The efficacy of metoclopramide in the treatment of migraine headache

The effectiveness of parenteral agents for pain reduction in patients with migraine presenting to emergency settings: A systematic review and network analysis

OBJECTIVES

To assess the comparative effectiveness and safety of parenteral agents for pain reduction in patients with acute migraine.

BACKGROUND

Parenteral agents have been shown to be effective in treating acute migraine pain; however, the comparative effectiveness of different approaches is unclear.

METHODS

Nine electronic databases and gray literature sources were searched to identify randomized clinical trials assessing parenteral agents to treat acute migraine pain in emergency settings. Two independent reviewers completed study screening, data extraction, and Cochrane risk-of-bias assessment, with differences being resolved by adjudication. The protocol of the review was registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO; CRD42018100096).

RESULTS

A total of 97 unique studies were included, with most studies reporting a high or unclear risk of bias. Monotherapy, as well as combination therapy, successfully reduced pain scores prior to discharge. They also increased the proportion of patients reporting pain relief and being pain free. Across the pain outcomes assessed, combination therapy was one of the higher ranked approaches and provided robust improvements in pain outcomes, including lowering pain scores (mean difference -3.36, 95% confidence interval [CI] -4.64 to -2.08) and increasing the proportion of patients reporting pain relief (risk ratio [RR] 2.83, 95% CI 1.74-4.61). Neuroleptics and metoclopramide also ranked high in terms of the proportion of patients reporting pain relief (neuroleptics RR 2.76, 95% CI 2.12-3.60; metoclopramide RR 2.58, 95% CI 1.90-3.49) and being pain free before emergency department discharge (neuroleptics RR 4.8, 95% CI 3.61-6.49; metoclopramide RR 4.1, 95% CI 3.02-5.44). Most parenteral agents were associated with increased adverse events, particularly combination therapy and neuroleptics.

CONCLUSIONS

Various parenteral agents were found to provide effective pain relief. Considering the consistent improvements across various outcomes, combination therapy, as well as monotherapy of either metoclopramide or neuroleptics are recommended as first-line options for managing acute migraine pain. There are risks of adverse events, especially akathisia, following treatment with these agents. We recommend that a shared decision-making model be considered to effectively identify the best treatment option based on the patient's needs.

Dopaminergic Projections from the Hypothalamic A11 Nucleus to the Spinal Trigeminal Nucleus Are Involved in Bidirectional Migraine Modulation

Clinical imaging studies have revealed that the hypothalamus is activated in migraine patients prior to the onset of and during headache and have also shown that the hypothalamus has increased functional connectivity with the spinal trigeminal nucleus. The dopaminergic system of the hypothalamus plays an important role, and the dopamine-rich A11 nucleus may play an important role in migraine pathogenesis. We used intraperitoneal injections of glyceryl trinitrate to establish a model of acute migraine attack and chronicity in mice, which was verified by photophobia experiments and von Frey experiments. We explored the A11 nucleus and its downstream pathway using immunohistochemical staining and neuronal tracing techniques. During acute migraine attack and chronification, c-fos expression in GABAergic neurons in the A11 nucleus was significantly increased, and inhibition of DA neurons was achieved by binding to GABA A-type receptors on the surface of dopaminergic neurons in the A11 nucleus. However, the expression of tyrosine hydroxylase and glutamic acid decarboxylase proteins in the A11 nucleus of the hypothalamus did not change significantly. Specific destruction of dopaminergic neurons in the A11 nucleus of mice resulted in severe nociceptive sensitization and photophobic behavior. The expression levels of the D1 dopamine receptor and D2 dopamine receptor in the caudal part of the spinal trigeminal nucleus candalis of the chronic migraine model were increased. Skin nociceptive sensitization of mice was slowed by activation of the D2 dopamine receptor in SP5C, and activation of the D1 dopamine receptor reversed this behavioral change. GABAergic neurons in the A11 nucleus were activated and exerted postsynaptic inhibitory effects, which led to a decrease in the amount of DA secreted by the A11 nucleus in the spinal trigeminal nucleus candalis. The reduced DA bound preferentially to the D2 dopamine receptor, thus exerting a defensive effect against headache.

The efficacy and safety of metoclopramide in relieving acute migraine attacks compared with other anti-migraine drugs: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Many drugs are prescribed in relieving acute migraine attacks, we aim to compare metoclopramide with other antimigraine drugs.

METHODS

We searched online databases like PubMed, Cochrane Library, Scopus, and Web of Science till June 2022 for RCTs that compared metoclopramide alone with placebo or active drugs. The main outcomes were the mean change in headache score and complete headache relief. The secondary outcomes were the rescue medications need, side effects, nausea and recurrence rate. We qualitatively reviewed the outcomes. Then, we performed the network meta-analyses (NMAs) when it was possible. which were done by the Frequentist method using the MetaInsight online software.

RESULTS

Sixteen studies were included with a total of 1934 patients: 826 received metoclopramide, 302 received placebo, and 806 received other active drugs. Metoclopramide was effective in reducing headache outcomes even for 24 h. The intravenous route was the most chosen route in the included studies and showed significant positive results regarding headache outcomes; however, the best route whether intramuscular, intravenous, or suppository was not compared in the previous studies. Also, both 10 and 20 mg doses of metoclopramide were effective in improving headache outcomes; however, there was no direct comparison between both doses and the 10 mg dose was the most frequently used dosage. In NMA of headache change after 30 min or 1 h, metoclopramide effect came after granisetron, ketorolac, chlorpromazine, and Dexketoprofen trometamol. Only granisetron's effect was significantly higher than metoclopramide's effect which was only significantly higher than placebo and sumatriptan. In headache-free symptoms, only prochlorperazine was non-significantly higher than metoclopramide which was higher than other medications and showed significantly higher effects only with placebo. In rescue medication, metoclopramide's effect was only non-significantly lower than prochlorperazine and chlorpromazine while its effect was higher than other drugs and showed higher significant effects only than placebo and valproate. In the recurrence rate, studies showed no significant difference between metoclopramide and other drugs. Metoclopramide significantly decreased nausea more than the placebo. Regarding side effects, metoclopramide showed a lower incidence of mild side effects than pethidine and chlorpromazine and showed a higher incidence of mild side effects than placebo, dexamethasone, and ketorolac. The reported extrapyramidal symptoms with metoclopramide were dystonia or akathisia.

