Hypothalamic stimulation in chronic cluster headache: a pilot study of efficacy and mode of action

Identification of a novel perifornical-hypothalamic-area-projecting serotonergic system that inhibits innate panic and conditioned fear responses

The serotonin (5-HT) system is heavily implicated in the regulation of anxiety and trauma-related disorders such as panic disorder and post-traumatic stress disorder, respectively. However, the neural mechanisms of how serotonergic neurotransmission regulates innate panic and fear brain networks are poorly understood. Our earlier studies have identified that orexin (OX)/glutamate neurons within the perifornical hypothalamic area (PFA) play a critical role in adaptive and pathological panic and fear. While site-specific and electrophysiological studies have shown that intracranial injection and bath application of 5-HT inhibits PFA neurons via 5-HT1a receptors, they largely ignore circuit-specific neurotransmission and its physiological properties that occur in vivo. Here, we investigate the role of raphe nuclei 5-HT inputs into the PFA in panic and fear behaviors. We initially confirmed that photostimulation of glutamatergic neurons in the PFA of rats produces robust cardioexcitation and flight/aversive behaviors resembling panic-like responses. Using the retrograde tracer cholera toxin B, we determined that the PFA receives discrete innervation of serotonergic neurons clustered in the lateral wings of the dorsal (lwDRN) and in the median (MRN) raphe nuclei. Selective lesions of these serotonergic projections with saporin toxin resulted in similar panic-like responses during the suffocation-related CO2 challenge and increased freezing to fear-conditioning paradigm. Conversely, selective stimulation of serotonergic fibers in the PFA attenuated both flight/escape behaviors and cardioexcitation responses elicited by the CO2 challenge and induced conditioned place preference. The data here support the hypothesis that PFA projecting 5-HT neurons in the lwDRN/MRN represents a panic/fear-off circuit and may also play a role in reward behavior.

Association of Clinical and Neuroanatomic Factors With Response to Ventral Tegmental Area DBS in Chronic Cluster Headache

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Deep brain stimulation (DBS) of the ventral tegmental area (VTA) is a surgical treatment option for selected patients with refractory chronic cluster headache (CCH). We aimed to identify clinical and structural neuroimaging factors associated with response to VTA DBS in CCH.

METHODS

This prospective observational cohort study examines consecutive patients with refractory CCH treated with VTA DBS by a multidisciplinary team in a single tertiary neuroscience center as part of usual care. Headache diaries and validated questionnaires were completed at baseline and regular follow-up intervals. All patients underwent T1-weighted structural MRI before surgery. We compared clinical features using multivariable logistic regression and neuroanatomic differences using voxel-based morphometry (VBM) between responders and nonresponders.

RESULTS

Over a 10-year period, 43 patients (mean age 53 years, SD 11.9), including 29 male patients, with a mean duration of CCH 12 years (SD 7.4), were treated and followed up for at least 1 year (mean follow-up duration 5.6 years). Overall, there was a statistically significant improvement in median attack frequency from 140 to 56 per month (Z = -4.95, p < 0.001), attack severity from 10/10 to 8/10 (Z = -4.83, p < 0.001), and duration from 110 to 60 minutes (Z = -3.48, p < 0.001). Twenty-nine (67.4%) patients experienced ≥50% improvement in attack frequency and were therefore classed as responders. There were no serious adverse events. The most common side effects were discomfort or pain around the battery site (7 patients) and transient diplopia and/or oscillopsia (6 patients). There were no differences in demographics, headache characteristics, or comorbidities between responders and nonresponders. VBM identified increased neural density in nonresponders in several brain regions, including the orbitofrontal cortex, anterior cingulate cortex, anterior insula, and amygdala, which were statistically significant (p < 0.001).

DISCUSSION

VTA DBS showed no serious adverse events, and, although there was no placebo control, was effective in approximately two-thirds of patients at long-term follow-up. This study did not reveal any reliable clinical predictors of response. However, nonresponders had increased neural density in brain regions linked to processing of pain and autonomic function, both of which are prominent in the pathophysiology of CCH.

