Vagus nerve stimulation suppresses acute noxious activation of trigeminocervical neurons in animal models of primary headache

Current and Novel Therapies for Cluster Headache: A Narrative Review

Cluster headache (CH) is an excruciating and debilitating primary headache disorder. The prevalence is up to 1.3%, and the typical onset is around age 30. Often misdiagnosed as migraine, particularly in children, the diagnosis rate of CH has been increasing among women. CH is characterized by intense unilateral pain and autonomic symptoms, significantly impacting patients' quality of life, mental health, and productivity.Genetic associations suggest a familial risk for developing CH, with lifestyle factors also potentially playing a role. The pathophysiology involves alterations in both central and peripheral nervous system, with the hypothalamus, trigeminocervical complex, and neuropeptides such as calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) being implicated.Nonpharmacological treatments focus on patient education and lifestyle modifications, while pharmacological treatments include acute therapies such as oxygen and subcutaneous or nasal sumatriptan, as well as preventive therapies like verapamil, lithium, and CGRP monoclonal antibodies. Transitional options include oral corticosteroids and greater occipital nerve injections. Emerging interventional procedures offer new avenues for managing refractory cases. Noninvasive vagal nerve stimulation and occipital nerve stimulation show promise for both acute and preventive treatment. Careful consideration of safety profiles is crucial in specific populations such as pregnant patients and children.Current treatments still leave patients highly burdened by limited efficacy and side effects. Future research continues to explore novel pharmacological targets, interventional procedures, and the potential role of psychedelics in CH management. Comprehensive, multifaceted treatment strategies are essential to improve the daily functioning and quality of life for individuals with CH.

Effect of Transcutaneous Auricular Vagus Nerve Stimulation on Conditioned Pain Modulation in Trigeminal Neuralgia Patients

INTRODUCTION

Conditioned pain modulation (CPM) is a quantitative estimation of the capacity for endogenous pain modulation. Reduced CPM enables chronic painful event development or exacerbates pre-existing pain symptoms. Emerging reports indicate that patients with trigeminal neuralgia (TN) have dysregulated endogenous pain modulation. Transauricular vagus nerve stimulation (taVNS) is known to alleviate both acute and chronic pain symptoms. Its role in modulation or management of TN remains unknown. Here, we evaluated the taVNS efficacy in modulating CPM among TN patients. Conclusions from this investigation may facilitate establishment of novel non-invasive adjunctive approaches to treating TN patients.

METHODS

All research work was conducted at the First Affiliated Hospital of the University of Science and Technology of China (Anhui Provincial Hospital). In all, we recruited 62 study participants, 31 TN patients and 31 healthy volunteers, for a 2-day experimental test. At the beginning of the experiment (Day 1), all subjects received 30 min of active taVNS. On Day 2, they received sham taVNS with the same duration and intensity. Meanwhile, technicians documented participant pressure pain thresholds (PPT) and CPM values at baseline, and at 15 and 30 min post-active or sham taVNS.

RESULTS

A 30-min active taVNS exposure substantially elevated the PPT and CPM effect (P < 0.05) among TN patients, and we also observed a notable rise in the PPT and CPM effect (P < 0.05) among healthy controls. Additionally, there were no serious adverse events from the administered treatment.

CONCLUSION

Exposure to 30 min of active taVNS strongly augmented the CPM effect and elevated the PPT among TN patients and healthy controls. These effects were not observed with sham stimulation. Despite the limitations inherent to survey studies, such as duration and compliance biases, we consider that taVNS is a promising, safe, and cost-effective therapy. In future investigations, we recommend assessment of long-term taVNS application and its effects on CPM and clinical pain.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ChiCTR2300078673 ( www.Chictr.org.cn ).

Indomethacin-Responsive Headache Disorders

OBJECTIVE

This article describes the clinical features and treatment of the indomethacin-responsive headache disorders paroxysmal hemicrania and hemicrania continua.

LATEST DEVELOPMENTS

Both paroxysmal hemicrania and hemicrania continua are treated with indomethacin at the lowest clinically useful dose. It has recently become clear that some patients with either condition may respond to treatment with noninvasive vagus nerve stimulation, which can be both indomethacin sparing and, in some cases, headache controlling. Given the lifelong nature of both paroxysmal hemicrania and hemicrania continua, brain imaging with MRI is recommended when the conditions are identified, specifically including pituitary views.

ESSENTIAL POINTS

Paroxysmal hemicrania and hemicrania continua are indomethacin-responsive headache disorders that offer a rewarding and unique opportunity to provide marked clinical improvement when recognized and treated appropriately. These disorders share the final common pathway of the trigeminal-autonomic reflex, with head pain and cranial autonomic features, and are differentiated pathophysiologically by the pattern of brain involvement, which can be seen using functional imaging. They have distinct differential diagnoses to which the clinician needs to remain alert.

Gut-Brain Crosstalk and the Central Mechanisms of Orofacial Pain

Accumulated evidence has demonstrated that the gut microbiome can contribute to pain modulation through the microbiome-gut-brain axis. Various relevant microbiome metabolites in the gut are involved in the regulation of pain signaling in the central nervous system. In this review, we summarize recent advances in gut-brain interactions by which the microbiome metabolites modulate pain, with a focus on orofacial pain, and we further discuss the role of gut-brain crosstalk in the central mechanisms of orofacial pain whereby the gut microbiome modulates orofacial pain via the vagus nerve-mediated direct pathway and the gut metabolites/molecules-mediated indirect pathway. The direct and indirect pathways both contribute to the central regulation of orofacial pain through different brain structures (such as the nucleus tractus solitarius and the parabrachial nucleus) and signaling transmission across the blood-brain barrier, respectively. Understanding the gut microbiome-regulated pain mechanisms in the brain could help us to develop non-opioid novel therapies for orofacial pain.

Management of cluster headache: Treatments and their mechanisms

BACKGROUND

The management of cluster headache is similar to that of other primary headache disorders and can be broadly divided into acute and preventive treatments. Acute treatments for cluster headache are primarily delivered via rapid, non-oral routes (such as inhalation, nasal, or subcutaneous) while preventives include a variety of unrelated treatments such as corticosteroids, verapamil, and galcanezumab. Neuromodulation is becoming an increasingly popular option, both non-invasively such as vagus nerve stimulation when medical treatment is contraindicated or side effects are intolerable, and invasively such as occipital nerve stimulation when medical treatment is ineffective. Clinically, this collection of treatment types provides a range of options for the informed clinician. Scientifically, this collection provides important insights into disease mechanisms.

METHODS

Two authors performed independent narrative reviews of the literature on guideline recommendations, clinical trials, real-world data, and mechanistic studies.

RESULTS

Cluster headache is treated with acute treatments, bridge treatments, and preventive treatments. Common first-line treatments include subcutaneous sumatriptan and high-flow oxygen as acute treatments, corticosteroids (oral or suboccipital injections) as bridge treatments, and verapamil as a preventive treatment. Some newer acute (non-invasive vagus nerve stimulation) and preventive (galcanezumab) treatments have excellent clinical trial data for episodic cluster headache, while other newer treatments (occipital nerve stimulation) have been specifically tested in treatment-refractory chronic cluster headache. Most treatments are suspected to act on the trigeminovascular system, the autonomic system, or the hypothalamus.

CONCLUSIONS

The first-line treatments have not changed in recent years, but new treatments have provided additional options for patients.

