Transient Neurologic Dysfunction in Migraine

The Association Between Periodontal Disease and Chronic Migraine: A Systematic Review

Migraine is a neurologic illness that produces intense throbbing pain on one side of the head and affects roughly 1 billion people worldwide. Recent research indicates a relationship between periodontitis and chronic migraines. This study aimed to review the association between chronic migraines and periodontitis through a systematic literature review. Four research databases (Google Scholar, PubMed, ProQuest, and SpringerLink) were searched according to PRISMA guidelines to retrieve the studies included in this review. A search strategy was developed to answer the study question with appropriate inclusion and exclusion criteria. Out of 34 published studies, 8 studies were included in this review. Three of the studies were cross-sectional, 3 were case-control, and 2 were clinical report and medical hypothesis papers. Seven of the 8 included studies showed that there is an association between periodontal disease and chronic migraine. The elevated blood levels of some biomarkers such as leptins, ProCalcitonin (proCT), calcitonin gene-related peptides (CGRPs), Pentraxin 3 (PTX3), and Soluble Tumor Necrosis Factor-like Weak Inducer Of Apoptosis (sTWEAK) play a significant role in this association. The limitations include a small sample size, the influence of anti-inflammatory drugs, and a self-reported headache measure that is subject to misclassification bias. This systematic review reveals a supposed correlation between periodontal disease and chronic migraine, as evidenced by various biomarkers and inflammatory mediators. This suggests that periodontal disease could potentially contribute to the development of chronic migraine. However, to further assess the potential benefits of periodontal treatment in patients with chronic migraine, additional longitudinal studies with larger sample sizes and interventional studies are needed.

Differential Diagnosis of Visual Phenomena Associated with Migraine: Spotlight on Aura and Visual Snow Syndrome

Migraine is a severe and common primary headache disorder, characterized by pain as well as a plethora of non-painful symptoms. Among these, visual phenomena have long been known to be associated with migraine, to the point where they can constitute a hallmark of the disease itself. In this review we focus on two key visual disorders that are directly or indirectly connected to migraine: visual aura and visual snow syndrome (VSS). Visual aura is characterized by the transient presence of positive and negative visual symptoms, before, during or outside of a migraine attack. VSS is a novel stand-alone phenomenon which has been shown to be comorbid with migraine. We discuss key clinical features of the two disorders, including pathophysiological mechanisms, their differential diagnoses and best treatment practices. Our aim is to provide an aid for clinicians and researchers in recognizing these common visual phenomena, which can even appear simultaneously in patients with an underlying migraine biology.

Pathophysiology of migraine aura

Migraine aura occurs in about a third of patients with migraine and consists of a group of transient focal neurological symptoms that appear from 5 to 60min and then resolve prior to or in the early phase of a migraine headache attack. Migraine auras may consist of visual, language, unilateral sensory, or motor symptoms. There has been considerable debate as to the origins of the migrainous aura. Investigations during physiologically induced visual auras suggest that the phenomenon of cortical spreading depression or its human equivalent underpins the migraine aura. Single gene defects have been linked to relatively rare forms of the motor subtypes of aura known as familial hemiplegic migraine (FHM). These include CACNA1A (FHM1), ATP1A2 (FHM2), and SCN1A (FHM3). In the familial hemiplegic forms of migraine, the more typical forms of aura are almost always also present. Despite ample epidemiological evidence of increased heritability of migraine with aura compared to migraine without aura, identification of the specific variants driving susceptibility to the more common forms of aura has been problematic thus far. In the first genome-wide association study (GWAS) that focused migraine with aura, a single SNP rs835740 reached genome-wide significance. Unfortunately, the SNP did show statistical significance in a later meta-analysis which included GWAS data from subsequent studies. Here, we review the clinical features, pathophysiological theories, and currently available potential evidence for the genetic basis of migraine aura.

Clinical features of new daily persistent headache: A retrospective chart review of 328 cases

OBJECTIVE

To describe the clinical features of new daily persistent headache (NDPH) at an outpatient neurology clinic with a subspecialty interest in headache in Houston, Texas.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review was performed by a neurologist subspecialty certified in headache medicine of all patients seen from September 1, 2011 through February 28, 2020 (8.5 years) with a provisional diagnosis of NDPH and abstracted charts meeting criteria for primary NDPH.