Ten-Year Durability of Hypothalamic Deep Brain Stimulation in Treatment of Chronic Cluster Headaches: A Case Report and Literature Review

Chronic cluster headache (CCH) is a debilitating primary headache that causes excruciating pain without remission. Various medical and surgical treatments have been implemented over the years, yet many provide only short-term relief. Deep brain stimulation (DBS) is an emerging treatment alternative that has been shown to dramatically reduce the intensity and frequency of headache attacks. However, reports of greater than 10-year outcomes after DBS for CCH are scant. Here, we report the durability of DBS in the posterior inferior hypothalamus after 10 years on a patient with CCH. Our patient experienced an 82% decrease in the frequency of headaches after DBS, which was maintained for over 10 years. The side effects observed included depression, irritability, anxiety, and dizziness, which were alleviated by changing programming settings. In the context of current literature, DBS shows promise for long-term relief of cluster headaches when other treatments fail.

European Academy of Neurology guidelines on the treatment of cluster headache

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Cluster headache is a relatively rare, disabling primary headache disorder with a major impact on patients' quality of life. This work presents evidence-based recommendations for the treatment of cluster headache derived from a systematic review of the literature and consensus among a panel of experts.

METHODS

The databases PubMed (Medline), Science Citation Index, and Cochrane Library were screened for studies on the efficacy of interventions (last access July 2022). The findings in these studies were evaluated according to the recommendations of the European Academy of Neurology, and the level of evidence was established using GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation).

RECOMMENDATIONS

For the acute treatment of cluster headache attacks, there is a strong recommendation for oxygen (100%) with a flow of at least 12 L/min over 15 min and 6 mg subcutaneous sumatriptan. Prophylaxis of cluster headache attacks with verapamil at a daily dose of at least 240 mg (maximum dose depends on efficacy and tolerability) is recommended. Corticosteroids are efficacious in cluster headache. To reach an effect, the use of at least 100 mg prednisone (or equivalent corticosteroid) given orally or at up to 500 mg iv per day over 5 days is recommended. Lithium, topiramate, and galcanezumab (only for episodic cluster headache) are recommended as alternative treatments. Noninvasive vagus nerve stimulation is efficacious in episodic but not chronic cluster headache. Greater occipital nerve block is recommended, but electrical stimulation of the greater occipital nerve is not recommended due to the side effect profile.

A century of research on neuromodulation interventions: A scientometric analysis of trends and knowledge maps

Interest in neurostimulation interventions has significantly grown in recent decades, yet a scientometric analysis objectively mapping scientific knowledge and recent trends remains unpublished. Using relevant keywords, we conducted a search in the Web of Science Core Collection on September 23, 2022, retrieving a total of 47,681 documents with 987,979 references. We identified two prominent research trends: 'noninvasive brain stimulation' and 'invasive brain stimulation.' These methods have interconnected over time, forming a cluster focused on evidence synthesis. Noteworthy emerging research trends encompassed 'transcutaneous auricular vagus nerve stimulation,' 'DBS/epilepsy in the pediatric population,' 'spinal cord stimulation,' and 'brain-machine interface.' While progress has been made for various neurostimulation interventions, their approval as adjuvant treatments remains limited, and optimal stimulation parameters lack consensus. Enhancing communication between experts of both neurostimulation types and encouraging novel translational research could foster further development. These findings offer valuable insights for funding agencies and research groups, guiding future directions in the field.

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.

Deep Brain Stimulation for Chronic Cluster Headaches: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Chronic cluster headache (CCH) is a severe and debilitating sub-type of trigeminal autonomic cephalalgia that can be resistant to medical management and associated with significant impairment in quality of life. Studies of deep brain stimulation (DBS) for CCH have provided promising results but have not been assessed in a comprehensive systematic review/meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE

The objective was to perform a systematic literature review and meta-analysis of patients with CCH treated with DBS to provide insight on safety and efficacy.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed according to PRISMA 2020 guidelines. 16 studies were included in final analysis. A random-effects model was used to meta-analyze data.

RESULTS

Sixteen studies reported 108 cases for data extraction and analysis. DBS was feasible in >99% of cases and was performed either awake or asleep. Meta-analysis revealed that the mean difference in headache attack frequency and headache intensity after DBS were statistically significant (p < 0.0001). Utilization of microelectrode recording was associated with statistically significant improvement in headache intensity postoperatively (p = 0.006). The average overall follow-up period was 45.4 months and ranged from 1 to 144 months. Death occurred in <1%. The rate of major complications was 16.67%.

CONCLUSIONS

DBS for CCHs is a feasible surgical technique with a reasonable safety profile that can be successfully performed either awake or asleep. In carefully selected patients, approximately 70% of patients achieve excellent control of their headaches.