Migraine: from pathophysiology to treatment

Migraine is an extremely disabling, common neurological disorder characterized by a complex neurobiology, involving a series of central and peripheral nervous system areas and networks. A growing increase in the understanding of migraine pathophysiology in recent years has facilitated translation of that knowledge into novel treatments, which are currently becoming available to patients in many parts of the world and are substantially changing the clinical approach to the disease. In the first part of this review, we will provide an up to date overview of migraine pathophysiology by analyzing the anatomy and function of the main regions involved in the disease, focusing on how these give rise to the plethora of symptoms characterizing the attacks and overall disease. The second part of the paper will discuss the novel therapeutic agents that have emerged for the treatment of migraine, including molecules targeting calcitonin gene-related peptide (gepants and monoclonal antibodies), serotonin 5-HT_1F receptor agonists (ditans) and non-invasive neuromodulation, as well as providing a brief overview of new evidence for classic migraine treatments.

Non-invasive neuromodulation of the cervical vagus nerve in rare primary headaches

Primary headache disorders can be remarkably disabling and the therapeutic options available are usually limited to medication with a high rate of adverse events. Here, we discuss the mechanism of action of non-invasive vagal nerve stimulation, as well as the findings of the main studies involving patients with primary headaches other than migraine or cluster headache, such as hemicrania continua, paroxysmal hemicrania, cough headache, or short-lasting neuralgiform headache attacks (SUNCT/SUNA), in a narrative analysis. A bibliographical search of low-prevalence disorders such as rare primary headaches retrieves a moderate number of studies, usually underpowered. Headache intensity, severity, and duration showed a clinically significant reduction in the majority, especially those involving indomethacin-responsive headaches. The lack of response of some patients with a similar diagnosis could be due to a different stimulation pattern, technique, or total dose. The use of non-invasive vagal nerve stimulation for the treatment of primary headache disorders represents an excellent option for patients with these debilitating and otherwise refractory conditions, or that cannot tolerate several lines of preventive medication, and should always be considered before contemplating invasive, non-reversible stimulation techniques.

Symptoms and pathophysiology of cluster headache. Approach to combined occipital and supraorbital neurostimulation

Cluster headache (CH) is included under section 3 - Trigeminal autonomic cephalalgias (TAC) of the International Headache Society (IHS) classification. It is one of the most frequent, painful and disabling primary headaches. Acute and preventive pharmacological treatments are often poorly tolerated and of limited effectiveness. Due to improved understanding of the pathophysiology of CH, neuromodulation devices are now considered safe and effective options for preventive and acute treatment of CH. In this paper, we review the information available to date, and present the case of a patient with disabling cluster headache highly resistant to medical treatment who underwent implantation of a peripheral nerve neurostimulation system to stimulate the supraorbital nerves (SON) and greater occipital nerve (GON) in our Pain Unit. We also review the diagnostic criteria for CH, the state of the knowledge on the pathophysiology of CH, and the role played by neuromodulation in treating this condition.

Migraine and Gastroparesis

PURPOSEOF REVIEW

Migraine is a chronic and disabling disease affecting a significant proportion of the world's population. There is evidence that gastroparesis, a gastrointestinal (GI) dysmotility disorder in which transit of gastric contents is delayed, can occur in the setting of migraine. This article aims to review recent literature on overlap in the pathophysiology and clinical manifestations of migraine and gastroparesis and highlight management considerations when these disorders coexist.

RECENT FINDINGS

There has been increasing recognition of the importance of the connection between the GI tract and the brain, and mounting evidence for the overlap in the pathophysiology of migraine and gastroparesis specifically. There exists a complex interplay between the central, autonomic, and enteric nervous systems. Studies show that gastroparesis may be present during and between acute migraine attacks necessitating modification of management to optimize outcomes. Gastric dysmotility in the setting of migraine can impact absorption of oral migraine medications and alternate formulations should be considered for some patients. Noninvasive vagus nerve stimulation has been FDA cleared for migraine treatment and is also being studied in gastroparesis. Dysfunction of the autonomic nervous system is a significant feature in the pathophysiology of gut motility and migraine, making treatments that modulate the vagus nerve attractive for future research.

Devices for Episodic Migraine: Past, Present, and Future

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Historically, therapies for migraine have generally involved pharmacological treatments using non-selective or selective analgesics and preventive treatments. However, for many patients these treatments are not effective, while others prefer to use non-pharmacological-based therapies. To fill this need, over the last 15 years, neuromodulatory devices have entered the market for migraine treatment. Here, we will review the most recent findings for the use of these devices in the treatment of migraine.

RECENT FINDINGS

Non-invasive vagus nerve stimulation and spring-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation are both cleared for the treatment of migraine, supported by preclinical studies that validate efficacy and mechanism of action, and complemented with clinical trial data. Other options also authorized for use include transcutaneous supraorbital nerve stimulation and remote electrical neuromodulation. Various options are available to treat migraine using authorized neuromodulatory devices. These data support their efficacy in the treatment of episodic migraine, although further studies are necessary to elucidate their mechanism of action and to provide rigor to clinical trial data.

De-risking in Tier I CNS safety assessments is the primary function of study design and technical training of laboratory staff observers

Derisking is not a pharmaceutical industry strategy to reduce time, effort, or costs in drug development. Derisking strategies originated within the National Institutes of Health as a predicate to good science. There is a growing sentiment within drug development programs to diminish the importance of behavioral measures in toxicological studies and in the Tiered Safety assessment plans of the U.S. Regulatory Agencies and the International Commission on Harmonization. The validity and reliability of the Functional Observational Batter (FOB) is critically dependent on consistency and technical quality in each risk assessment plan. US Federal and International drug approval organizations have universally adopted the concept of principles of test construction rather than delineating specific behavioral assay endpoints for inclusion of the FOB in nonclinical safety protocols. The validity and reliability of behavioral observations in standardized neurotoxicity screening is critically dependent on the FOB developed by the Study Director with the Sponsor throughout all stages of testing.. The individual risk factors selected for observation to be included in the early Tier 1 safety program should be determined by the mechanism and mode of action of the test article. The results of Tier I testing are the basis for Tier II testing designs. Critical to the compliance with Good Laboratory Practices is the documentation of training of the operational staff scheduled to conduct all aspects of the established protocol.

Temporary resolution of hemicrania continua following ipsilateral ear piercing

BACKGROUND

Hemicrania continua is an uncommon subtype of trigeminal autonomic cephalgia that exhibits dramatic therapeutic response to indomethacin. Unfortunately, indomethacin is associated with a range of adverse effects, including neuropsychiatric complications, which limits its use in many patients. Although no other effective pharmacologic agents exist, there is emerging evidence for interventional treatments such as occipital nerve and vagus nerve stimulation, which may act by modulating neural activity within the trigeminovascular system.

CASE

We present a 30-year-old woman with long-standing refractory hemicrania continua who suffered adverse effects to indomethacin. She experienced temporary, but near-complete, symptom resolution following piercing of the crus of the ear helix ipsilateral to her headache, whereas contralateral piercing produced no benefit.

CONCLUSIONS

To our knowledge, this case is the first to describe a therapeutic benefit following ear piercing in a patient with trigeminal autonomic cephalgia. We argue that symptom relief was obtained through a similar mechanism to occipital or vagus nerve stimulation.

