means. It is important to highlight that the various diets available pose risks for patients without professional guidance. This comprehensive overview explores the connection between migraine, the gut microbiome, and gastrointestinal disorders. It provides insight into migraine-triggering foods, and discusses potential diets to help reduce the frequency and severity of migraine attacks. Additionally, it delves into the benefits of using pre- and probiotics as adjunctive therapy in migraine treatment.

Pain reduction and adverse effects of intravenous metoclopramide for acute migraine attack: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized-controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Metoclopramide may be used to treat people suffering from acute migraine. However, no comprehensive investigation on this issue has been recorded. This review will provide more solid evidence for the use of metoclopramide in treating acute migraine.

AIM

To compare the efficacy of intravenous metoclopramide with other therapies in migraine attack treatment in an emergency department (ED).

METHODS

We included randomized controlled trials of participants older than 18 years with acute migraine headaches, which included at least one arm that received intravenous (IV) metoclopramide at the ED. A literature search of PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Collaboration, and Reference Citation Analysis on December 31, 2021 retrieved other drugs or placebo-controlled studies without language limitation. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. The primary endpoint was pain reduction at 60 min or closest to 1 h after treatment, as measured by the pain scale. Secondary endpoints included adverse effects or reactions resulting from metoclopramide or comparisons.

RESULTS

Fourteen trials with a total of 1661 individuals were eligible for review. The risk of bias ranged from low to intermediate. IV metoclopramide administration was not associated with higher pain reduction at 1 h (Standard mean difference [SMD] = -0.03, 95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.33-0.28, P = 0.87). However, metoclopramide was associated with better pain reduction than placebo (SMD = 1.04, 95%CI: 0.50-1.58, P = 0.0002). In addition, side effects were not significantly different between IV metoclopramide and other drugs or placebo (odds ratio [OR] = 0.76, 95%CI: 0.48-1.19, P = 0.09 and OR = 0.92, 95%CI: 0.31-2.74, P = 0.54, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Metoclopramide is more effective than placebo in treating migraine in the ED. Despite the observed tendency of decreased side effects, its effectiveness compared to other regimens is poorly understood. More research on this area is needed to treat migraine in acute care settings effectively.

Second-line interventions for migraine in the emergency department: A narrative review

OBJECTIVE

Millions of patients present to US emergency departments (ED) annually for the treatment of migraine. First-line treatments, including metoclopramide, prochlorperazine, and sumatriptan, fail to provide sufficient relief in up to one-third of treated patients. In this narrative review, we discuss the evidence supporting the use of injectable (intravenous, intramuscular, or subcutaneous) medications for patients in the ED who fail to improve sufficiently after treatment with first-line medication.

METHODS

We used the American Headache Society's guideline, "Management of Adults with Acute Migraine in the Emergency Department: The American Headache Society Evidence Assessment of Parenteral Pharmacotherapies," published in 2016, to identify first-line medications for migraine. We then conducted a PubMed search to determine whether any evidence supported the use of these medications as second-line therapy and whether any evidence existed to support the use of injectable therapies not discussed in the guideline as second-line therapy.

RESULTS

We identified only scant high-quality randomized data of second-line therapy. Therefore, we based our recommendations on medications that have reliably demonstrated efficacy as first-line treatment of migraine. These medications include injectable non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and acetaminophen. Dihydroergotamine and valproic acid have some data supporting efficacy. More recently, greater occipital nerve blocks (GONBs) have been shown to be efficacious. With the exception of meperidine, opioids have been shown to be not efficacious. Most data published to date demonstrate no role for propofol and ketamine.

CONCLUSIONS

There are no evidence-based second-line treatments of migraine in the ED setting. For patients with migraine, who fail to improve after treatment with a first-line medication, it is reasonable to use an intravenous NSAID or intravenous acetaminophen. Alternatively, clinicians adept at performing a GONB may offer this treatment.

Randomised trial of IV metoclopramide vs IV ketorolac in treatment of acute primary headaches

INTRODUCTION

Headache is one of the most common neurological conditions among emergency department visits (ED), although the best therapy has not been identified yet. Therefore, in the current study, we aimed to compare the pain-relieving effect of metoclopramide and ketorolac in acute primary headaches patients.

METHODS

This double-blind, randomised clinical trial was conducted at Golestan Hospital, Ahvaz, Iran. This research involved all adult patients with acute primary (migraine or tension-type) headaches presented to the ED. Pain intensity was assessed with 0 to 10 verbal Numeric Rating Scales (NRS). The subjects were randomised into 10 mg intravenous (IV) metoclopramide or 30 mg IV ketorolac groups. Pain score and drug adverse reactions were compared between the two groups at baseline, 15, 30, and 60 min after baseline.