Preventive treatment of refractory chronic cluster headache: systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Preventive treatment for refractory chronic cluster headache (rCCH) is challenging and many therapies have been tried.

OBJECTIVE

To study what could be considered the therapy of choice in rCCH through a systematic review and meta-analysis.

METHODS

This review was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. The protocol was registered in PROSPERO (ID CRD42021290983). A systematic search was performed in MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane, clinicaltrials.gov, and the WHO's-International-Clinical-Trials-Registry-Platform. Studies on the preventive treatment for rCCH as defined by the European Headache Federation consensus statement were included. A meta-analysis of the pooled response rate was conducted for the different therapies.

RESULTS

Of 336 results, 45 were eligible for inclusion. Most articles studied the effect of neuromodulation as a preventive treatment for rCCH. The most studied neuromodulation technique was occipital nerve stimulation (ONS), with a pooled response rate in the meta-analysis of 57.3% (95% CI 0.481-0.665). Deep brain stimulation (DBS) was the second most studied treatment with a pooled response rate of 77.0% (95% CI 0.594-0.957). DBS results were more heterogeneous than ONS, which could be related to the different stimulation targets in DBS studies, and reported more serious adverse events than in ONS studies. The remaining therapies (anti-CGRP pathway drugs, warfarin, ketamine-magnesium infusions, serial occipital nerve blocks, clomiphene, onabotulinum toxin A, ketogenic diet, sphenopalatine ganglion radiofrequency or stimulation, vagus nerve stimulation, percutaneous bioelectric current stimulation, upper cervical cord stimulation, and vidian neurectomy) present weaker results or have less quality of evidence.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this systematic review and meta-analysis suggest that ONS could be the first therapeutic strategy for patients with rCCH based on the current evidence.

Neurosurgical Treatment of Pain

The aim of this review is to draw attention to neurosurgical approaches for treating chronic and opioid-resistant pain. In a first chapter, an up-to-date overview of the main pathophysiological mechanisms of pain has been carried out, with special emphasis on the details in which the surgical treatment is based. In a second part, the principal indications and results of different surgical approaches are reviewed. Cordotomy, Myelotomy, DREZ lesions, Trigeminal Nucleotomy, Mesencephalotomy, and Cingulotomy are revisited. Ablative procedures have a limited role in the management of chronic non-cancer pain, but they continues to help patients with refractory cancer-related pain. Another ablation lesion has been named and excluded, due to lack of current relevance. Peripheral Nerve, Spine Cord, and the principal possibilities of Deep Brain and Motor Cortex Stimulation are also revisited. Regarding electrical neuromodulation, patient selection remains a challenge.

Neuromodulation for Chronic Daily Headache

Purpose of Review

We reviewed the literature that explored the use of central and peripheral neuromodulation techniques for chronic daily headache (CDH) treatment.

Recent Findings

Although the more invasive deep brain stimulation (DBS) is effective in chronic cluster headache (CCH), it should be reserved for extremely difficult-to-treat patients. Percutaneous occipital nerve stimulation has shown similar efficacy to DBS and is less risky in both CCH and chronic migraine (CM). Non-invasive transcutaneous vagus nerve stimulation is a promising add-on treatment for CCH but not for CM. Transcutaneous external trigeminal nerve stimulation may be effective in treating CM; however, it has not yet been tested for cluster headache. Transcranial magnetic and electric stimulations have promising preventive effects against CM and CCH.

Summary

Although the precise mode of action of non-invasive neuromodulation techniques remains largely unknown and there is a paucity of controlled trials, they should be preferred to more invasive techniques for treating CDH.

History of cluster headache

Objective:

To summarise the history of cluster headache evolving concepts and growing insights.

Background:

Excruciating pain, activation of the parasympathetic nervous system, and circadian rhythmicity characterise cluster headache attacks.

Results:

We find the oldest descriptions of patients suffering from the disorder in case reports of the 17th and 18th centuries. Only in the 19th and early 20th centuries did physicians start hypothesizing its cause. Initially, many researchers suspected the origin of the pain in peripheral nerves or blood vessels. However, eventually, they understood that the cause of the disease lies in the brain. In 1998, Positron emission tomography studies revealed increased activity of the posterior hypothalamus, whose role remains incompletely understood. Only recently have researchers realised that being diseased implies more than dysfunction. Recent studies analysed the consequences of cluster headache for each patient. Many struggle to deal with the disorder even in the absence of pain.