The bottom-up approach: Non-invasive peripheral neurostimulation methods to treat migraine: A scoping review from the child neurologist's perspective

Migraine is a common and invalidating disorder worldwide. Patients of all ages experience the disorder as very impairing regarding their personal and occupational lives. The current approach in migraine therapy is multimodal including lifestyle management, psychoeducation and, if available, psychotherapeutic interventions, and pharmacotherapy. The lack of non-pharmacological and non-invasive treatment options call for new and innovative therapeutic approaches. Peripheral neurostimulation is a relatively new method in migraine management offering a painless and non-pharmacological way of targeting specific mechanisms involved in migraine. This review summarizes 15 recent randomized clinical trials to provide an overview of non-invasive peripheral neurostimulation methods currently available for the treatment of migraine. Efficacy, tolerability, and safety of the different interventions and their feasibility in the pediatric setting are evaluated. Vagal nerve stimulation (VNS), remote electrical neuromodulation (REN) and supraorbital nerve stimulation (SNS) are considered effective in treating acute migraine attacks, the latter being more pronounced in migraine without aura. Regarding migraine prevention, occipital nerve stimulation (ONS) and supraorbital nerve stimulation (SNS) demonstrated efficacy, whereas repetitive neuromuscular magnetic stimulation (rNMS) may represent a further effective option in episodic migraine. REN and rNMS were found to be well-accepted with fewer patients discontinuing treatment than those receiving direct cranial nerve stimulation. In summary, peripheral neurostimulation represents a promising option to complement the multimodal therapy concept for pediatric migraine. In particular, rNMS opens a new field for research and treatment fitting the requirements of "non-invasiveness" for children. Given the reported efficacy, safety, and feasibility, the therapy decision should be made on an individual level.

Cluster headache pathophysiology - insights from current and emerging treatments

Cluster headache is a debilitating primary headache disorder that affects approximately 0.1% of the population worldwide. Cluster headache attacks involve severe unilateral pain in the trigeminal distribution together with ipsilateral cranial autonomic features and a sense of agitation. Acute treatments are available and are effective in just over half of the patients. Until recently, preventive medications were borrowed from non-headache indications, so management of cluster headache is challenging. However, as our understanding of cluster headache pathophysiology has evolved on the basis of key bench and neuroimaging studies, crucial neuropeptides and brain structures have been identified as emerging treatment targets. In this Review, we provide an overview of what is known about the pathophysiology of cluster headache and discuss the existing treatment options and their mechanisms of action. Existing acute treatments include triptans and high-flow oxygen, interim treatment options include corticosteroids in oral form or for greater occipital nerve block, and preventive treatments include verapamil, lithium, melatonin and topiramate. We also consider emerging treatment options, including calcitonin gene-related peptide antibodies, non-invasive vagus nerve stimulation, sphenopalatine ganglion stimulation and somatostatin receptor agonists, discuss how evidence from trials of these emerging treatments provides insights into the pathophysiology of cluster headache and highlight areas for future research.

Characterization of opioidergic mechanisms related to the anti-migraine effect of vagus nerve stimulation

Vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) is a promising neuromodulation approach used in the treatment of migraine, whose therapeutic mechanism is largely unknown. Previous studies suggest that VNS's anti-nociceptive effects may, in part, involve engaging opioidergic mechanisms. We used a validated preclinical model of head pain, with good translational outcomes in migraine, acute intracranial-dural stimulation, which has responded to invasive VNS. We tested the effects of μ (MOR), δ (DOR) and κ (KOR) opioid receptor agonists in this model, and subsequently the effects of opioid receptor antagonists against VNS-mediated neuronal inhibition. MOR, DOR, and KOR agonists all inhibited dural-evoked trigeminocervical neuronal responses. Both DOR and KOR agonists also inhibited ongoing spontaneous firing of dural responsive neurons. Both DOR and KOR agonists were more efficacious than the MOR agonist in this model. We confirm the inhibitory effect of invasive VNS and demonstrate that this effect was prevented by a broad-spectrum opioid receptor antagonist, and by a highly selective DOR antagonist. Our data confirm the role of MOR in dural-trigeminovascular neurotransmission and additionally provide evidence of a role of both DOR and KOR in dural-nociceptive transmission of trigeminocervical neurons. Further, the results here provide evidence of engagement of opioidergic mechanisms in the therapeutic action of VNS in headache, specifically the DOR. These studies provide further support for the important role of the DOR in headache mechanisms, and as a potential therapeutic target. The data begin to dissect the mode of action of the analgesic effects of VNS in the treatment of primary headache disorders.

The Instant Effects of Continuous Transcutaneous Auricular Vagus Nerve Stimulation at Acupoints on the Functional Connectivity of Amygdala in Migraine without Aura: A Preliminary Study

Background

A growing body of evidence suggests that both auricular acupuncture and transcutaneous auricular vagus nerve stimulation (taVNS) can induce antinociception and relieve symptoms of migraine. However, their instant effects and central treatment mechanism remain unclear. Many studies proved that the amygdalae play a vital role not only in emotion modulation but also in pain processing. In this study, we investigated the modulation effects of continuous taVNS at acupoints on the FC of the bilateral amygdalae in MwoA.

Methods

Thirty episodic migraineurs were recruited for the single-blind, crossover functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) study. Each participant attended two kinds of eight-minute stimulations, taVNS and sham-taVNS (staVNS), separated by seven days in random order. Finally, 27 of them were included in the analysis of seed-to-voxel FC with the left/right amygdala as seeds.

Results

Compared with staVNS, the FC decreased during taVNS between the left amygdala and left middle frontal gyrus (MFG), left dorsolateral superior frontal gyrus, right supplementary motor area (SMA), bilateral paracentral lobules, bilateral postcingulum gyrus, and right frontal superior medial gyrus, so did the FC of the right amygdala and left MFG. A significant positive correlation was observed between the FC of the left amygdala and right SMA and the frequency/total time of migraine attacks during the preceding four weeks.

Conclusion

Continuous taVNS at acupoints can modulate the FC between the bilateral amygdalae and pain-related brain regions in MwoA, involving the limbic system, default mode network, and pain matrix, with obvious differences between the left amygdala and the right amygdala. The taVNS may produce treatment effects by modulating the abnormal FC of the amygdala and pain networks, possibly having the same central mechanism as auricular acupuncture.

Recent Advances in the Management of Cluster Headache

Purpose of review

Among the spectrum of pain conditions, cluster headache represents one of the most severe. Targeted therapies for cluster headache are evolving thus improving the available therapeutic armamentarium. A better understanding of the currently available therapies, as well as new and emerging options, may aide physicians to manage affected sufferers better by evolving treatment guidance.

Recent findings

While classic first-line medications are useful in some patients with cluster headache, they are often accompanied by significant side effects that limit their use. Recently, novel treatments with better tolerability and decreased medication interactions have proven to be effective. A remarkable example of this is the blockage of the calcitonin gene-related peptide pathway with monoclonal antibodies, which may be a key element in the future treatment of cluster headache. The sphenopalatine ganglion and vagus nerve perform a critical role in the regulation of pain and the trigeminal autonomic reflex. Neuromodulation therapies targeting these structures have shown excellent tolerability and few significant adverse events, constituting a promising form of treatment. Finally, several potential therapeutic targets are examined in this review, such as small molecule CGRP receptor antagonists, known as gepants, and serotonin receptor 5-HT1F receptor agonists: ditans.

Summary

In summary, a deepening of the understanding of cluster headache mechanisms in recent years has driven the evolution of sophisticated therapeutic approaches that could allow a new era in the treatment of this difficult condition.