RESULTS

108 patients completed this trial and were equally divided into two groups (mean age of 34 ± 8.54 years; 57.4% female). Before treatment, the mean pain score was 6.9 and 6.8 in metoclopramide and ketorolac groups, respectively (p > 0.05). Metoclopramide failed to provide more improvement in pain score at 30 min (p = 0.55) and 60 min (p = 0.15) from baseline. There were no serious adverse events in this study. Only five patients required rescue medication which four of them were in ketorolac group.

CONCLUSION

We were unable to reject the null hypothesis that there would be no difference in pain outcomes between metoclopramide and ketorolac.

Acute Treatments for Episodic Migraine in Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

IMPORTANCE

Migraine is common and can be associated with significant morbidity, and several treatment options exist for acute therapy.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the benefits and harms associated with acute treatments for episodic migraine in adults.

DATA SOURCES

Multiple databases from database inception to February 24, 2021.

STUDY SELECTION

Randomized clinical trials and systematic reviews that assessed effectiveness or harms of acute therapy for migraine attacks.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Independent reviewers selected studies and extracted data. Meta-analysis was performed with the DerSimonian-Laird random-effects model with Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman variance correction or by using a fixed-effect model based on the Mantel-Haenszel method if the number of studies was small.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The main outcomes included pain freedom, pain relief, sustained pain freedom, sustained pain relief, and adverse events. The strength of evidence (SOE) was graded with the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Methods Guide for Effectiveness and Comparative Effectiveness Reviews.

FINDINGS

Evidence on triptans and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs was summarized from 15 systematic reviews. For other interventions, 115 randomized clinical trials with 28 803 patients were included. Compared with placebo, triptans and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs used individually were significantly associated with reduced pain at 2 hours and 1 day (moderate to high SOE) and increased risk of mild and transient adverse events. Compared with placebo, calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor antagonists (low to high SOE), lasmiditan (5-HT1F receptor agonist; high SOE), dihydroergotamine (moderate to high SOE), ergotamine plus caffeine (moderate SOE), acetaminophen (moderate SOE), antiemetics (low SOE), butorphanol (low SOE), and tramadol in combination with acetaminophen (low SOE) were significantly associated with pain reduction and increase in mild adverse events. The findings for opioids were based on low or insufficient SOE. Several nonpharmacologic treatments were significantly associated with improved pain, including remote electrical neuromodulation (moderate SOE), transcranial magnetic stimulation (low SOE), external trigeminal nerve stimulation (low SOE), and noninvasive vagus nerve stimulation (moderate SOE). No significant difference in adverse events was found between nonpharmacologic treatments and sham.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

There are several acute treatments for migraine, with varying strength of supporting evidence. Use of triptans, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, acetaminophen, dihydroergotamine, calcitonin gene-related peptide antagonists, lasmiditan, and some nonpharmacologic treatments was associated with improved pain and function. The evidence for many other interventions, including opioids, was limited.

A link between gastrointestinal disorders and migraine: Insights into the gut-brain connection

Background

Migraine is a complex, multifaceted, and disabling headache disease that is often complicated by gastrointestinal (GI) conditions, such as gastroparesis, functional dyspepsia, and cyclic vomiting syndrome (CVS). Functional dyspepsia and CVS are part of a spectrum of disorders newly classified as disorders of gut–brain interaction (DGBI). Gastroparesis and functional dyspepsia are both associated with delayed gastric emptying, while nausea and vomiting are prominent in CVS, which are also symptoms that commonly occur with migraine attacks. Furthermore, these gastric disorders are comorbidities frequently reported by patients with migraine. While very few studies assessing GI disorders in patients with migraine have been performed, they do demonstrate a physiological link between these conditions.

Objective

To summarize the available studies supporting a link between GI comorbidities and migraine, including historical and current scientific evidence, as well as provide evidence that symptoms of GI disorders are also observed outside of migraine attacks during the interictal period. Additionally, the importance of route of administration and formulation of migraine therapies for patients with GI symptoms will be discussed.

Methods

A literature search of PubMed for articles relating to the relationship between the gut and the brain with no restriction on the publication year was performed. Studies providing scientific support for associations of gastroparesis, functional dyspepsia, and CVS with migraine and the impact these associations may have on migraine treatment were the primary focus. This is a narrative review of identified studies.

Results

Although the association between migraine and GI disorders has received very little attention in the literature, the existing evidence suggests that they may share a common etiology. In particular, the relationship between migraine, gastric motility, and vomiting has important clinical implications in the treatment of migraine, as delayed gastric emptying and vomiting may affect oral dosing compliance, and thus, the absorption and efficacy of oral migraine treatments.

Conclusions

There is evidence of a link between migraine and GI comorbidities, including those under the DGBI classification. Many patients do not find adequate relief with oral migraine therapies, which further necessitates increased recognition of GI disorders in patients with migraine by the headache community.