CONCLUSION

A dose of 10 mg IV Metoclopramide was effective in relieving migraine attacks with minimal side effects. Compared to other active drugs, it only showed a lower significant effect compared with granisetron regarding headache change while it showed significantly higher effects only with placebo in both rescue medication needs and headache-free symptoms and valproate in only rescue medication need. Also, it significantly decreased headache scores more than placebo and sumatriptan. However, more studies are needed to support our results.

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.

The migraineur’s brain networks: Continuous resting state fMRI over 30 days

Objective

The aim of the current study was to identify typical alterations in resting state connectivity within different stages of the migraine cycle and to thus explore task-free mechanisms of headache attack generation in migraineurs.

Background

Recent evidence in migraine pathophysiology suggests that hours and even days before headache certain changes in brain activity take place, ultimately leading to an attack. Here, we investigate changes before headache onset using resting state functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI).

Methods

Nine episodic migraineurs underwent daily resting state functional magnetic resonance imaging for a minimum period of 30 consecutive days, leading to a cumulative number of 282 total days scanned. Thus, data from 15 spontaneous headache attacks were acquired. This allows analysing not only the ictal and the interictal phase of migraine but also the preictal phase. ROI-to-ROI (region of interest) and ROI-to-voxel connectivity was calculated over the migraine cycle.

Results

Within the ROI-to-ROI analysis, the right nucleus accumbens showed enhanced functional connectivity to the left amygdala, hippocampus and gyrus parahippocampalis in the preictal phase compared to the interictal phase. ROI-to-voxel connectivity of the right accumbens with the dorsal rostral pons was enhanced during the preictal phase compared to interictally. Regarding custom defined ROIs, the dorsal pons was ictally functionally more strongly coupled to the hypothalamic area than interictally.

Conclusions

This unique data set suggests that particularly connectivity changes in dopaminergic centres and between the dorsal pons and the hypothalamus are important within migraine attack generation and sustainment.

Emergency Department and Inpatient Management of Headache in Adults

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This article reviews treatment options for patients presenting with headache in the emergency department (ED) and for inpatients, including red flags and status migrainosus (SM).

RECENT FINDINGS

Most patients presenting with headache in the ED will have migraine, but red flags must be reviewed to rule out secondary headaches. SM refractory to home treatment is a common reason for ED presentation or inpatient admission, but high-quality treatment evidence is lacking. Common treatments include intravenous fluids, anti-dopaminergic agents with diphenhydramine, steroids, divalproex, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, intravenous dihydroergotamine, and nerve blocks. Other therapies (e.g., ketamine and lidocaine) are used with limited or inconsistent evidence. There is evidence for inpatient behavioral management therapy. This article details red flags to review in the workup of headache presentation in the ED and provides a step-wise approach to ED and inpatient management. However, more studies are needed to better optimize care.

Adherence to guidelines of treatment of non-traumatic headache in the emergency department

To evaluate therapies employed in patients presenting to the emergency department (ED) with a chief complaint of non-traumatic headache to check if guidelines are followed. A 6-month retrospective analysis of the ED records of all the patients who referred to the ED of the University Hospital of Trieste for non-traumatic headache was performed. Out of 37.335 admissions, 336 patients were selected (0.9%). Diagnosis at discharge was primary headache (25.6%), secondary headache (40.5%), and headache "not otherwise specified" (33.9%). One-hundred-ninety-three patients were treated in mono- (51.8%) or poly-therapy (48.2%), with NSAIDs (46.5%), benzodiazepines (13.4%), antiemetics (10.7%), analgesics (8.3%), opioids (1.6%), triptans (1.5%), and other drugs (17.7%). NSAIDs, particularly ketorolac, are the class of drugs most often prescribed in ED, independently of the discharge diagnosis. Metoclopramide is rarely used in monotherapy (4%), but it is the drug most frequently used in association with NSAIDs (19.3%). Only two migraineurs received triptans. Mean time spent in ED was 231 ± 130 min, which was significantly longer in patients who received treatment (272 ± 141 vs. 177 ± 122 min; p = 0.003). No drugs had any side effects. In accordance with the current guidelines, NSAIDs monotherapy or in association with antiemetics were the drugs most often prescribed in ED. Opioids were rarely used probably because of potential sedative side effects. Only very few patients received triptans. Special attention should be drawn also in ED to apply the International Classification of Headache Disorders criteria, which can lead to clarify the diagnosis and receive the specific treatment.

Out-of-hospital assessment and treatment of adults with atraumatic headache

OBJECTIVE

Little is known about the presentation or management of patients with headache in the out-of-hospital setting. Our primary objective is to describe the out-of-hospital assessment and treatment of adults with benign headache. We also describe meaningful pain reduction stratified by commonly administered medications.

METHODS

This retrospective evaluation was conducted using data from a large national cohort. We included all 911 responses by paramedics for patients 18 and older with headache. We excluded patients with trauma, fever, suspected alcohol/drug use, or who received medications suggestive of an alternate condition. We presented our findings with descriptive statistics.

RESULTS

Of the 5,977,612 emergency responses, 1.1% (66,235) had a provider-documented primary impression of headache or migraine and 52.5% (34,763) met inclusion criteria. An initial pain score was recorded for 73.5% (25,544) of patients, and 58.5% (14,948) of these patients had multiple pain scores documented. Of the patients with multiple pain scores documented, 53.8% (8037) of patients had an initial pain score >5. Of these, 7.1% (573) were administered any medication. Among patients receiving a single medication, Fentanyl was the most commonly administered (32.1%, 126). As a group, opioids were the most commonly administered class of drugs (38.9%, 153) and were associated with the largest proportion of clinically significant pain reduction (69.3%, 106). Dopamine antagonists were given least frequently (9.9%, 39) but had the second largest proportion of pain reduction (43.6%, 17).