Non-invasive vagus nerve stimulation for primary headache: A clinical update

Background

Non-invasive vagus nerve stimulation (nVNS) is a proven treatment for cluster headache and migraine. Several possible mechanisms of action by which nVNS mitigates headache have been identified.

Methods

We conducted a narrative review of recent scientific and clinical research into nVNS for headache, including findings from mechanistic studies and their possible relationships to the clinical effects of nVNS.

Results

Findings from animal and human studies have provided possible mechanistic explanations for nVNS efficacy in headache involving four core areas: Autonomic nervous system functions; cortical spreading depression inhibition; neurotransmitter regulation; and nociceptive modulation. We discuss how overlap and interplay among these areas may underlie the utility of nVNS in the context of clinical evidence supporting its safety and efficacy as acute and preventive therapy for both cluster headache and migraine. Possible future nVNS applications are also discussed.

Conclusion

Significant progress over the past several years has yielded valuable mechanistic and clinical evidence that, combined with the excellent safety and tolerability profile of nVNS, suggests that it should be considered a first-line treatment for both acute and preventive treatment of cluster headache, an effective option for acute treatment of migraine, and a highly relevant, practical option for migraine prevention.

Neuromodulation in headache and craniofacial neuralgia: guidelines from the Spanish Society of Neurology and the Spanish Society of Neurosurgery

INTRODUCTION

Numerous invasive and non-invasive neuromodulation devices have been developed and applied to patients with headache and neuralgia in recent years. However, no updated review addresses their safety and efficacy, and no healthcare institution has issued specific recommendations on their use for these 2 conditions.

METHODS

Neurologists from the Spanish Society of Neurology's (SEN) Headache Study Group and neurosurgeons specialising in functional neurosurgery, selected by the Spanish Society of Neurosurgery (SENEC), performed a comprehensive review of articles on the MEDLINE database addressing the use of the technique in patients with headache and neuralgia.

RESULTS

We present an updated review and establish the first set of consensus recommendations of the SEN and SENC on the use of neuromodulation to treat headache and neuralgia, analysing the current levels of evidence on its effectiveness for each specific condition.

CONCLUSIONS

Current evidence supports the indication of neuromodulation techniques for patients with refractory headache and neuralgia (especially migraine, cluster headache, and trigeminal neuralgia) selected by neurologists and headache specialists, after pharmacological treatment options are exhausted. Furthermore, we recommend that invasive neuromodulation be debated by multidisciplinary committees, and that the procedure be performed by teams of neurosurgeons specialising in functional neurosurgery, with acceptable rates of morbidity and mortality.

A Randomized Sham-Controlled Cross-Over Study on the Short-Term Effect of Non-Invasive Cervical Vagus Nerve Stimulation on Spinal and Supraspinal Nociception in Healthy Subjects

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the present study was to test the effects of vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) on the descending pain inhibition, quantified by the nociceptive flexor (RIII) reflex and the conditioned pain modulation (CPM) paradigm, and on supraspinal nociceptive responses, assessed by pain intensity and unpleasantness ratings and late somatosensory evoked potentials (SEPs), in healthy subjects.

BACKGROUND

Non-invasive vagus nerve stimulation (nVNS) showed promising effects on headache and pain treatment. Underlying mechanisms are only incompletely understood but may include the activation of the descending pain inhibitory system and/or the modification of emotional responses to pain.

METHODS

Twenty-seven adult, healthy, and pain-free subjects participated in this double-blind cross-over study conducted at a university research center. They received 4 minutes of cervical nVNS or sham stimulation in randomized order. RIII reflexes, pain ratings, and SEPs were assessed before, during, and 5, 15, 30, and 60 minutes after nVNS/sham stimulation, followed by CPM testing. The primary outcome was the nVNS effect on the RIII reflex size. Three subjects were excluded after the preparatory session (before randomization), 1 subject was excluded after outlier analysis, leaving 23 for analysis.

RESULTS

RIII reflex areas were 917.1 ± 563.8 µV × ms (mean ± SD) before, 952.4 ± 467.4 µV × ms during and 929.2 ± 484.0 µV × ms immediately after nVNS and 858.4 ± 489.2 µV × ms before, 913.9 ± 539.7 µV × ms during and 862.4 ± 476.0 µV × ms after sham stimulation, revealing no differences between the immediate effects of nVNS and sham stimulation (F _[3,66]  = 0.67, P = .574). There also were no effects of nVNS over sham on RIII reflex areas up to 60 minutes after nVNS (F _[1.7,37.4]  = 1.29, P = .283). Similarly, there was no statistically significant effect of nVNS on pain intensity ratings and thresholds, RIII reflex thresholds, late SEP amplitudes, and the CPM effect, compared to sham. Pain unpleasantness ratings statistically significantly decreased from 4.4 ± 2.4 (NRS 0-10) to 4.1 ± 2.5 during nVNS compared to sham stimulation (F _[1,22]  = 8.74, P = .007), but there were no longer lasting effects (5-60 minutes after stimulation).

CONCLUSIONS

The present study does not support an acute effect of nVNS on descending pain inhibition, pain intensity perception or supraspinal nociception in healthy adults. However, there was a small effect on pain unpleasantness during nVNS, suggesting that nVNS may preferentially act on affective, not somatosensory pain components.

Inhibition of Trigeminal Nociception by Non-invasive Vagus Nerve Stimulation: Investigating the Role of GABAergic and Serotonergic Pathways in a Model of Episodic Migraine

Migraine is a prevalent neurological disease that is characterized by unpredictable episodic attacks of intense head pain. The underlying pathology involves sensitization and activation of the trigeminal system. Although non-invasive vagus nerve stimulation (nVNS) is recommended for the treatment of migraine, the abortive mechanism of action is not well-understood. The goal of this study was to compare the ability of nVNS and sumatriptan to inhibit trigeminal activation in two animal models of episodic migraine and to investigate the receptor mechanism of action of nVNS. Nocifensive head withdrawal response was investigated in adult male Sprague Dawley rats using von Frey filaments. To induce trigeminal nociceptor sensitization, complete Freund's adjuvant was injected in the trapezius muscle and trigeminal neurons were activated by exposure to a pungent odor or injection of the nitric oxide donor sodium nitroprusside. Some animals received nVNS or sumatriptan as treatment. Some animals were injected intracisternally with antagonists of GABAA, 5-HT3 or 5-HT7 receptors prior to nVNS since these receptors are implicated in descending modulation. While unsensitized animals exposed to the pungent odor or nitric oxide alone did not exhibit enhanced mechanical nociception, sensitized animals with neck muscle inflammation displayed increased trigeminal nocifensive responses. The enhanced nociceptive response to both stimuli was attenuated by nVNS and sumatriptan. Administration of antagonists of GABAA, 5-HT3, and 5-HT7 receptors in the upper spinal cord suppressed the anti-nocifensive effect of nVNS. Our findings suggest that nVNS inhibits trigeminal activation to a similar degree as sumatriptan in episodic migraine models via involvement of GABAergic and serotonergic signaling to enhance central descending pain modulation.