Randomized Study of Metoclopramide Plus Diphenhydramine for Acute Posttraumatic Headache

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether IV metoclopramide 20 mg + diphenhydramine 25 mg (M + D) was more efficacious than IV placebo for acute moderate or severe posttraumatic headache in the emergency room.

METHODS

We conducted this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study in 2 urban emergency departments (EDs). Participants who experienced head trauma and presented to our EDs within 10 days with a headache fulfilling criteria for acute posttraumatic headache were included. We randomized participants in a 1:1 ratio to M + D or placebo. Participants, caregivers, and outcome assessors were blinded to assignment. The primary outcome was improvement in pain on a scale of 0 to 10 between baseline and 1 hour after treatment.

RESULTS

This study was completed between August 2017 and March 2020. We screened 414 patients for participation and randomized 160: 81 to M + D and 79 to placebo. Baseline characteristics were comparable between the groups. All enrolled participants provided primary outcome data. Patients receiving placebo reported mean improvement of 3.8 (SD 2.6), while those receiving M + D improved by 5.2 (SD 2.3), for a difference favoring metoclopramide of 1.4 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.7-2.2, p < 0.01). Adverse events were reported by 35 of 81 (43%) patients who received metoclopramide and 22 of 79 (28%) of patients who received placebo (95% CI 1-30 for difference of 15%, p = 0.04).

CONCLUSION

M + D was more efficacious than placebo with regard to relief of posttraumatic headache in the ED.

TRIAL REGISTRATION INFORMATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03220958.

CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE

This study provides Class I evidence that for patients with acute moderate or severe posttraumatic headache, IV M + D significantly improved pain compared to placebo.

Metoclopramide versus sumatriptan in the treatment of migraine in the emergency department: a single-center, open-label, cluster-randomized controlled non-inferiority trial

Migraine is a common disease seen in the emergency department (ED). Triptans, which are recommended in therapeutic guidelines for migraine, have some contraindications and possible severe side effects. Metoclopramide, which is commonly used as an antiemetic, also seems to have pain-relieving effects for migraine. In this article, we will introduce a study in progress, which investigates whether metoclopramide 10 mg intravenously (IV) is non-inferior to sumatriptan 3 mg subcutaneously (SQ) as migraine treatment in the ED. This study is a single-center, open-label, cluster-randomized controlled trial of 80 patients with migraine attacks to investigate the non-inferiority of metoclopramide to sumatriptan. The patients will be cluster-randomized monthly into metoclopramide 10 mg IV and sumatriptan 3 mg SQ arms. The primary outcome will be change in Numerical Rating Scale score for headache at 1 h after baseline. In discussion, if our hypothesis is confirmed, metoclopramide can be considered as first-line medication for migraine attacks in ED settings.

Clinical Policy: Critical Issues in the Evaluation and Management of Adult Patients Presenting to the Emergency Department With Acute Headache

This clinical policy from the American College of Emergency Physicians addressed key issues in the evaluation and management of adult patients presenting to the emergency department with acute headache. A writing subcommittee conducted a systematic review of the literature to derive evidence-based recommendations to answer the following clinical questions: (1) In the adult emergency department patient presenting with acute headache, are there risk-stratification strategies that reliably identify the need for emergent neuroimaging? (2) In the adult emergency department patient treated for acute primary headache, are nonopioids preferred to opioid medications? (3) In the adult emergency department patient presenting with acute headache, does a normal noncontrast head computed tomography scan performed within 6 hours of headache onset preclude the need for further diagnostic workup for subarachnoid hemorrhage? (4) In the adult emergency department patient who is still considered to be at risk for subarachnoid hemorrhage after a negative noncontrast head computed tomography, is computed tomography angiography of the head as effective as lumbar puncture to safely rule out subarachnoid hemorrhage? Evidence was graded and recommendations were made based on the strength of the available data.

Efficacy of metoclopramide for the treatment of acute migraine

BACKGROUND

In this study, we will assess the efficacy and safety of metoclopramide for the treatment of acute migraine (AM).

METHODS

We will comprehensively search Cochrane Library, PUMBED, EMBASE, Google Scholar, Web of Science, Allied and Complementary Medicine Database, Chinese Biomedical Literature Database, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure from the inception to July 1, 2019 to identify any eligible studies. Only randomized controlled trials will be considered for inclusion. The study selection, data collection, and management will be completed by two authors independently. The risk of bias will be assessed using Cochrane risk of bias tool. RevMan 5.3 software will be used for statistical analysis.

RESULTS

The primary outcome includes pain intensity, as measured by visual analogue scale or others. The secondary outcomes are success rate, requirement of rescue medicine, quality of life, relapse, and adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

This study will summarize the latest evidence for the clinical efficacy and safety of metoclopramide for the treatment of AM.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

PROSPERO CRD42019142795.