Conclusion:

Physicians have been aware of this type of pain for at least 300 years. Only when researchers studied pathological anatomy and physiology did knowledge accrue. A more comprehensive picture of the disease severity emerged when they also considered its consequences.

Psychedelics in the Treatment of Headache and Chronic Pain Disorders

The therapeutic potential of psychedelics in headache and chronic pain disorders is documented over decades of anecdotal and early investigational reports, which have paved the way for the first controlled studies of psilocybin and lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD) in these disorders. The reported lasting clinical effects after limited dosing with psychedelics present a novel means for disease management, but considerable further study will be required to address disease-specific treatments, uncover mechanism(s) of action, and verify safety. In this chapter, these topics are reviewed with particular attention to the neurobiological systems that offer potential sources of psychedelics' unique clinical effects in headache and pain.

Neurostimulation Treatment in Chronic Cluster Headache-a Narrative Review

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

In this narrative review, the current literature on neurostimulation methods in the treatment of chronic cluster headache is evaluated. These neurostimulation methods include deep brain stimulation, vagus nerve stimulation, greater occipital nerve stimulation, sphenopalatine ganglion stimulation, transcranial magnetic stimulation, transcranial direct current stimulation, supraorbital nerve stimulation, and cervical spinal cord stimulation.

RECENT FINDINGS

Altogether, only nVNS and SPG stimulation are supported by at least one positive sham-controlled clinical trial for preventive and acute attack (only SPG stimulation) treatment. Other clinical trials either did not control at all or controlled by differences in the stimulation technique itself but not by a sham-control. Case series report higher responder rates. The evidence for these neurostimulation methods in the treatment of chronic cluster headache is poor and in part contradictive. However, except deep brain stimulation, tolerability and safety of these methods are good so that in refractory situations application might be justified in individual cases.

Frequency Dependent Electrical Stimulation of PFC and ACC for Acute Pain Treatment in Rats

As pain consists of both sensory and affective components, its management by pharmaceutical agents remains difficult. Alternative forms of neuromodulation, such as electrical stimulation, have been studied in recent years as potential pain treatment options. Although electrical stimulation of the brain has shown promise, more research into stimulation frequency and targets is required to support its clinical applications. Here, we studied the effect that stimulation frequency has on pain modulation in the prefrontal cortex (PFC) and the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) in acute pain models in rats. We found that low-frequency stimulation in the prelimbic region of the PFC (PL-PFC) provides reduction of sensory and affective pain components. Meanwhile, high-frequency stimulation of the ACC, a region involved in processing pain affect, reduces pain aversive behaviors. Our results demonstrate that frequency-dependent neuromodulation of the PFC or ACC has the potential for pain modulation.

Safety and efficacy of occipital nerve stimulation for attack prevention in medically intractable chronic cluster headache (ICON): a randomised, double-blind, multicentre, phase 3, electrical dose-controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Occipital nerve stimulation (ONS) has shown promising results in small uncontrolled trials in patients with medically intractable chronic cluster headache (MICCH). We aimed to establish whether ONS could serve as an effective treatment for patients with MICCH.

METHODS

The ONS in MICCH (ICON) study is an investigator-initiated, international, multicentre, randomised, double-blind, phase 3, electrical dose-controlled clinical trial. The study took place at four hospitals in the Netherlands, one hospital in Belgium, one in Germany, and one in Hungary. After 12 weeks' baseline observation, patients with MICCH, at least four attacks per week, and history of being non-responsive to at least three standard preventive drugs, were randomly allocated (at a 1:1 ratio using a computer-generated permuted block) to 24 weeks of occipital nerve stimulation at either 100% or 30% of the individually determined range between paraesthesia threshold and near-discomfort (double-blind study phase). Because ONS causes paraesthesia, preventing masked comparison versus placebo, we compared high-intensity versus low-intensity ONS, which are hypothesised to cause similar paraesthesia, but with different efficacy. In weeks 25-48, participants received individually optimised open-label ONS. The primary outcome was the weekly mean attack frequency in weeks 21-24 compared with baseline across all patients and, if a decrease was shown, to show a group-wise difference. The trial is closed to recruitment (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01151631).