[Peripheral neurostimulation in headache treatment]

According to rough estimates, at least one third of the population in developed countries suffers, to varying degrees, from certain forms of primary headache, the modern pharmacotherapy of which is not always effective and has a number of limitations. The non-pharmacological treatment of headache can be an alternative to the prescription of pharmacological agents and the only possible assistance option for patients developing drug-resistant cephalalgias. This review describes various methods of electrical neuromodulation that are used for the management of primary headaches. The authors provide information on current stages in implementation of implantable and non-invasive equipment into clinical practice, which makes possible electrical stimulations of peripheral nerves and of the sphenopalatine ganglion, as well as allows transcranial magnetic stimulation. Also the appearance and usage of portable electrical devices available on the world market are described, and mechanisms that can underlie anticephalgic action of neuromodulation therapy are discussed. Special attention is paid to the methods that are applied for electrostimulation of the vagus nerve and occipital nerves.

Peripheral neuromodulation for the treatment of migraine and headache: recent advances

Noninvasive neuromodulation is a rapidly developing field that offers an attractive nonpharmacologic treatment option for headache patients. Devices that stimulate peripheral nerves (e.g., vagus nerve, trigeminal sensory nerve, somatic sensory nerve) or brain parenchyma (e.g., occipital cortex) have been developed for this purpose, with promising results in clinical trials. There are currently four US FDA-cleared devices for the treatment of migraine and/or cluster headache: Cefaly®, a trigeminal nerve stimulator; gammaCore™, a vagus nerve stimulator; sTMS mini™, a transcranial magnetic stimulator and Nerivio™, a remote electrical neurostimulator. This narrative review will provide an overview of FDA-cleared neuromodulatory devices, including their proposed mechanisms of action as well as device safety and efficacy as demonstrated in clinical trials.

Non-invasive vagus nerve stimulation (nVNS) for the preventive treatment of episodic migraine: The multicentre, double-blind, randomised, sham-controlled PREMIUM trial

INTRODUCTION

Non-invasive vagus nerve stimulation (nVNS; gammaCore®) has the potential to prevent migraine days in patients with migraine on the basis of mechanistic rationale and pilot clinical data.

METHODS

This multicentre study included a 4-week run-in period, a 12-week double-blind period of randomised treatment with nVNS or sham, and a 24-week open-label period of nVNS. Patients were to administer two 120-second stimulations bilaterally to the neck three times daily (6-8 hours apart).

RESULTS

Of 477 enrolled patients, 332 comprised the intent-to-treat (ITT) population. Mean reductions in migraine days per month (primary outcome) were 2.26 for nVNS (n = 165; baseline, 7.9 days) and 1.80 for sham (n = 167; baseline, 8.1 days) (p = 0.15). Results were similar across other outcomes. Upon observation of suboptimal adherence rates, post hoc analysis of patients with ≥ 67% adherence per month demonstrated significant differences between nVNS (n = 138) and sham (n = 140) for outcomes including reduction in migraine days (2.27 vs. 1.53; p = 0.043); therapeutic gains were greater in patients with aura than in those without aura. Most nVNS device-related adverse events were mild and transient, with application site discomfort being the most common.

CONCLUSIONS

Preventive nVNS treatment in episodic migraine was not superior to sham stimulation in the ITT population. The "sham" device inadvertently provided a level of active vagus nerve stimulation. Post hoc analysis showed significant effects of nVNS in treatment-adherent patients. Study identification and registration: PREMIUM; NCT02378844; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02378844.

Animal models of migraine and experimental techniques used to examine trigeminal sensory processing

Background

Migraine is a common debilitating condition whose main attributes are severe recurrent headaches with accompanying sensitivity to light and sound, nausea and vomiting. Migraine-related pain is a major cause of its accompanying disability and can encumber almost every aspect of daily life.

Main body

Advancements in our understanding of the neurobiology of migraine headache have come in large from basic science research utilizing small animal models of migraine-related pain. In this current review, we aim to describe several commonly utilized preclinical models of migraine. We will discuss the diverse array of methodologies for triggering and measuring migraine-related pain phenotypes and highlight briefly specific advantages and limitations therein. Finally, we will address potential future challenges/opportunities to refine existing and develop novel preclinical models of migraine that move beyond migraine-related pain and expand into alternate migraine-related phenotypes.

Conclusion

Several well validated animal models of pain relevant for headache exist, the researcher should consider the advantages and limitations of each model before selecting the most appropriate to answer the specific research question. Further, we should continually strive to refine existing and generate new animal and non-animal models that have the ability to advance our understanding of head pain as well as non-pain symptoms of primary headache disorders.

Vagus nerve stimulation for primary headache disorders: An anatomical review to explain a clinical phenomenon

BACKGROUND

Non-invasive stimulation of the vagus nerve has been proposed as a new neuromodulation therapy to treat primary headache disorders, as the vagus nerve is hypothesized to modulate the headache pain pathways in the brain. Vagus nerve stimulation can be performed by placing an electrode on the ear to stimulate the tragus nerve, which contains about 1% of the vagus fibers. Non-invasive vagus nerve stimulation (nVNS) conventionally refers to stimulation of the cervical branch of the vagus nerve, which is made up entirely of vagal nerve fibers. While used interchangeably, most of the research to date has been performed with nVNS or an implanted vagus nerve stimulation device. However, the exact mechanism of action of nVNS remains hypothetical and no clear overview of the effectiveness of nVNS in primary headache disorders is available.

METHODS

In the present study, the clinical trials that investigated the effectiveness, tolerability and safety of nVNS in primary headache disorders were systematically reviewed. The second part of this study reviewed the central connections of the vagus nerve. Papers on the clinical use of nVNS and the anatomical investigations were included based on predefined criteria, evaluated, and results were reported in a narrative way.

RESULTS

The first part of this review shows that nVNS in primary headache disorders is moderately effective, safe and well-tolerated. Regarding the anatomical review, it was reported that fibers from the vagus nerve intertwine with fibers from the trigeminal, facial, glossopharyngeal and hypoglossal nerves, mostly in the trigeminal spinal tract. Second, the four nuclei of the vagus nerve (nuclei of the solitary tract, nucleus ambiguus, spinal nucleus of the trigeminal nerve and dorsal motor nucleus (DMX)) show extensive interconnections. Third, the efferents from the vagal nuclei that receive sensory and visceral input (i.e. nuclei of the solitary tract and spinal nucleus of the trigeminal nerve) mainly course towards the main parts of the neural pain matrix directly or indirectly via other vagal nuclei.

CONCLUSION

The moderate effectiveness of nVNS in treating primary headache disorders can possibly be linked to the connections between the trigeminal and vagal systems as described in animals.

Ictal Epileptic Headache: When Terminology Is Not a Moot Question

The relationship between headache and epilepsy is complex and despite the nature of this association is not yet clear. In the last few years, it has been progressively introduced the concept of the “ictal epileptic headache” that was included in the recently revised International Classification of Headaches Disorders 3rd edition (ICHD-3-revised). The diagnostic criteria for ictal epileptic headache (IEH) suggested in 2012 were quite restrictive thus leading to the underestimation of this phenomenon. However, these criteria have not yet been included into the ICHD-3 revision published in 2018, thus creating confusion among both, physicians and experts in this field. Here, we highlight the importance to strictly apply the original IEH criteria explaining the reasons through the analysis of the clinical, historical, epidemiological and pathophysiological characteristics of the IEH itself. In addition, we discuss the issues related to the neurophysiopathological link between headache and epilepsy as well as to the classification of these epileptic events as “autonomic seizure.”