Comparing the Therapeutic Effects of Dexamethasone-Metoclopramide with Ketorolac in Relieving Headache in Patients with Acute Migraine Attacks Presenting to the Emergency Department

Introduction:

Migraine is a frequent chief complaint of patients in the emergency department. A wide range of treatments are used for acute migraine.

Objective:

This study aimed to compare the therapeutic effects of a combination of metoclopramide + dexamethasone with those of ketorolac for treatment of acute migraine in the emergency department.

Method:

This quasi-experimental study enrolled patients identified as migraine headache cases admitted to the emergency departments of Shohadaye Tajrish and Sina hospitals, Tehran, Iran. The patients were divided into two groups and treated with either 8 mg Dexamethasone + 10 mg Metoclopramide or 60 mg ketorolac, and then compared regarding the rate of pain control based on visual analogue scale (VAS) on arrival and 1 and 2 hours afterward.

Results:

Overall, 86 patients were recruited, of whom 50 were male (58.1%). Their mean age was 37.6 ± 10.3 years. Thirty-five (40.7%) were in the ketorolac group and 51 (59.3%) were in the dexamethasone + metoclopramide group. Treatment success was defined as a reduction of at least 3 points in pain severity in comparison to the admission time. One hour after administration of medications, the reported pain intensity was 4.7 ± 2.0 and 6.2 ± 2.3 in ketorolac group and dexamethasone + metoclopramide group, respectively. By the second hour, pain intensity was 3.4 ± 1.2 and 2.9 ± 1.3 in ketorolac group and dexamethasone + metoclopramide group, respectively. The two groups did not show a significant difference in terms of the reported pain at this time (p= 0.04).

Conclusion:

Based on our findings, the pain reduction time was relatively shorter for ketorolac in acute migraine, but the final response was identical in the two groups.

Intravenous metoclopramide in the treatment of acute migraines: A randomized, placebo-controlled trial

OBJECTIVES

The present study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of intravenous metoclopramide for acute migraine treatment.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A double-blind, randomized, parallel-group, placebo-controlled trial was carried out in an academic emergency department. After the patients were assessed for eligibility via the International Headache Society criteria for migraines, they were randomized into 10 mg intravenous metoclopramide and normal saline groups. The headache intensity was evaluated using an 11-point numeric rating scale (NRS) score. The primary outcome measure was determined as the median between-group change in the score at the 30th minute. The secondary outcome measures were rescue medication needs, adverse events, and emergency department (ED) revisits after discharge.

RESULTS

A total of 148 patients were randomized into two equal groups with similar baseline characteristics, including the baseline NRS scores (8 points). The median reduction in the NRS scores at the 30th minute was 4 [interquartile range (IQR): 2-6)] in the metoclopramide group and 3 (IQR: 1-4) in the normal saline group [median difference: -1.0, 95% confidence interval (CI): -2.1 to 0.1]. No serious adverse events were observed, and the rescue medication needs were similar in both groups.

CONCLUSION

No difference was found between intravenous metoclopramide and placebo regarding efficacy and safety in patients with acute migraines.

Treatment of migraine attacks and prevention of migraine: Guidelines by the German Migraine and Headache Society and the German Society of Neurology

In collaboration with some of the leading headache centres in Germany, Switzerland and Austria, we have established new guidelines for the treatment of migraine attacks and the prevention of migraine. A thorough literature research of the last 10 years has been the basis of the current recommendations. At the beginning, we present therapeutic novelties, followed by a summary of all recommendations. After an introduction, we cover topics like drug therapy and practical experience, non-effective medication, migraine prevention, interventional methods, non-medicational and psychological methods for prevention and therapies without proof of efficacy.

Treating status migrainosus in the emergency setting: what is the best strategy?

INTRODUCTION

Migraine is a disabling primary headache disorder with unknown exact pathomechanism. Status migrainosus (SM) is a complication of migraine (with or without aura), representing an attack that lasts for more than 72 h. There is a paucity of data published with regard to its pathomechanism and therapeutic options.

AREAS COVERED

The authors review the literature on SM from PubMed published between 1999 and January 2018. The authors specifically look at the therapeutic possibilities of SM in the emergency department in patients that have or have not already been treated with serotonergic agents. Additional discussion is given to the rare complications of migraine.

EXPERT OPINION

SM is a devastating condition; therefore, the primary goal is to prevent its development with proper acute and prophylactic migraine medication. If this treatment fails, the patient should be treated in the emergency setting. Due to the severity of the condition, parenteral pharmacotherapy is recommended. However, high-quality randomized trials are lacking. The currently available data suggest the use of intravenous fluids, corticosteroids, magnesium sulfate, anticonvulsive drugs, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, antiemetics, and serotonergic agents for the treatment of SM. Still, there is a need for personalized and causal therapy for migraine sufferers.