CONCLUSION

Out-of-hospital pain scores were documented infrequently and less than one in five patients with initial pain scores >5 received medication. Additionally, adherence to evidence-based guidelines was infrequent.

Hypothalamic regulation of headache and migraine

BACKGROUND

The clinical picture, but also neuroimaging findings, suggested the brainstem and midbrain structures as possible driving or generating structures in migraine.

FINDINGS

This has been intensely discussed in the last decades and the advent of modern imaging studies refined the involvement of rostral parts of the pons in acute migraine attacks, but more importantly suggested a predominant role of the hypothalamus and alterations in hypothalamic functional connectivity shortly before the beginning of migraine headaches. This was shown in the NO-triggered and also in the preictal stage of native human migraine attacks. Another headache type that is clinically even more suggestive of hypothalamic involvement is cluster headache, and indeed a structure in close proximity to the hypothalamus has been identified to play a crucial role in attack generation.

CONCLUSION

It is very likely that spontaneous oscillations of complex networks involving the hypothalamus, brainstem, and dopaminergic networks lead to changes in susceptibility thresholds that ultimately start but also terminate headache attacks. We will review clinical and neuroscience evidence that puts the hypothalamus in the center of scientific attention when attack generation is discussed.

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.

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.

Effects of prophylactic anticholinergic medications to decrease extrapyramidal side effects in patients taking acute antiemetic drugs: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effectiveness of prophylactic anticholinergic medications in reducing extrapyramidal symptoms in patients taking acute antiemetics with a dopamine D2 receptor antagonist effect.

METHODS

Systematic searches of all published studies through March 2017 were identified from PubMed, Cochrane library, Embase, Web of Science and Scopus. Only randomised controlled trials of patients receiving dopamine D2 antagonist antiemetic therapy for acute migraine in which an anticholinergic or placebo was compared were included. Pooled ORs were calculated for incidence of extrapyramidal symptoms and sedation.

RESULTS

Four placebo-controlled randomised controlled trials consisting of 737 patients met the inclusion criteria for our meta-analysis. The effect of diphenhydramine differed depending on the method of administration of the antiemetic. When the antiemetic was delivered as a 2 min antiemetic bolus, the odds of extrapyramidal symptoms were significantly reduced in the diphenhydramine group compared with placebo (OR 0.42; 95% CI 0.22 to 0.81; P=0.01). However, when the antiemetic was given as a 15 min infusion, there was no significant difference in extrapyramidal symptoms with or without diphenhydramine (OR 1.06; 95% CI 0.58 to 1.91; P=0.85). The lowest incidence of extrapyramidal symptoms was observed in patients receiving a 15 min antiemetic infusion without diphenhydramine prophylaxis (9.8%). In two trials including 351 patients that dichotomously reported sedation scales, diphenhydramine had significantly higher rates of sedation (31.6%vs19.2%, OR 2.01, 95% CI 1.21 to 3.33; P=0.007).

CONCLUSION

Prophylactic diphenhydramine reduces extrapyramidal symptoms in patients receiving bolus antiemetic therapy with a dopamine D2 antagonist effect, but not when it is given as an infusion. Because of significantly greater sedation with diphenhydramine, the most effective strategy is to administer the D2 antagonist antiemetic as a 15 min infusion without prophylaxis.

A Randomized Prospective Placebo-Controlled Study of Intravenous Magnesium Sulphate vs. Metoclopramide in the Management of Acute Migraine Attacks in the Emergency Department

The objective of this randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind study was to determine the effectiveness of intravenous magnesium sulphate and intravenous metoclopramide in the treatment of acute migraine attacks in the Emergency Department when compared with placebo. Adult patients who presented to the Emergency Department with a headache that met International Headache Society (IHS) criteria for acute migraine were infused with either 10 mg of intravenous metoclopramide, 2 g of intravenous magnesium sulphate or normal saline over 10 min. At 0, 15, and 30 min, patients were asked to rate their pain on a standard visual analogue scale. At 30 min, patients were asked in a standard manner about the need for rescue medication. Adverse affects were also recorded. Patients were followed up by telephone within 24 h for any recurrence after discharge. The primary endpoint of the study was the difference in pain relief between the groups at 30 min. Of the 120 patients who met IHS criteria, seven were excluded from the study due to insufficient data. The number of patients, gender, age and initial visual analogue scale (VAS) scores were comparable between groups. Each group experienced more than a 25-mm improvement in VAS score at 30 min. However, there was no significant difference detected in the mean changes in VAS scores for pain. The rescue medication requirement was higher in the placebo group. The recurrence rate in 24 h was similar between the groups. Although patients receiving placebo required rescue medication more than the others, metoclopramide and magnesium have an analgesic effect similar to placebo in migraine attacks.

Critical reappraisal of intravenous metoclopramide in migraine attack: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Migraine is one of the most common causes of headache presentations to emergency departments (EDs). Patients with migraine attack need rapid pain relief rather than diagnostic modalities. Metoclopramide, a dopamine antagonist with a primary use of antiemetic, has been used commonly in ceasing migraine attack. An earlier meta-analysis favors metoclopramide over placebo but includes studies with significant methodological errors and heterogeneity. The present article aimed to review the literature to reveal studies comparing metoclopramide to either placebo or active comparators. A literature search including PubMed, Cochrane Database, and Google Scholar was performed by using the evidence-based process for determining the study quality. Although the studies comparing parenteral metoclopramide to placebo in ceasing migraine headache favor metoclopramide to placebo and lower rates of rescue drug need, however, they lack high methodological quality even to perform a meta-analysis. Meanwhile, the effect of metoclopramide in ceasing migraine headache is also comparable to active comparators. It seems reasonable to use metoclopramide in migraine attacks in EDs according to the current literature. However, further studies with high methodological quality are needed to reveal whether and how much metoclopramide is superior to placebo.