FINDINGS

Patients were enrolled between Oct 12, 2010, and Dec 3, 2017. We enrolled 150 patients and randomly assigned 131 (87%) to treatment; 65 (50%) patients to 100% ONS and 66 (50%) to 30% ONS. One of the 66 patients assigned to 30% ONS was not implanted and was therefore excluded from the intention-to-treat analysis. Because the weekly mean attack frequencies at baseline were skewed (median 15·75; IQR 9·44 to 24·75) we used log transformation to analyse the data and medians to present the results. Median weekly mean attack frequencies in the total population decreased from baseline to 7·38 (2·50 to 18·50; p<0·0001) in weeks 21-24, a median change of -5·21 (-11·18 to -0·19; p<0·0001) attacks per week. In the 100% ONS stimulation group, mean attack frequency decreased from 17·58 (9·83 to 29·33) at baseline to 9·50 (3·00 to 21·25) at 21-24 weeks (median change from baseline -4·08, -11·92 to -0·25), and for the 30% ONS stimulation group, mean attack frequency decreased from 15·00 (9·25 to 22·33) to 6·75 (1·50 to 16·50; -6·50, -10·83 to -0·08). The difference in median weekly mean attack frequency between groups at the end of the masked phase in weeks 21-24 was -2·42 (95% CI -5·17 to 3·33). In the masked study phase, 129 adverse events occurred with 100% ONS and 95 occurred with 30% ONS. None of the adverse events was unexpected but 17 with 100% ONS and eight with 30% ONS were labelled as serious, given they required brief hospital admission for minor hardware-related issues. The most common adverse events were local pain, impaired wound healing, neck stiffness, and hardware damage.

INTERPRETATION

In patients with MICCH, both 100% ONS intensity and 30% ONS intensity substantially reduced attack frequency and were safe and well tolerated. Future research should focus on optimising stimulation protocols and disentangling the underlying mechanism of action.

FUNDING

The Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research, the Dutch Ministry of Health, the NutsOhra Foundation from the Dutch Health Insurance Companies, and Medtronic.

Deep Brain Stimulation and Motor Cortex Stimulation for Chronic Pain

Deep brain stimulation (DBS) and Motor Cortex stimulation (MCS) have been used for control of chronic pain. Chronic pain of any origin is complex and difficult to treat. Stimulation of various areas in brain-like sensory thalamus, medial nuclei of thalamus including centro-lateral nucleus of thalamus (CL), periaqueductal gray, periventricular gray, nucleus accumbence and motor cortex provides partial relief in properly selected patients. This article reviews the pain pathways, theories of pain, targets for DBS and rationale of DBS and MCS. It also discusses the patient selection, technical details of each target.

Current advances in the management of cluster headaches

Introduction: Cluster headache (CH) is probably the most severe idiopathic pain condition, yet its current medical management remains poor.Areas covered: Only repurpose medicines are currently in use for the prevention of CH, partially because the pathophysiology of the condition is still elusive. In this article we performed a systematic review to evaluate the evidence for efficacy of the currently available or emerging treatments for CH.Expert opinion: We found several ongoing randomized clinical trials testing prophylactic treatments for CH and only few for the standard ones. Recent data from randomized trials with monoclonal antibodies targeting the calcitonin gene related peptide pathway (anti-CGRP mAbs) are controversial, although its role in the pathogenesis of the condition is well documented. This inconsistency may depict inadequacies in clinical trial designing. Anti-CGRP mAbs and antagonists of pituitary adenylate cyclase-activating polypeptide (PACAP) along with neuromodulation techniques, are curing the necessary valuable evidence that could illuminate the therapeutical future for cluster headache. Orexin pathway is another attractive target for CH treatment. To improve the evidence for efficacy, we further propose that the design of the clinical trials for CH needs to be radically reviewed to allow more patients to participate.

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.

Low-temperature plasma radiofrequency ablation for the management of refractory cluster headache

Introduction

Although the sphenopalatine ganglion (SPG) has been considered a site of therapeutic potential for cluster headache (CH), the optimal technique of SPG is still to be determined. Low-temperature plasma radiofrequency ablation (LTPRA) has been proposed as an alternative treatment for several neuropathic pain diseases.

Aim

To evaluate the effect of LTPRA of SPG in treating chronic and episodic CH.

Material and methods

The patients with CH, who achieved temporary pain relief following SPG block, treated using LTPRA between January 2015 and October 2017 were reviewed. Seventy-six patients were included: 50 patients suffered from episodic CH and the remaining 26 patients from chronic CH. The primary outcomes were clinical improvement rate, defined as the percentage of partial and complete pain relief results at 1 day, 12 months, and 24 months of follow-up after the operation.