Which is more effective for the treatment of Acute Migraine Attack: Dexketoprofen, Ibuprofen or Metoclopramide?

Objective:

The aim of this study was head-to-head comparison of the efficacy and rate of adverse events of metoclopramide, ibuprofen and dexketoprofen for the acute treatment of migraine attack in the real-life conditions of a busy emergency department (ED).

Methods:

This was a prospective, observational, cross-sectional study. All patients who presented to the ED with a headache fulfilling the inclusion criteria were enrolled. All patients were treated by the attending emergency physicians in their daily routine. If an IV treatment in the ED was found indicated by the EP, they selected one of the options in the written departmental migraine treatment protocol.

Results:

During the study period, 54 patients met the inclusion criteria. The median change in the pain score was significantly different among treatment options (p<0.0001). The median pain score change at the end of the 30 minutes for treatment groups were 7.5 mm (IQR: 7.0-8.0), 5.0 mm (IQR: 4.75-7.0), and 7.0 mm (IQR: 6.0-7.25), respectively (p=0.0002). All three groups were found to be significantly different from each other in the post-hoc analysis.

Conclusion:

All drugs compared in this study are effective in the relief of migraine headache. However, IV dexketoprofen seems to be faster and more effective than metoclopramide and ibuprofen.

Metoclopramide for Acute Migraine Treatment in the Emergency Department: An Effective Alternative to Opioids

In light of recent warnings by the United States (US) Surgeon General and Centers for Disease Control (CDC) guidelines for recommending more prudent use of opioid narcotics, the search for a non-opioid alternative for aborting acute migraines is particularly relevant. The CDC also estimates the prevalence of opioid dependence may be as high as 26% among patients prescribed opioids for chronic pain, not due to cancer, in the primary care setting. Given such staggering data, it is imperative that we, as caretakers, not foster opioid dependence but rather continue to investigate non-opioid therapies for the management of acute migraines in the emergent care settings. Our literature review demonstrates that metoclopramide should be used more frequently as first-line therapy for an acute migraine over opioids. The use of opioids specifically has been discouraged as migraine treatment by the American Headache Society citing “insufficient evidence” as the main reason. Metoclopramide, specifically using the 10 mg dose, has been cited as “highly likely to be effective” by the same guidelines. Another major issue with opioids is the growing potential for abuse, thus minimizing the use of these drugs for only special circumstances would be beneficial overall.

Diphenhydramine as Adjuvant Therapy for Acute Migraine: An Emergency Department-Based Randomized Clinical Trial

STUDY OBJECTIVE

More than 1 million patients present to US emergency departments (EDs) annually seeking care for acute migraine. Parenteral antihistamines have long been used in combination with antidopaminergics such as metoclopramide to treat acute migraine in the ED. High-quality data supporting this practice do not exist. We determine whether administration of diphenhydramine 50 mg intravenously+metoclopramide 10 mg intravenously results in greater rates of sustained headache relief than placebo+metoclopramide 10 mg intravenously.

METHODS

This was a randomized, double-blind, clinical trial comparing 2 active treatments for acute migraine in an ED. Eligible patients were adults younger than 65 years presenting with an acute moderate or severe headache meeting International Classification of Headache Disorders-2 migraine criteria. Patients were stratified according to presence or absence of allergic symptoms. The primary outcome was sustained headache relief, defined as achieving a headache level of mild or none within 2 hours of medication administration and maintaining this level of relief without use of any additional headache medication for 48 hours. Secondary efficacy outcomes included mean improvement on a 0 to 10 verbal scale between baseline and 1 hour, the frequency with which subjects indicated they would want the same medication the next time they present to the ED with migraine, and the ED throughput time. Sample size calculation using a 2-sided α of .05, a β of .20, and a 15% difference between study arms determined the need for 374 patients. An interim analysis was conducted when data were available for 200 subjects.

RESULTS

Four hundred twenty patients were approached for participation. Two hundred eight eligible patients consented to participate and were randomized. At the planned interim analysis, the data and safety monitoring board recommended that the study be halted for futility. Baseline characteristics were comparable between the groups. Fourteen percent (29/208) of the sample reported allergic symptoms. Of patients randomized to diphenhydramine, 40% (40/100) reported sustained relief at 48 hours, as did 37% (38/103) of patients randomized to placebo (95% confidence interval [CI] for difference of 3%: -10% to 16%). One hour after medication administration, patients randomized to diphenhydramine improved by a mean of 5.1 on the 0 to 10 scale versus 4.8 for those randomized to placebo (95% CI for difference of 0.3: -0.6 to 1.1). Eighty-five percent (84/99) of the patients in the diphenhydramine arm reported they would want the same medication combination during a subsequent ED visit, as did 76% (77/102) of those who received placebo (95% CI for difference of 9%: -2% to 20%). Median ED length of stay was 122 minutes (interquartile range 84 to 180 minutes) in the diphenhydramine group and 139 minutes (interquartile range 90 to 235 minutes) in the placebo arm. Rates of adverse effects, including akathisia, were comparable between the groups.