Why does vomiting stop a migraine attack?

Migraine is commonly associated with nausea and vomiting, though, interestingly, vomiting has also been reported by some patients to be therapeutic, and may actually stop a migraine attack. In this review, we will first discuss the epidemiology of nausea and vomiting in migraine. Further, we will briefly review the connections between the enteric nervous system, the autonomic nervous system, and the central nervous system as they pertain to understanding the question of "Why does vomiting stop a migraine attack?"

Commonly used gastrointestinal drugs

This chapter reviews the spectrum and mechanisms of neurologic adverse effects of commonly used gastrointestinal drugs including antiemetics, promotility drugs, laxatives, antimotility drugs, and drugs for acid-related disorders. The commonly used gastrointestinal drugs as a group are considered safe and are widely used. A range of neurologic complications are reported following use of various gastrointestinal drugs. Acute neurotoxicities, including transient akathisias, oculogyric crisis, delirium, seizures, and strokes, can develop after use of certain gastrointestinal medications, while disabling and pervasive tardive syndromes are described following long-term and often unsupervised use of phenothiazines, metoclopramide, and other drugs. In rare instances, some of the antiemetics can precipitate life-threatening extrapyramidal reactions, neuroleptic malignant syndrome, or serotonin syndrome. In contrast, concerns about the cardiovascular toxicity of drugs such as cisapride and tegaserod have been grave enough to lead to their withdrawal from many world markets. Awareness and recognition of the neurotoxicity of gastrointestinal drugs is essential to help weigh the benefit of their use against possible adverse effects, even if uncommon. Furthermore, as far as possible, drugs such as metoclopramide and others that can lead to tardive dyskinesias should be used for as short time as possible, with close clinical monitoring and patient education.

Acute Treatment of Migraine

Migraine is one of the most frequent disabling neurological conditions with a major impact on the patient's quality of life. Migraine has been described as a chronic disorder that characterized with attacks. Attacks are characterized by moderate-severe, often unilateral, pulsating headache attacks, typically lasting 4 to 72 hours. Migraine remains underdiagnosed and undertreated despite advances in the understanding of its pathophysiology. This article reviews management of migraine acute pharmacological treatment. Currently, for the acute treatment of migraine attacks, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and triptans (serotonin 5HT1B/1D receptor agonists) are recommended. Before intake of NSAID and triptans, metoclopramide or domperidone is useful. In very severe attacks, subcutaneous sumatriptan is first choice. The patient should be treated early in the attack, use an adequate dose and formulation of a medication. Ideally, acute therapy should be restricted to no more than 2 to 3 days per week to avoid medication overuse.

Ibuprofen with or without an antiemetic for acute migraine headaches in adults

BACKGROUND

This is an updated version of the original review published in Issue 10, 2010 (Rabbie 2010). Migraine is a common, disabling condition and a burden for the individual, health services and society. Many sufferers do not seek professional help, relying instead on over-the-counter analgesics. Co-therapy with an antiemetic should help to reduce symptoms commonly associated with migraine headaches.

OBJECTIVES

To determine efficacy and tolerability of ibuprofen, alone or in combination with an antiemetic, compared to placebo and other active interventions in the treatment of acute migraine headaches in adults.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Oxford Pain Relief Database, ClinicalTrials.gov, and reference lists for studies through 22 April 2010 for the original review and to 14 February 2013 for the update.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised, double-blind, placebo- or active-controlled studies using self-administered ibuprofen to treat a migraine headache episode, with at least 10 participants per treatment arm.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. Numbers of participants achieving each outcome were used to calculate relative risk and number needed to treat (NNT) or harm (NNH) compared to placebo or other active treatment.

MAIN RESULTS

No new studies were found for this update. Nine included studies (4373 participants, 5223 attacks) compared ibuprofen with placebo or other active comparators; none combined ibuprofen with a self-administered antiemetic. All studies treated attacks with single doses of medication. For ibuprofen 400 mg versus placebo, NNTs for 2-hour pain-free (26% versus 12% with placebo), 2-hour headache relief (57% versus 25%) and 24-hour sustained headache relief (45% versus 19%) were 7.2, 3.2 and 4.0, respectively. For ibuprofen 200 mg versus placebo, NNTs for 2-hour pain-free (20% versus 10%) and 2-hour headache relief (52% versus 37%) were 9.7 and 6.3, respectively. The higher dose was significantly better than the lower dose for 2-hour headache relief. Soluble formulations of ibuprofen 400 mg were better than standard tablets for 1-hour, but not 2-hour headache relief.Similar numbers of participants experienced adverse events, which were mostly mild and transient, with ibuprofen and placebo.Ibuprofen 400 mg did not differ from rofecoxib 25 mg for 2-hour headache relief or 24-hour headache relief.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found no new studies since the last version of this review. Ibuprofen is an effective treatment for acute migraine headaches, providing pain relief in about half of sufferers, but complete relief from pain and associated symptoms for only a minority. NNTs for all efficacy outcomes were better with 400 mg than 200 mg in comparisons with placebo, and soluble formulations provided more rapid relief. Adverse events were mostly mild and transient, occurring at the same rate as with placebo.

Rescue therapy for acute migraine, part 3: opioids, NSAIDs, steroids, and post-discharge medications

OBJECTIVE

The final section of this 3-part review analyzes published reports involving the acute treatment of migraine with opioids, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), and steroids in the emergency department (ED), urgent care, and headache clinic settings, as well as post-discharge medications. In the Conclusion, there is a general discussion of all the therapies presented in the 3 sections.