Differential efficacy of non-invasive vagus nerve stimulation for the acute treatment of episodic and chronic cluster headache: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Two randomized, double-blind, sham-controlled trials (ACT1, ACT2) evaluated non-invasive vagus nerve stimulation (nVNS) as acute treatment for cluster headache. We analyzed pooled ACT1/ACT2 data to increase statistical power and gain insight into the differential efficacy of nVNS in episodic and chronic cluster headache.

METHODS

Data extracted from ACT1 and ACT2 were pooled using a fixed-effects model. Main outcome measures were the primary endpoints of each study. This was the proportion of participants whose first treated attack improved from moderate (2), severe (3), or very severe (4) pain intensity to mild (1) or nil (0) for ACT1 and the proportion of treated attacks whose pain intensity improved from 2-4 to 0 for ACT2.

RESULTS

The pooled population included 225 participants (episodic: n = 112; chronic: n = 113) from ACT1 (n = 133) and ACT2 (n = 92) in the nVNS (n = 108) and sham (n = 117) groups. Interaction was shown between treatment group and cluster headache subtype (p < 0.05). nVNS was superior to sham in episodic but not chronic cluster headache (both endpoints p < 0.01). Only four patients discontinued the studies due to adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

nVNS is a well-tolerated and effective acute treatment for episodic cluster headache.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The studies were registered at clinicaltrials.gov (ACT1: NCT01792817; ACT2: NCT01958125).

Primary headache disorders: Five new things

Purpose of review

To review 5 new areas in primary headache disorders, especially migraine and cluster headache.

Recent findings

Calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) receptor antagonists (gepants-rimegepant and ubrogepant) and serotonin 5-HT_1F receptor agonists (ditans-lasmiditan) have completed phase 3 clinical trials and will soon offer novel, effective, well-tolerated nonvasoconstrictor options to treat acute migraine. CGRP preventive treatment is being revolutionized after the licensing of 3 monoclonal antibodies (MABs), erenumab, fremanezumab, and galcanezumab, with eptinezumab to follow, especially designed for migraine; they are effective and well tolerated. For patients seeking a nondrug therapy, neuromodulation approaches, single-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation, noninvasive vagus nerve stimulation (nVNS), and external trigeminal nerve stimulation, represent licensed, well-tolerated approaches to migraine treatment. For the acute treatment of episodic cluster headache, nVNS is effective, well tolerated, and licensed; nVNS is effective and well tolerated in preventive treatment of cluster headache. The CGRP MAB galcanezumab was effective and well tolerated in a placebo-controlled trial in the preventive treatment of episodic cluster headache. Sphenopalatine ganglion stimulation has been shown to be effective and well tolerated in 2 randomized sham-controlled studies on chronic cluster headache. Understanding the premonitory (prodromal) phase of migraine during which patients experience symptoms such as yawning, tiredness, cognitive dysfunction, and food cravings may help explain apparent migraine triggers in some patients, thus offering better self-management.

Summary

Headache medicine has made remarkable strides, particularly in understanding migraine and cluster headache in the past 5 years. For the most common reason to visit a neurologist, therapeutic advances offer patients reduced disability and neurologists a rewarding, key role in improving the lives of those with migraine and cluster headache.

Targeting the central projection of the dural trigeminovascular system for migraine prophylaxis

Migraine abortives likely target both peripheral-dural and central trigeminovascular mechanisms in mediating their therapeutic effects. However, in preclinical assays, many migraine preventives have little success at inhibiting similar trigeminovascular-mediated peripheral changes within the dural microenvironment. In addition, their effects on central trigeminovascular neuronal responses are largely unknown. Using a validated preclinical model of acute dural-intracranial (migraine-like) head pain, using Sprague Dawley rats, we tested whether migraine preventives suppress ongoing firing of central trigeminocervical neurons, and evoked responses to cranial neurovascular activation. Flunarizine, sodium valproate, propranolol, and amitriptyline, all dose-dependently inhibited ongoing spontaneous firing of dural trigeminovascular neurons, and differentially affected neuronal responses to intracranial-dural and extracranial-cutaneous somatosensory stimulation. Lamotrigine, only effective in the treatment of migraine aura, did not affect responses. These data provide a mechanistic rationale for the clinical effects of migraine preventives in the treatment of migraine, via the modulation of dural-responsive central trigeminovascular neurons. Also, given their limited effect on peripheral dural vasdilatory responses, these data also suggest that migraine preventives specifically target central, rather than peripheral, components of trigeminal neurovascular mechanisms involved in migraine pathophysiology, to mediate their preventive action. Finally, these data further validate this preclinical model of central trigeminovascular activation to screen migraine preventives.

Noninvasive neuromodulation in migraine and cluster headache

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The purpose of this narrative review is to provide an overview of the currently available noninvasive neuromodulation devices for the treatment of migraine and cluster headache.

RECENT FINDINGS

Over the last decade, several noninvasive devices have undergone development and clinical trials to evaluate efficacy and safety. Based on this body of work, single-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation, transcutaneous supraorbital neurostimulation, and noninvasive vagal nerve stimulation devices have been cleared by the United States Food and Drug Administration and are available for clinical use for the treatment of primary headache disorders.

SUMMARY

Overall, these novel noninvasive devices appear to be safe, well tolerated, and have demonstrated promising results in clinical trials in both migraine and cluster headache. This narrative review will provide a summary and update of the proposed mechanisms of action, evidence, safety, and future directions of various currently available modalities of noninvasive neuromodulation for the treatment of migraine and cluster headache.

Saliva molecular inflammatory profiling in female migraine patients responsive to adjunctive cervical non-invasive vagus nerve stimulation: the MOXY Study

Background

Rising evidence indicate that oxytocin and IL-1β impact trigemino-nociceptive signaling. Current perspectives on migraine physiopathology emphasize a cytokine bias towards a pro-inflammatory status. The anti-nociceptive impact of oxytocin has been reported in preclinical and human trials. Cervical non-invasive vagus nerve stimulation (nVNS) emerges as an add-on treatment for the preventive and abortive use in migraine. Less is known about its potential to modulate saliva inflammatory signaling in migraine patients. The rationale was to perform inter-ictal saliva measures of oxytocin and IL-1ß along with headache assessment in migraine patients with 10 weeks adjunctive nVNS compared to healthy controls.

Methods

12 migraineurs and 12 suitably matched healthy control were studied with inter-ictal saliva assay of pro- and anti-neuroinflammatory cytokines using enzyme-linked immuno assay techniques along with assessment of headache severity/frequency and associated functional capacity at baseline and after 10 weeks adjunctive cervical nVNS.

Results

nVNS significantly reduced headache severity (VAS), frequency (headache days and total number of attacks) and significantly improved sleep quality compared to baseline (p < 0.01). Inter-ictal saliva oxytocin and IL-1β were significantly elevated pre- as well as post-nVNS compared to healthy controls (p < 0.01) and similarly showed changes that may reflect the observed clinical effects.

Conclusions

Our results add to accumulating evidence for a therapeutic efficacy of adjunct cervical non-invasive vagus nerve stimulation in migraine patients. This study failed to provide an evidence-derived conclusion addressed to the predictive value and usefulness of saliva assays due to its uncontrolled study design. However, saliva screening of mediators associated with trigemino-nociceptive traffic represents a novel approach, thus deserve future targeted headache research.