CONCLUSION

Intravenous diphenhydramine, when administered as adjuvant therapy with metoclopramide, does not improve migraine outcomes.

Comparison of Intravenous Metoclopramide and Acetaminophen in Primary Headaches: a Randomized Controlled Trial

INTRODUCTION

Headache is the most common neurologic symptom among referees to the emergency department (ED), while the best treatment has not yet been found. Therefore, in the present study pain relief effects of metoclopramide and acetaminophen were compared in patients suffered acute primary headache.

METHODS

This study was a double-blind randomized clinical trial performed in Imam Khomeini Hospital, Urmia, Iran, through July to October 2014. All adult patients, with acute primary (migraine, tension type and cluster) headache referred to the ED were included in this study. Pain severity was measured with 10 centimeters numeric rating scales. The patients were randomized into two groups of intravenous (IV) metoclopramide (10 milligrams) and acetaminophen (1 gram). Pain score, success rate, and drug complications were compared between the 2 groups at 0, 15, 30, 60, and 120 minutes after injection.

RESULTS

100 patients were equally categorized into two groups (mean age of 32 ± 13.2 years; 51.2% male). Initial pain score in metoclopramide and acetaminophen groups were 9.1 and 9.4, respectively (p = 0.46). IV metoclopramide did not have any analgesic effect at 15 minutes, but had good effect at 30 minutes. While, the analgesic effect of acetaminophen initiated after 15 minutes. After 2 hours, both drugs had good therapeutic effect on primary headaches (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

The present study demonstrated that efficacy of metoclopramide for pain relief in primary headaches is lower than acetaminophen. In this regard, success rate of acetaminophen was 42.0% versus 0% for metoclopramide within 15 minutes. The efficacy of acetaminophen continued until 60 minutes.

Novel strategies for the treatment of migraine attacks via the CGRP, serotonin, dopamine, PAC1, and NMDA receptors

INTRODUCTION

Migraine is a common, paroxysmal, and disabling primary headache with a high personal and socioeconomic impact. It involves ∼ 16% of the general population. During the years, a number of hypotheses have been put forward concerning the exact pathomechanism, but the final solution is still undiscovered.

AREAS COVERED

Although the origin is enigmatic, parallel therapeutic efforts have been developed. Current attack therapy does not meet the expectations of the patients or the doctors. This article, based on a PubMed search, reviews the novel pharmacological possibilities that influence the peripheral and central sensitization involved in the disease.

EXPERT OPINION

In order to overcome the therapeutic insufficiency, a calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor antagonist without the side-effect of liver transaminase elevation is required. Another therapeutic option is to develop a neurally acting antimigraine agent, such as a serotonin-1F receptor agonist, with low adverse central nervous system events. Development of a potent dopamine receptor antagonist is necessary to diminish the premonitory symptoms of migraine. A further option is to decrease the headache intensity with a pituitary adenylate cyclase-activating polypeptide type 1 receptor blocker which can cross the blood-brain barrier. Finally, synthetic kynurenine analogues are required to block the pain transmission in the activated trigeminal system.

Breastfeeding and migraine drugs

PURPOSE

Breastfeeding women may suffer from migraine. While we have many drugs for its treatment and prophylaxis, the majority are poorly studied in breastfeeding women. We conducted a review of the most common anti-migraine drugs (AMDs) and we determined their lactation risk.

METHODS

For each AMD, we collected all retrievable data from Hale's Medications and Mother Milk (2012), from the LactMed database (2014) of the National Library of Medicine, and from a MedLine Search of relevant studies published in the last 10 years.

RESULTS

According to our review, AMDs safe during breastfeeding are as follows: low-dose acetylsalicylic acid (ASA), ibuprofen, sumatriptan, metoprolol, propranolol, verapamil, amitriptyline, escitalopram, paroxetine, sertraline, acetaminophen, caffeine, and metoclopramide. AMDs compatible with breastfeeding but warranting caution are as follows: diclofenac, ketoprofen, naproxen, most new triptans, topiramate, valproate, venlafaxine, and cyproheptadine. Finally, high-dose ASA, atenolol, nadolol, cinnarizine, flunarizine, ergotamine, methysergide, and pizotifen are contraindicated.

CONCLUSIONS

According to our review, the majority of the revised AMDs were assessed to be compatible with breastfeeding.

Canadian Headache Society systematic review and recommendations on the treatment of migraine pain in emergency settings

BACKGROUND

There is a considerable amount of practice variation in managing migraines in emergency settings, and evidence-based therapies are often not used first line.