METHOD

Using the terms ("migraine" AND "emergency") AND ("therapy" OR "treatment"), the author searched MEDLINE for reports from ED and urgent care settings that involved all routes of medication delivery. Reports from headache clinic settings were included only if medications were delivered by a parenteral route.

RESULTS

Seventy-five reports were identified that compared the efficacy and safety of multiple acute migraine medications for rescue. Of the medications reviewed in Part 3, opioids, NSAIDs, and steroids all demonstrated some effectiveness. When used alone, nalbuphine and metamizole were superior to placebo. NSAIDs were inferior to the combination of metoclopramide and diphenhydramine. Meperidine was arguably equivalent when compared with ketorolac and dihydroergotamine (DHE) but was inferior to chlorpromazine and equivalent to the other dopamine antagonists. Steroids afford some protection against headache recurrence after the patient leaves the treatment center.

CONCLUSIONS

All 3 opioids most frequently studied - meperidine, tramadol, and nalbuphine - were superior to placebo in relieving migraine pain, although meperidine combined with promethazine was not. Opioid side effects included dizziness, sedation, and nausea. With ketorolac being the most frequently studied drug in the class, NSAIDs were generally well tolerated, and they may provide benefit even when given late in the migraine attack. The rate of headache recurrence within 24-72 hours after discharge from the ED can be greater than 50%. Corticosteroids can be useful in reducing headache recurrence after discharge. As discussed in Parts 1, 2, and 3, there are effective medications for provider-administered "rescue" in all the classes discussed. Prochlorperazine and metoclopramide are the most frequently studied of the anti-migraine medications in the emergent setting, and their effectiveness is superior to placebo. Prochlorperazine is superior or equivalent to all other classes of medications in migraine pain relief. Although there are fewer studies involving sumatriptan and DHE, relatively "migraine-specific" medications, they appear to be equivalent to the dopamine antagonists for migraine pain relief. Lack of comparisons with placebo and the frequent use of combinations of medications in treatment arms complicate the comparison of single agents to one another. When used alone, prochlorperazine, promethazine, metoclopramide, nalbuphine, and metamizole were superior to placebo. Droperidol and prochlorperazine were superior or equal in efficacy to all other treatments, although they also are more likely to produce side effects that are difficult for a patient to tolerate (especially akathisia). Metoclopramide was equivalent to prochlorperazine, and, when combined with diphenhydramine, was superior in efficacy to triptans and NSAIDs. Meperidine was arguably equivalent when compared with ketorolac and DHE but was inferior to chlorpromazine and equivalent to the other neuroleptics. Sumatriptan was inferior or equivalent to the neuroleptics and equivalent to DHE when only paired comparisons were considered. The overall percentage of patients with pain relief after taking sumatriptan was equivalent to that observed with droperidol or prochlorperazine.

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.

Overview of migraine treatment

SUMMARY Migraine is ranked as the 19th top cause of disability worldwide by WHO. Despite advancements in migraine-specific acute treatment, only a minority of patients utilize these medications. Specific pharmacologic treatments consist of the ergot alkaloids and triptans (serotonin 5-HT1B/1D receptor agonists). Both classes are regarded as relatively safe and effective; however, there is a greater concern for vasoconstrictive effects with the ergots, which limits their use. Triptans transformed migraine therapy, setting in motion revolutionary research that heightened our understanding of migraine mechanisms. However, one in three migraineurs may be triptan nonresponders and there is a group of migraine patients that remains ‘refractory’ to conventional pharmacologic migraine therapy. This article discusses the approach to migraine management, reviews currently available acute and preventive pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic treatment options for migraine headache, as well as briefly focuses on novel and upcoming medicines presently under investigation.

Headache in pregnancy: a nuisance or a new sense?

Headache is a very commonly encountered symptom in pregnancy and is usually due to primary headache disorders which are benign in nature. It can however be quite debilitating for some women who may need therapeutic treatment of which there are several options safe to use in pregnancy. It is equally important though to recognise that headache may be a sign of serious underlying pathology. This paper aims to provide a clinically useful guidance for differentiation between primary and secondary headaches in pregnancy. The primary headache disorders and their management in pregnancy are explored in depth with brief overviews of the causes for secondary headaches and their further investigation and management.

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

STUDY OBJECTIVE

Intravenous metoclopramide is effective as primary therapy for acute migraine, but the optimal dose of this medication is not yet known. The objective of this study is to compare the efficacy and safety of 3 different doses of intravenous metoclopramide for the treatment of acute migraine.

METHODS

This was a randomized, double-blind, dose-finding study conducted on patients who presented to our emergency department (ED) meeting International Classification of Headache Disorders criteria for migraine without aura. We randomized patients to 10, 20, or 40 mg of intravenous metoclopramide. We coadministered diphenhydramine to all patients to prevent extrapyramidal adverse effects. The primary outcome was improvement in pain on an 11-point numeric rating scale at 1 hour. Secondary outcomes included sustained pain freedom at 48 hours and adverse effects.

RESULTS

In this study, 356 patients were randomized. Baseline demographics and headache features were comparable among the groups. At 1 hour, those who received 10 mg of intravenous metoclopramide improved by a mean of 4.7 numeric rating scale points (95% confidence interval [CI] 4.2 to 5.2 points); those who received 20 mg improved by 4.9 points (95% CI 4.4 to 5.4 points), and those who received 40 mg improved by 5.3 points (95% CI 4.8 to 5.9 points). Rates of 48-hour sustained pain freedom in the 10-, 20-, and 40-mg groups were 16% (95% CI 10% to 24%), 20% (95% CI 14% to 28%), and 21% (95% CI 15% to 29%), respectively. The most commonly occurring adverse event was drowsiness, which impaired function in 17% (95% CI 13% to 21%) of the overall study population. Akathisia developed in 33 patients. Both drowsiness and akathisia were evenly distributed across the 3 arms of the study. One month later, no patient had developed tardive dyskinesia.

CONCLUSION

Twenty milligrams or 40 mg of metoclopramide is no better for acute migraine than 10 mg of metoclopramide.