RESULTS

A total of 328 patients met the International Classification of Headache Disorders, 3rd edition criteria including 215 (65.5%) female patients. The mean age of onset was 40.3 years (range 12-87 years) with a mean age at first consultation in the study clinic of 42.6 years (range 12-87 years). The median [25th, 75th] duration of NDPH at initial consultation was 0.7 [0.3, 2.0] years, and at last visit, it was 1.9 [0.7, 4.8] years. The headaches were side-locked unilateral in 28/328 (8.5%). 12/328 cases (3.6%) with a thunderclap onset are reported. There was no obvious seasonal or other cyclical variation. The pain was usually moderate to severe and more often severe for the migraine phenotype (MP; 260/328 [79.3%] of cases) than for the tension-type phenotype (TTP). Precipitating factors were the following: stressful life events, 67/328 (20.4%); upper respiratory infection or flu-like illness, 33/328 (10.1%); and extracranial surgery, 5/328 (1.5%). Exacerbating or aggravating factors similar to migraine triggers were more often reported with the MP than with the TTP in this sample. For the MP, vertigo or dizziness was reported by 19/260 (7.3%) and a visual aura by 21/260 (8.1%) with descriptions provided. The prognostic types were the following for all patients: persisting (refractory), 305/328 (93.0%); relapsing-remitting, 9/328 (2.7%); and remitting (self-limited), 14/328 (4.3%).

CONCLUSION

NDPH is typically of moderate to severe intensity often with migraine features without obvious seasonal or other cyclical variation. Most cases are refractory. 3.6% have a thunderclap onset often with a good response to treatment.

Schankin C, Straube A. Visual Phenomena Associated With Migraine and Their Differential Diagnosis

BACKGROUND

Visual phenomena are of many different kinds; their differential diagnosis is usually possible with directed history-taking. In this review, we describe common visual phenomena that must be distinguished from a migraine aura.

METHODS

This review is based on publications retrieved by a selective search in PubMed and the Web of Knowledge/Science, with special attention to the current classification of the International Headache Society and the recommendations of the German Migraine and Headache Society. The following search terms were used: "visual phenomena/phenomenon," "migraine aura," and "persistent/complication/ long-lasting/ongoing."

RESULTS

The most helpful questions for differential diagnosis are whether the symptoms are present in one eye only or in both, whether their onset was sudden or over minutes or days, and whether the phenomenon has occurred only once or repeatedly, or is persistently present. A visual aura associated with migraine must be distinguished, in rare cases, from an isolated epileptic aura, from cerebral/retinal ischemia, or from visual snow. Further differential diagnoses include a persisting perceptual disturbance after hallucinogen use (HPPD, "hallucinogen persisting perception disorder") and the Charles Bonnet syndrome (CBS); the latter arises as a consequence of severely impaired vision. Posterior reversible encephalopathy syndrome (PRES) is rare and generally reveals itself over its further course through the appearance of additional clinical manifestations. Primary ophthalmological causes can usually be readily identified and classified by ophthalmological examination.

CONCLUSION

Patients with visual phenomena typically consult physicians from various medical specialties. A correct differential diagnosis can be made based on the history if the physician views the symptoms in their overall context to determine the particular disease entity that is responsible.

May lamotrigine be an alternative to topiramate in the prevention of migraine with aura? Results of a retrospective study

Background

Evidence suggests that lamotrigine could be effective in reducing aura frequency and duration. However, studies comparing lamotrigine to other, first-line prophylactic agents solely involving patients suffering from migraine with aura are still lacking. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of lamotrigine and topiramate for the preventive treatment of migraine with aura.

Methods

Fifty-three patients suffering from migraine with aura treated with lamotrigine or topiramate for at least 6 months were included. Pre- and post-treatment clinical data regarding monthly aura frequency and duration, monthly migraine frequency, days of headache and rescue medication used per month were collected.

Results

Responder rates were similar between the two treatment groups at 6-month follow-up. Interestingly, responder rates for aura frequency and duration were higher in the lamotrigine group compared with the topiramate group (88% vs 79% and 73% vs 54%). Moreover, 50% of the lamotrigine-treated patients reported a complete disappearance of migraine aura compared with 37% of topiramate-treated patients. Side effects were more frequent in topiramate group compared with lamotrigine group (p=0.004).

Conclusions

Lamotrigine should be considered in clinical practice for the preventive treatment of migraine with aura especially for patients reporting prolonged aura and who do not respond, have contraindications or discontinue topiramate treatment due to side effects.