METHODS

A peer-reviewed search of databases (MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL) was carried out to identify randomized and quasi-randomized controlled trials of interventions for acute pain relief in adults presenting with migraine to emergency settings. Where possible, data were pooled into meta-analyses.

RESULTS

Two independent reviewers screened 831 titles and abstracts for eligibility. Three independent reviewers subsequently evaluated 120 full text articles for inclusion, of which 44 were included. Individual studies were then assigned a US Preventive Services Task Force quality rating. The GRADE scheme was used to assign a level of evidence and recommendation strength for each intervention.

INTERPRETATION

We strongly recommend the use of prochlorperazine based on a high level of evidence, lysine acetylsalicylic acid, metoclopramide and sumatriptan, based on a moderate level of evidence, and ketorolac, based on a low level of evidence. We weakly recommend the use of chlorpromazine based on a moderate level of evidence, and ergotamine, dihydroergotamine, lidocaine intranasal and meperidine, based on a low level of evidence. We found evidence to recommend strongly against the use of dexamethasone, based on a moderate level of evidence, and granisetron, haloperidol and trimethobenzamide based on a low level of evidence. Based on moderate-quality evidence, we recommend weakly against the use of acetaminophen and magnesium sulfate. Based on low-quality evidence, we recommend weakly against the use of diclofenac, droperidol, lidocaine intravenous, lysine clonixinate, morphine, propofol, sodium valproate and tramadol.

Metoclopramide versus sumatriptan for treatment of migraine headache: A randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND

There are different options to manage benign headache in the emergency department. The costs, side effects, and efficacies of the drugs used are significantly different. The aim of this study was to compare intravenous (IV) metoclopramide with subcutaneous (SC) sumatriptan in treatment of migraine headache.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

In a randomized, double-blinded clinical trial study, patients presenting to the university referral emergency department with acute benign headache were allocated into two groups after obtaining their informed consent. Patients received 20 mg of IV metoclopramide or 6 mg of SC sumatriptan. Pain intensity was assessed with 10-cm visual analog scale at baseline and 60 min after treatment.

RESULTS

One hundred and twenty-four subjects participated. The mean age was 34.9 ± 9 years in metoclopramide group and 26.8 ± 4 years in sumatriptan group (P < 0.0001). The baseline pain scores were 6.47 ± 0.84 and 6.12 ± 0.73 in metoclopramide and sumatriptan groups, respectively (P < 0.0001). The mean of pain score decreased to 0.66 ± 0.59 cm (P < 0.0001) in the metoclopramide group and 1.1 ± 0.70 (P < 0.0001) in the sumatriptan group. Comparison of these two groups showed more pain reduction in the metoclopramide group, with a mean difference of 0.55 ± 0.13 between the groups (95% CI: 0.25-0.79 cm) (P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

For treatment of migraine headache, IV metoclopramide may be superior to SC sumatriptan in the emergency department.

The evolution of a migraine attack - a review of recent evidence

A migraine attack is an extraordinarily complex brain event that takes place over hours to days. This review focuses on recent human studies that shed light on the evolution of a migraine attack. It begins with a constellation of premonitory symptoms that are associated with activation of the hypothalamus and may involve the neurotransmitter dopamine. Even in the premonitory phase, patients experience sensitivity to sensory stimuli, indicating that central sensitization is a primary phenomenon. The migraine attack progresses to a phase that in some patients includes aura, which involves changes in cortical function, blood flow, and neurovascular coupling. The aura phase overlaps with the headache phase, which is associated with further changes in blood flow and function of the brainstem, thalamus, hypothalamus, and cortex. Serotonin receptors, nitric oxide, calcitonin gene-related peptide, pituitary adenylate cyclase-activating polypeptide, and prostanoids are demonstrated specific chemical mediators of migraine based on therapeutic and triggered migraine studies. A number of migraine symptoms persist beyond resolution of headache into a postdromal phase, accompanied by persistent blood flow changes in several brain regions. Although these phases of migraine have substantial temporal, neurochemical, and anatomical overlap, each represents an important window onto the pathophysiology of migraine as well as a target for therapeutic intervention. A comprehensive approach to migraine requires an understanding of the entire range of mechanisms and resultant symptoms that occur throughout the evolution of an attack.