Ibuprofen with or without an antiemetic for acute migraine headaches in adults

BACKGROUND

Migraine is a common, disabling condition and a burden for the individual, health services and society. Many sufferers do not seek professional help, relying instead on over-the-counter analgesics. Co-therapy with an antiemetic should help to reduce symptoms commonly associated with migraine headaches.

OBJECTIVES

To determine efficacy and tolerability of ibuprofen, alone or in combination with an antiemetic, compared to placebo and other active interventions in the treatment of acute migraine headaches in adults.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched Cochrane CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Oxford Pain Relief Database for studies through 22 April 2010.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised, double-blind, placebo- or active-controlled studies using self-administered ibuprofen to treat a migraine headache episode, with at least 10 participants per treatment arm.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. Numbers of participants achieving each outcome were used to calculate relative risk and number needed to treat (NNT) or harm (NNH) compared to placebo or other active treatment.

MAIN RESULTS

Nine studies (4373 participants, 5223 attacks) compared ibuprofen with placebo or other active comparators; none combined ibuprofen with a self-administered antiemetic. All studies treated attacks with single doses of medication. For ibuprofen 400 mg versus placebo, NNTs for 2-hour pain-free (26% versus 12% with placebo), 2-hour headache relief (57% versus 25%) and 24-hour sustained headache relief (45% versus 19%) were 7.2, 3.2 and 4.0, respectively. For ibuprofen 200 mg versus placebo, NNTs for 2-hour pain-free (20% versus 10%) and 2-hour headache relief (52% versus 37%) were 9.7 and 6.3, respectively. The higher dose was significantly better for 2-hour headache relief than the lower dose. Soluble formulations of ibuprofen 400 mg were better than standard tablets for 1-hour, but not 2-hour headache relief.Associated symptoms of nausea, vomiting, photophobia and phonophobia and functional disability were reduced within 2 hours, and fewer participants used rescue medication with ibuprofen compared with placebo. Similar numbers of participants experienced adverse events, which were mostly mild and transient.Ibuprofen 400 mg did not differ from rofecoxib 25 mg for 2-hour headache relief, 24-hour headache relief or use of rescue medication.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Ibuprofen is an effective treatment for acute migraine headaches, providing pain relief in about half of sufferers, but complete relief from pain and associated symptoms for only a minority. NNTs for all efficacy outcomes were better with 400 mg than 200 mg in comparisons with placebo, and soluble formulations provided more rapid relief. Adverse events were mostly mild and transient, occurring at the same rate as with placebo.

Effectiveness of prokinetic agents against diseases external to the gastrointestinal tract

Prokinetic agents are effective not only for disease of the gastrointestinal (GI) tract but also for those external to the GI tract such as the central nervous system, and the respiratory, urologic, and metabolic organs. This article reviews the effectiveness of prokinetic agents against diseases external to the GI tract. Studies were identified by computerized and manual searches of the available literature. A Medline search was performed (1975-July, 2008) using the following medical subject headings: prokinetic agent, metoclopramide, domperidone, trimebutine, cisapride, itopride, mosapride, tegaserod, and human. The identified diseases for which prokinetic agents may be effective are various: bronchial asthma, chronic cough, hiccup, spontaneous bacterial peritonitis, cholelithiasis, diabetes mellitus, acute migraine, Parkinson's disease, anorexia nervosa, Tourette's disorder, urologic sequelae of spinal cord injury and of radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer, laryngeal dysfunction and so on. These agents are also useful for prevention of aspiration pneumonia during anesthesia, and in tube-fed patients. Prokinetic agents should be a valuable addition to our currently limited pharmacological armamentarium not only for functional bowel disease, but also for diseases external to the GI tract.

Midazolam vs. diphenhydramine for the treatment of metoclopramide-induced akathisia: a randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effects of midazolam, which is a fast and short-acting benzodiazepine, and diphenhydramine, which is a widely used anticholinergic agent, in clinical practice for the treatment of metoclopramide-induced akathisia.

METHODS

All adults older than 17 years given metoclopramide for nausea and vomiting or for headache and who had akathisia were eligible for this clinical, randomized, double-blind trial. Patients were randomized to receive diphenhydramine or midazolam. Subjective, objective, and total akathisia scores and modified Ramsay Sedation Scale scores were recorded. Repeated-measures analysis of variance was used to compare the efficacy and side effects of the medications.

RESULTS

Forty-one (73.3%) of the 56 enrolled patients were women. The mean (+/-SD) age was 39.9 (+/-15.7) years in the diphenhydramine group and 40.9 (+/-16.2) years in the midazolam group. Mean subjective, objective, and total akathisia scores in the first 5 minutes declined considerably in the midazolam group compared with the diphenhydramine group (p < 0.001). However, the mean Ramsay Sedation Scale score in the first 15 minutes increased significantly in the midazolam group compared with the diphenhydramine group (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Midazolam can correct the symptoms of metoclopramide-induced akathisia faster than diphenhydramine, but it causes more sedation.

Relief from migraine headache with aripiprazole treatment

There have been many reports of the association between migraine headaches and psychiatric disorders as well as of the utility of dopamine antagonists in the treatment of migraine headache. There is increasing evidence to support the activation of dopaminergic systems as a primary component of migraine pathogenesis. This report documents 3 cases of female migraineurs who received the dopamine modulator aripiprazole for treatment of co-occurring psychiatric disorders and experienced a decrease in migraine frequency and severity. A hypothesis as to the mechanism of action of dopamine regulation in migraine treatment is discussed.