Trial registration This study was indexed at the German Register for Clinical Trials (DRKS No. 00011089) registered on 21.09.2016

Consistent effects of non-invasive vagus nerve stimulation (nVNS) for the acute treatment of migraine: additional findings from the randomized, sham-controlled, double-blind PRESTO trial

BACKGROUND

Non-invasive vagus nerve stimulation (nVNS) has been shown to be practical, safe, and well tolerated for treating primary headache disorders. The recent multicenter, randomized, double-blind, sham-controlled PRESTO trial provided Class I evidence that for patients with episodic migraine, nVNS significantly increases the probability of having mild pain or being pain-free 2 h post stimulation. We report additional pre-defined secondary and other end points from PRESTO that demonstrate the consistency and durability of nVNS efficacy across a broad range of outcomes.

METHODS

After a 4-week observation period, 248 patients with episodic migraine with/without aura were randomly assigned to acute treatment of migraine attacks with nVNS (n = 122) or a sham device (n = 126) during a double-blind period lasting 4 weeks (or until the patient had treated 5 attacks). All patients received nVNS therapy during the subsequent 4-week/5-attack open-label period.

RESULTS

The intent-to-treat population consisted of 243 patients. The nVNS group (n = 120) had a significantly greater percentage of attacks treated during the double-blind period that were pain-free at 60 (P = 0.005) and 120 min (P = 0.026) than the sham group (n = 123) did. Similar results were seen for attacks with pain relief at 60 (P = 0.025) and 120 min (P = 0.018). For the first attack and all attacks, the nVNS group had significantly greater decreases (vs sham) in pain score from baseline to 60 min (P = 0.029); the decrease was also significantly greater for nVNS at 120 min for the first attack (P = 0.011). Results during the open-label period were consistent with those of the nVNS group during the double-blind period. The incidence of adverse events (AEs) and adverse device effects was low across all study periods, and no serious AEs occurred.

CONCLUSIONS

These results further demonstrate that nVNS is an effective and reliable acute treatment for multiple migraine attacks, which can be used safely while preserving the patient's option to use traditional acute medications as rescue therapy, possibly decreasing the risk of medication overuse. Together with its practicality and optimal tolerability profile, these findings suggest nVNS has value as a front-line option for acute treatment of migraine.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02686034 .

Practical and clinical utility of non-invasive vagus nerve stimulation (nVNS) for the acute treatment of migraine: a post hoc analysis of the randomized, sham-controlled, double-blind PRESTO trial

BACKGROUND

The PRESTO study of non-invasive vagus nerve stimulation (nVNS; gammaCore®) featured key primary and secondary end points recommended by the International Headache Society to provide Class I evidence that for patients with an episodic migraine, nVNS significantly increases the probability of having mild pain or being pain-free 2 h post stimulation. Here, we examined additional data from PRESTO to provide further insights into the practical utility of nVNS by evaluating its ability to consistently deliver clinically meaningful improvements in pain intensity while reducing the need for rescue medication.

METHODS

Patients recorded pain intensity for treated migraine attacks on a 4-point scale. Data were examined to compare nVNS and sham with regard to the percentage of patients who benefited by at least 1 point in pain intensity. We also assessed the percentage of attacks that required rescue medication and pain-free rates stratified by pain intensity at treatment initiation.

RESULTS

A significantly higher percentage of patients who used acute nVNS treatment (n = 120) vs sham (n = 123) reported a ≥ 1-point decrease in pain intensity at 30 min (nVNS, 32.2%; sham, 18.5%; P = 0.020), 60 min (nVNS, 38.8%; sham, 24.0%; P = 0.017), and 120 min (nVNS, 46.8%; sham, 26.2%; P = 0.002) after the first attack. Similar significant results were seen when assessing the benefit in all attacks. The proportion of patients who did not require rescue medication was significantly higher with nVNS than with sham for the first attack (nVNS, 59.3%; sham, 41.9%; P = 0.013) and all attacks (nVNS, 52.3%; sham, 37.3%; P = 0.008). When initial pain intensity was mild, the percentage of patients with no pain after treatment was significantly higher with nVNS than with sham at 60 min (all attacks: nVNS, 37.0%; sham, 21.2%; P = 0.025) and 120 min (first attack: nVNS, 50.0%; sham, 25.0%; P = 0.018; all attacks: nVNS, 46.7%; sham, 30.1%; P = 0.037).

CONCLUSIONS

This post hoc analysis demonstrated that acute nVNS treatment quickly and consistently reduced pain intensity while decreasing rescue medication use. These clinical benefits provide guidance in the optimal use of nVNS in everyday practice, which can potentially reduce use of acute pharmacologic medications and their associated adverse events.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02686034 .

Spotlight on cervical vagus nerve stimulation for the treatment of primary headache disorders: a review

Objectives

Cervical noninvasive vagus nerve stimulation (nVNS) emerged as an adjunctive neuromodulation approach for primary headache disorders with limited responsiveness to pharmacologic and behavioral treatment. This narrative review evaluates the safety and efficacy of invasive and noninvasive peripheral nerve stimulation of the cervical branch of the vagal nerve (afferent properties) for primary headache disorders (episodic/chronic migraine [EM/CM] and cluster headache [ECH/CCH]) and provides a brief summary of the preclinical data on the possible mechanism of action of cervical vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) and trigemino-nociceptive head pain transmission.

Materials and methods

A systematic search of published data was performed in PubMed for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and prospective cohort clinical studies assessing the efficacy/safety and cost-effectiveness of cervical VNS in primary headache disorders and related preclinical studies.

Results

Three RCTs were identified for ECH/CCH (ACT-1, ACT-2 and PREVA), one RCT for migraine (EVENT) and several prospective cohort studies and retrospective analyses for both headache disorders. In ACT-1, a significantly higher response rate, a higher pain-free rate and a decrease in mean attack duration were found in nVNS-treated ECH/CCH patients compared to sham stimulation. ACT-2 confirmed these findings (e.g., significantly higher pain-free attacks, pain severity decline and increased responder-rate [defined as ≥50% reduction]). The PREVA study demonstrated the superiority of adjunctive nVNS to standard care alone and observed a significantly higher attack reduction (p=0.02) and responder rate (defined as ≥50% reduction). For CM, the EVENT study assessed a significantly higher frequency of decline in the open-label phase. Mostly transient mild/moderate adverse events were recorded, and no severe device-related adverse events occurred.

Conclusion

Cervical nVNS represents a novel, safe and efficient adjunctive treatment option for primary headache disorders. In particular, preliminary observations suggest enhanced nVNS responsiveness in favor of episodic subtypes (EM and ECH). However, preclinical studies are urgently warranted to dissect the mechanism of action.

Non-invasive vagus nerve stimulation reduces blood-brain barrier disruption in a rat model of ischemic stroke

BACKGROUND

Vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) significantly reduces infarct volume in rat models of cerebral ischemia, but the mechanism of this protective effect remains open.

HYPOTHESIS

This study tested the hypothesis that non-invasive VNS (nVNS), during transient middle cerebral artery occlusion (MCAO), protects the blood-brain barrier (BBB), leading to reduced infarct size in ischemic brain.

METHODS

Spontaneous hypertensive rats (SHRs) were subjected to a 90 min MCAO. nVNS treated rats received 5 stimulations (duration: 2 min; every 10 min) on the skin overlying the cervical vagus nerve in the neck beginning 30 min after MCAO onset. Control rats received the same stimulations on the quadriceps femoris muscle. Twenty-four hours after MCAO onset, MRI and immunohistochemistry (IHC) were performed for analyses of infarct size and BBB leakage.