Use of dopamine antagonists in treatment of migraine

OPINION STATEMENT

Dopamine antagonists are indicated for treatment of nausea or psychosis and have an established role in the treatment of migraine. Neuroleptics, including antipsychotics, act as antagonists at the dopamine D2 receptor type. These medications also have variable activity as antihistamines and anticholinergics, and they block alpha-adrenergic and some serotonin receptor types, but their actions on dopamine are likely the reason for their efficacy in treating nausea, psychosis, and acute migraine. Neuroleptics are first-line agents in the emergency room setting for migraine, especially for patients with nausea and vomiting. In the setting of a clear prodrome, antiemetics may prevent migraine when taken before an attack. They are also indicated in clinical situations such as patients who are pregnant or have contraindications to migraine-specific medications or NSAIDs. Recent developments suggest that dopamine is particularly important in chronic pain, and we most commonly use neuroleptic medications in the treatment of status migrainosus or medication-overuse headache. Clinicians may avoid dopamine antagonists because of unfamiliarity and a lack of large, controlled clinical trials. Their use requires special care to avoid adverse events such as sedation, akathisia or dystonic reactions, neuroleptic malignant syndrome, or movement disorders with long-term use. Some newer atypical neuroleptic agents appear promising for both acute and prophylactic migraine treatment with a lower risk of adverse events.

Rescue therapy for acute migraine, part 2: neuroleptics, antihistamines, and others

OBJECTIVES

This second portion of a 3-part series examines the relative effectiveness of headache treatment with neuroleptics, antihistamines, serotonin antagonists, valproate, and other drugs (octreotide, lidocaine, nitrous oxide, propofol, and bupivacaine) in the setting of an emergency department, urgent care center, or headache clinic.

METHODS

MEDLINE was searched using the terms "migraine" AND "emergency" AND "therapy" OR "treatment." Reports were from emergency department and urgent care settings and involved all routes of medication delivery. Reports from headache clinics were only included if medications were delivered by a parenteral route.

RESULTS

Prochlorperazine, promethazine, and metoclopramide, when used alone, were superior to placebo. Droperidol and prochlorperazine were superior or equal in efficacy to all other treatments, although they also have more side effects (especially akathisia). Metoclopramide was equivalent to prochlorperazine and, when combined with diphenhydramine, was superior in efficacy to triptans and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. Meperidine was inferior to chlorpromazine and equivalent to the other neuroleptics. The overall percentage of patients with pain relief after taking droperidol and prochlorperazine was equivalent to sumatriptan.

CONCLUSIONS

Prochlorperazine and metoclopramide are the most frequently studied of the anti-migraine medications in the emergent setting, and the effectiveness of each is superior to placebo. Prochlorperazine is superior or equivalent to all other classes of medications in producing migraine pain relief. Dopamine antagonists, in general, appear to be equivalent for migraine pain relief to the migraine-"specific" medications sumatriptan and dihydroergotamine, although there are fewer studies involving the last two. Lack of comparisons to placebo and the frequent use of combination medications in treatment arms complicate the comparison of single agents to one other.

Propofol alleviates intractable migraine headache: a case report

Abstract

Several medications have been proposed as the first line drugs in the treatment of migraine attack. However, the low efficacy, potential complications of medications and the intolerance of some patients for oral route due to nausea and vomiting establish a difficult situation in some migraine patients. This report describes a dramatic pain relief with 60 mg of intravenous propofol in a patient with migraine attack refractory to treatment with metoclopramide, promethazine, dexamethasone and meperidine. Pain relief in this patient besides earlier case reports suggests that subanesthetic doses of propofol may be an alternative to other treatment modalities for acute migraine.

Rescue therapy for acute migraine, part 1: triptans, dihydroergotamine, and magnesium

OBJECTIVE

To review and analyze published reports on the acute treatment of migraine headache with triptans, dihydroergotamine (DHE), and magnesium in emergency department, urgent care, and headache clinic settings.

METHODS

MEDLINE was searched using the terms "migraine" and "emergency," and "therapy" or "treatment." Reports from emergency department and urgent care settings that involved all routes of medication delivery were included. Reports from headache clinic settings were included only if medications were delivered by a parenteral route.

RESULTS

Acute rescue treatment studies involving the triptans were available for injectable and nasal sumatriptan, as well as rizatriptan. Effectiveness varied widely, even when the pain-free and pain-relief statistics were evaluated separately. As these medications are known to work best early in the migraine, part of this variability may be attributed to the timing of triptan administration. Multiple studies compared triptans with anti-emetics, dopamine antagonists, and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. The overall percentage of patients with pain relief after taking sumatriptan was roughly equivalent to that recorded with droperidol and prochlorperazine. Sumatriptan was equivalent to DHE when only paired comparisons were performed. While the data extracted suggest that magnesium may be effective in treating all symptoms in patients experiencing migraine with aura across all migraine patients, its effectiveness seems to be limited to treating only photophobia and phonophobia.

CONCLUSIONS

Although there are relatively few studies involving health-care provider-administered triptans or DHE for acute rescue, they appear to be equivalent to the dopamine antagonists for migraine pain relief. The relatively rare inclusion of a placebo arm and the frequent use of combination medications in active treatment arms complicate the comparison of single agents with each other.