EFNS guideline on the drug treatment of migraine - report of an EFNS task force

Migraine is one of the most frequent disabling neurological conditions with a major impact on the patients' quality of life. To give evidence-based or expert recommendations for the different drug treatment procedures of the different migraine syndromes based on a literature search and an consensus in an expert panel. All available medical reference systems were screened for all kinds of clinical studies on migraine with and without aura and on migraine-like syndromes. The findings in these studies were evaluated according to the recommendations of the EFNS resulting in level A,B, or C recommendations and good practice points. For the acute treatment of migraine attacks, oral non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and triptans are recommended. The administration should follow the concept of stratified treatment. Before intake of NSAIDs and triptans, oral metoclopramide or domperidon is recommended. In very severe attacks, intravenous acetylsalicylic acid or subcutaneous sumatriptan are drugs of first choice. A status migrainosus can probably be treated by steroids. For the prophylaxis of migraine, betablockers (propranolol and metoprolol), flunarizine, valproic acid, and topiramate are drugs of first choice. Drugs of second choice for migraine prophylaxis are amitriptyline, naproxen, petasites, and bisoprolol.

A clinical trial of trimethobenzamide/diphenhydramine versus sumatriptan for acute migraines

BACKGROUND

Although various classes of medication are used to treat acute migraine in the emergency department (ED), no treatment offers complete pain relief without side effects or recurrence of headache. Consequently, even though several antiemetic medications as well as SQ sumatriptan have demonstrated efficacy and tolerability for the ED treatment of migraine, there remains a need for more effective parenteral therapies. Open-label studies suggest that the combination of trimethobenzamide and diphenhydramine (TMB/DPH) may provide effective relief in a high proportion of migraineurs.

OBJECTIVE

To test the hypothesis that ED patients with acute migraine, given intramuscular TMB/DPH, would have a larger reduction in their pain scores than patients given SQ sumatriptan.

METHODS

This was an ED-based, randomized, double-blind, "double-dummy" clinical trial comparing 2 parenteral treatments for acute migraine headaches. Subjects received a combination of TMB 200 mg and DPH 25 mg as a single intramuscular injection or 6 mg of SQ sumatriptan. Pain scores, disability scores, associated symptoms, and adverse effects were assessed for 2 hours in the ED and by telephone 24 hours after medication administration. The primary outcome was the between-group difference in reduction of pain intensity as measured by a validated numerical rating scale 2 hours after medication administration. This study was designed to detect superiority of TMB/DPH; therefore, a 1-tailed t-test was used. An interim analysis was planned to terminate the trial if predetermined endpoints in the primary outcome variable were reached.

RESULTS

The trial was stopped by the data monitoring committee after 40 subjects were enrolled because a substantial benefit in the primary outcome was found favoring sumatriptan. Baseline pain scores were comparable between the 2 groups. By 2 hours, sumatriptan subjects had improved by a mean of 6.1 and the TMB/DPH subjects had improved by a mean of 4.4 (95% CI for difference of 1.7: -0.1 to 3.4). By 24 hours after medication administration, sumatriptan subjects had a mean improvement from baseline of 4.9 as compared to 5.3 for TMB (95% CI for difference of -0.4: -2.4 to 1.6). The need for rescue medication was comparable between the groups. No serious or frequent adverse effects were noted in either group.

CONCLUSIONS

SQ sumatriptan is probably superior to TMB/DPH for treating the pain of acute migraine at 2 hours. However, TMB/DPH was well-tolerated, efficacious, and relieved pain comparably to sumatriptan at 24 hours. TMB/DPH might have a role in select populations in which sumatriptan is contraindicated or likely to be ineffective.

Migraine: a review and future directions for treatment

Migraine is a chronic, neurological disorder generally manifesting itself in attacks with severe headache, nausea and an increased reactivity to sensory stimuli. A low migraine threshold is set by genetic factors, although the phenotype also modulates the manifestations. The 1-year prevalence is approximately 13% and is higher among women. Patients usually experience neuropsychological dysfunction, and sometimes also reversible focal neurological symptoms. The trajectories of the characteristic symptoms of acute migraine usually follow a similar time course, indicating a reciprocal underlying mechanism. A central nervous system hyperexcitability has been demonstrated in neurophysiological studies. The dibilitating effects of migraine are not confined to the attacks per se. Many individuals do not recover completely between the attacks and most report a negative impact on the most important life domains, and an interest in testing other treatments. Young persons have a higher frequency of attacks. Acute treatment should routinely be initiated with an analgesic plus a prokinetic anti-emetic. Triptans must not be provided early during the attack to ensure their efficacy. The natural course of attacks is commonly only temporarily altered by acute treatment. Non-pharmacological treatment and drugs may be equally viable in prophylaxis for migraine. In more complicated cases, conjoint therapy should be considered. New strategies to improve adherence with existing therapeutic regimens might yield greater benefits than will new pharmacological agents.

Rate of metoclopramide infusion affects the severity and incidence of akathisia

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the effect of the rate of metoclopramide infusion on akathisia incidence, severity, onset of symptoms, and duration in patients with headache, and/or nausea/vomiting in the emergency department (ED) setting.

METHODS

Prospective, double blind, randomised clinical study comparing two rates of intravenous infusion of metoclopramide over a period of six months at a tertiary university hospital ED.

RESULTS

A total of 300 patients presented to the ED met the inclusion criteria: 151 (50.3%) with nausea/vomiting, 108 (36%) with headache, and 41 (13.7%) with headache and nausea/vomiting. Of these, 154 patients (51.3%) were given 10 mg metoclopramide as a slow intravenous infusion over 15 minutes plus placebo (SIG group) and 146 patients were given 10 mg metoclopramide intravenous bolus infusion over two minutes plus placebo (BIG group). Nine of the 154 patients in the SIG group (5.8%) had akathisia compared with 36/146 patients (24.7%) in the BIG group (p < 0.001, OR 5.273, 95% CI 2.43 to 11.403). Severe akathisia were observed in 13/45 (28.8%). The incidence of severe akathisia was significantly higher in the BIG group (30.5%; 11/36) than in the SIG group (22.2%; 2/9), p = 0.009. Metoclopramide successfully relieved the presenting symptom(s) of 137/146 (90.8%) and 139/154 (90.2%) patients in the BIG and SIG groups, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

This study suggests that slowing the rate of infusion of metoclopramide is an effective strategy for reducing the incidence of akathisia in patients with headache, and/or nausea/vomiting in ED.