RESULTS

Compared with the control group, anatomic MRI T2-weighted images showed significantly smaller infarct sizes in the nVNS group. Dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE)-MRI showed a significantly decreased BBB transfer rate (Ki map) in the lesion area in the nVNS group, which was spatially correlated with the attenuation of the infarct size. Furthermore, significantly lower serum IgG leakage, visualized by IHC, was seen in the ischemic hemisphere in nVNS treated rats. nVNS also protected vascular tight junction proteins from disruption in microvessels, and reduced expression of matrix metalloproteinases-2/9 in reactive astrocytes surrounding the compromised vessels in the ischemic hemispheres.

CONCLUSION

Our data suggest that the neuroprotective role of a series of nVNS administrations during MCA occlusion, spatially correlates with protection of BBB integrity from damage and reduction of infarct extent induced by ischemic stroke.

Noninvasive vagus nerve stimulation as acute therapy for migraine: The randomized PRESTO study

Objective

To evaluate the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of noninvasive vagus nerve stimulation (nVNS; gammaCore; electroCore, LLC, Basking Ridge, NJ) for the acute treatment of migraine in a multicenter, double-blind, randomized, sham-controlled trial.

Methods

A total of 248 participants with episodic migraine with/without aura were randomized to receive nVNS or sham within 20 minutes from pain onset. Participants were to repeat treatment if pain had not improved in 15 minutes.

Results

nVNS (n = 120) was superior to sham (n = 123) for pain freedom at 30 minutes (12.7% vs 4.2%; p = 0.012) and 60 minutes (21.0% vs 10.0%; p = 0.023) but not at 120 minutes (30.4% vs 19.7%; p = 0.067; primary endpoint; logistic regression) after the first treated attack. A post hoc repeated-measures test provided further insight into the therapeutic benefit of nVNS through 30, 60, and 120 minutes (odds ratio 2.3; 95% confidence interval 1.2, 4.4; p = 0.012). nVNS demonstrated benefits across other endpoints including pain relief at 120 minutes and was safe and well-tolerated.

Conclusion

This randomized sham-controlled trial supports the abortive efficacy of nVNS as early as 30 minutes and up to 60 minutes after an attack. Findings also suggest effective pain relief, tolerability, and practicality of nVNS for the acute treatment of episodic migraine.

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier

NCT02686034.

Classification of evidence

This study provides Class I evidence that for patients with an episodic migraine, nVNS significantly increases the probability of having mild pain or being pain-free 2 hours poststimulation (absolute difference 13.2%).

Non-invasive vagus nerve stimulation for the acute treatment of episodic and chronic cluster headache: A randomized, double-blind, sham-controlled ACT2 study

Background Clinical observations and results from recent studies support the use of non-invasive vagus nerve stimulation (nVNS) for treating cluster headache (CH) attacks. This study compared nVNS with a sham device for acute treatment in patients with episodic or chronic CH (eCH, cCH). Methods After completing a 1-week run-in period, subjects were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive nVNS or sham therapy during a 2-week double-blind period. The primary efficacy endpoint was the proportion of all treated attacks that achieved pain-free status within 15 minutes after treatment initiation, without rescue treatment. Results The Full Analysis Set comprised 48 nVNS-treated (14 eCH, 34 cCH) and 44 sham-treated (13 eCH, 31 cCH) subjects. For the primary endpoint, nVNS (14%) and sham (12%) treatments were not significantly different for the total cohort. In the eCH subgroup, nVNS (48%) was superior to sham (6%; p < 0.01). No significant differences between nVNS (5%) and sham (13%) were seen in the cCH subgroup. Conclusions Combing both eCH and cCH patients, nVNS was no different to sham. For the treatment of CH attacks, nVNS was superior to sham therapy in eCH but not in cCH. These results confirm and extend previous findings regarding the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of nVNS for the acute treatment of eCH.

Diagnosis, pathophysiology, and management of cluster headache

Cluster headache is a trigeminal autonomic cephalalgia characterised by extremely painful, strictly unilateral, short-lasting headache attacks accompanied by ipsilateral autonomic symptoms or the sense of restlessness and agitation, or both. The severity of the disorder has major effects on the patient's quality of life and, in some cases, might lead to suicidal ideation. Cluster headache is now thought to involve a synchronised abnormal activity in the hypothalamus, the trigeminovascular system, and the autonomic nervous system. The hypothalamus appears to play a fundamental role in the generation of a permissive state that allows the initiation of an episode, whereas the attacks are likely to require the involvement of the peripheral nervous system. Triptans are the most effective drugs to treat an acute cluster headache attack. Monoclonal antibodies against calcitonin gene-related peptide, a crucial neurotransmitter of the trigeminal system, are under investigation for the preventive treatment of cluster headache. These studies will increase our understanding of the disorder and perhaps reveal other therapeutic targets.

Peripheral vagal nerve stimulation modulates the nociceptive withdrawal reflex in healthy subjects: A randomized, cross-over, sham-controlled study

Introduction The mechanism of action of non-invasive vagal nerve stimulation in the treatment of migraine is elusive. We studied its effect in a human model of pain, the nociceptive withdrawal reflex. Methods We enrolled 10 healthy subjects who underwent active non-invasive vagal nerve stimulation and sham treatment in a randomized, cross-over, sham-controlled study. Non-invasive vagal nerve stimulation was delivered with gammaCore®. The assessment of the nociceptive withdrawal reflex was performed at baseline (T0) and at 5 (T5) and 30 (T30) minutes after stimulation. Results Non-invasive vagal nerve stimulation significantly increased the reflex threshold to single stimulus at both T5 and T30 and the temporal summation threshold at T30. Sham treatment did not modify any parameters. Discussion These findings are consistent with a modulation of central descending pathways for pain control. An altered spinal and supraspinal control of pain has been described in primary headache, so this effect may partially explain the therapeutic effect of non-invasive vagal nerve stimulation.

Vagus nerve stimulation inhibits trigeminal nociception in a rodent model of episodic migraine

INTRODUCTION

Although neck muscle tension is considered a risk factor for migraine, pungent odors can act as a trigger to initiate an attack in sensitized individuals. Although noninvasive vagus nerve stimulation (nVNS) is now an approved treatment for chronic migraine, how it functions to inhibit trigeminal nociception in an episodic migraine model is not known.

OBJECTIVES

The objectives of this study were to determine if nVNS could inhibit trigeminal nociception in a novel model of episodic migraine and investigate changes in the expression of proteins implicated in peripheral and central sensitization.

METHODS

Sprague-Dawley male rats were injected with an inflammatory agent in the trapezius muscle before exposure to pungent volatile compounds, which was used to initiate trigeminal nociceptor activation. The vagus nerve was stimulated transdermally by a 1-ms pulse of 5 kHz sine waves, repeated at 25 Hz for 2 minutes. Nocifensive head withdrawal response to von Frey filaments was determined and immunoreactive protein levels in the spinal cord and trigeminal ganglion (TG) were investigated.

RESULTS

Exposure to the pungent odor significantly increased the number of nocifensive withdrawals in response to mechanical stimulation of sensitized TG neurons mediated by neck muscle inflammation. Noninvasive vagus nerve stimulation inhibited nociception and repressed elevated levels of P-ERK in TG, Iba1 in microglia, and GFAP in astrocytes from sensitized animals exposed to the pungent odor.

CONCLUSION

Our findings demonstrate that nVNS inhibits mechanical nociception and represses expression of proteins associated with peripheral and central sensitization of trigeminal neurons in a novel rodent model of episodic migraine.