Painful Dilemmas: An Evidence-based Look at Challenging Clinical Scenarios

Difficult clinical decisions are a part of every emergency practitioner's life. Dealing with difficult patients and recalcitrant consultants is seldom enjoyable, but can be made more palatable through the use of some of the clinical strategies contained in this article. Knowledge of the current best evidence and a willingness to discard outdated practice ideas will help ensure that emergency practitioners continue to provide state-of-the-art medical care. Expressions of care, concern, and respect for patients' problems, and development of a therapeutic alliance with these patients will maximize patient, and ultimately physician, satisfaction.

Neuroleptics in Headache

OBJECTIVES

To review the mechanism of action of neuroleptics, the evidence for their efficacy, and their clinical use in headache treatment.

BACKGROUND

Neuroleptics and antiemetics have long been used for headache treatment; however, they have not been widely utilized because of general unfamiliarity with them and concerns about their adverse events. With the recent advent of the atypical neuroleptics and their improved adverse event profile, our armamentarium for headache treatment has expanded. In this review, we explore the mechanism of action of these classes of drugs, their adverse events, and the evidence for their efficacy. We also detail our experience with the different drugs and how we use them as both acute and preventive headache therapy.

DESIGN

A review of published literature was obtained through a MEDLINE search on the use of neuroleptics in headache therapy.

CONCLUSION

Neuroleptics have widespread evidence supporting their use in headache treatment and present an important part of the armaterium against headache.

Prospective, randomised, double blind, controlled comparison of metoclopramide and pethidine in the emergency treatment of acute primary vascular and tension type headache episodes

STUDY OBJECTIVE

To compare analgesic effects of metoclopramide (MTP), pethidine (PET), and combination of metoclopramide-pethidine (M-PET) in the treatment of adult patients with acute primary vascular and tension type headache admitted in the emergency department (ED).

METHODS

All consecutive adult patients admitted into a university hospital ED in six months with acute vascular and tension type headache were recruited. The patients whose complaints had lasted no longer than seven days were randomised to four groups and thereby received 10 mg MTP intravenously plus placebo intramuscularly (MTP), 10 mg MTP intravenously plus 50 mg PET intramuscularly (M-PET), 50 mg PET intramuscularly plus placebo intravenously (PET); and intramuscular and intravenous placebo (PLC) in a blinded fashion. The patients were asked to report the degree of pain at 0, 15, 30, and 45 minutes on visual analogue scale (VAS) and demographic data and any side effects encountered were recorded. Rescue medication was used if required by the patient because of poor pain relief.

RESULTS

Data regarding 336 patients meeting inclusion criteria were analysed. Mean VAS values recorded at 45 minutes were significantly higher in PLC group than in others (p = 0.000). When the PLC group was excluded, VAS scores in MTP and M-PET groups were significantly lower than in PET group (p = 0.038). Though unimportant, the incidence of side effects recorded in PET group was found to be significantly higher than in the other groups (p = 0.003).

CONCLUSION

These data suggest that MTP produces more effective analgesia than PET in both vascular and tension type headache in patients with acute primary headache episodes.

Parenteral metoclopramide for acute migraine: meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

OBJECTIVE

To assess the evidence from controlled trials on the efficacy and tolerability of parenteral metoclopramide for acute migraine in adults.

DATA SOURCES

Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Medline, Embase, LILACS, CINAHL, conference proceedings, clinical practice guidelines, and other sources.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials of parenteral metoclopramide for acute migraine in adults.

RESULTS

We reviewed 596 potentially relevant abstracts and found 13 eligible trials totalling 655 adults. In studies comparing metoclopramide with placebo, metoclopramide was more likely to provide significant reduction in migraine pain (odds ratio 2.84, 95% confidence interval 1.05 to 7.68). Used as the only agent, metoclopramide showed mixed effectiveness when compared with other single agents. Heterogeneity of studies for combination treatment prevented statistical pooling. Treatments that did include metoclopramide were as, or more, effective than comparison treatments for pain, nausea, and relapse outcomes reported in all studies.

CONCLUSIONS

Metoclopramide is an effective treatment for migraine headache and may be effective when combined with other treatments. Given its non-narcotic and antiemetic properties, metoclopramide should be considered a primary agent in the treatment of acute migraines in emergency departments.

Treatment of primary headache in the emergency department

BACKGROUND

Each year many patients present to an emergency department for treatment of acute primary headache. We investigated the diagnosis and clinical outcome of patients treated for primary headache in the emergency department.

METHODS

Patients treated for acute primary headache in the emergency department completed a questionnaire related to their headache symptoms, response to treatment, and ability to return to normal function. These responses were compared to the treating physicians' observations of the patient's condition at the time of discharge from the emergency department.

RESULTS

Based on the questionnaire, 95% of the 57 respondents met International Headache Society diagnostic criteria for migraine. Emergency department physicians, however, diagnosed only 32% of the respondents with migraine, while 59% were diagnosed as having "cephalgia" or "headache NOS" (not otherwise specified). All patients previously had taken nonprescription medication, and 49% had never taken a triptan. In the emergency department, only 7% of the patients received a drug "specific" for migraine (ie, a triptan or dihydroergotamine). Sixty-five percent of the patients were treated with a "migraine cocktail" comprised of a variable mixture of a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory agent, a dopamine antagonist, and/or an antihistamine; 24% were treated with opioids. All 57 patients reported that after discharge they had to rest or sleep and were unable to return to normal function. Sixty percent of patients still had headache 24 hours after discharge from the emergency department.

CONCLUSION

The overwhelming majority of patients who present to an emergency department with acute primary headache have migraine, but the majority of patients receive a less specific diagnosis and a treatment that is correspondingly nonspecific.