Results

Clinical improvement rates were 92.3%, 92.3% and 73.1% in chronic CH and 73.1%, 84% and 68% in episodic CH at each follow-up time point, respectively. 3 chronic CH patients and 7 episodic CH patients showed no pain relief after the operation. Drooping eyelids were found in 2 cases, one recovered at the 3-month follow-up but another one did not in the 24-month follow-up. No serious complications occurred intraoperatively or postoperatively.

Conclusions

LTPRA can be considered an effective and alternative surgical modality in treating patients with chronic and episodic CH, based on SPG block.

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.

Probing the circuitry of panic with deep brain stimulation: Connectomic analysis and review of the literature

BACKGROUND

Panic attacks affect a sizeable proportion of the population. The neurocircuitry of panic remains incompletely understood.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the neuroanatomical underpinnings of panic attacks induced by deep brain stimulation (DBS) through (1) connectomic analysis of an obsessive-compulsive disorder patient who experienced panic attacks during inferior thalamic peduncle DBS; (2) appraisal of existing clinical reports on DBS-induced panic attacks.

METHODS

Panicogenic, ventral contact stimulation was compared with benign stimulation at other contacts using volume of tissue activated (VTA) modelling. Networks associated with the panicogenic zone were investigated using state-of-the-art normative connectivity mapping. In addition, a literature search for prior reports of DBS-induced panic attacks was conducted.

RESULTS

Panicogenic VTAs impinged primarily on the tuberal hypothalamus. Compared to non-panicogenic VTAs, panicogenic loci were significantly functionally coupled to limbic and brainstem structures, including periaqueductal grey and amygdala. Previous studies found stimulation of these areas can also provoke panic attacks.

CONCLUSIONS

DBS in the region of the tuberal hypothalamus elicited panic attacks in a single obsessive-compulsive disorder patient and recruited a network of structures previously implicated in panic pathophysiology, reinforcing the importance of the hypothalamus as a hub of panicogenic circuitry.

Opposing roles of dorsomedial hypothalamic CB1 and TRPV1 receptors in anandamide signaling during the panic-like response elicited in mice by Brazilian rainbow Boidae snakes

RATIONALE

The endocannabinoid system plays an important role in the organization of panic-like defensive behavior. Threatening situations stimulate brain areas, such as the dorsomedial hypothalamus (DMH). However, there is a lack of studies addressing the role of the DMH endocannabinoid system in panic-like responses.

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to verify which mechanisms underlie anandamide-mediated responses in the DMH.

METHODS

To test the hypothesis that the anandamide produces panicolytic-like effects, we treated mice with intra-DMH microinjections of vehicle or increasing doses of anandamide (0.5, 5, or 50 pmol) and then performed confrontation with the South American snake Epicrates cenchria assisi.

RESULTS

Intra-DMH anandamide treatment yielded a U-shaped dose-response curve with no effect of the lowest (0.5 pmol) or the highest (50 pmol) dose and significant inhibition of panic-like responses at the intermediate (5 pmol) dose. In addition, this panicolytic-like effect was prevented by pretreatment of the DMH with the CB1 receptor antagonist AM251 (100 pmol). However, pretreatment of the DMH with the TRPV1 receptor antagonist 6-iodo-nordihydrocapsaicin (3 nmol) restored the panicolytic-like effect of the highest dose of anandamide. Immunohistochemistry revealed that CB1 receptors were present primarily on axonal fibers, while TRPV1 receptors were found almost exclusively surrounding the perikarya in DMH.

CONCLUSIONS

The present results suggest that anandamide exerts a panicolytic-like effect in the DMH by activation of CB1 receptors and that TRPV1 receptors are related to the lack of effect of the highest dose of anandamide.

Deep brain stimulation of chronic cluster headaches: Posterior hypothalamus, ventral tegmentum and beyond

OBJECTIVE

We present long-term follow-up results and analysis of stimulation sites of a prospective cohort study of six patients with chronic cluster headaches undergoing deep brain stimulation of the ipsilateral posterior hypothalamic region.

METHODS

The primary endpoint was the postoperative change in the composite headache severity score "headache load" after 12 months of chronic stimulation. Secondary endpoints were the changes in headache attack frequency, headache attack duration and headache intensity, quality of life measures at 12, 24, and 48 months following surgery. Stimulating contact positions were analysed and projected onto the steroetactic atlas of Schaltenbrand and Wahren.

RESULTS

There was a significant reduction of headache load of over 93% on average at 12 months postoperatively that persisted over the follow-up period of 48 months (p = 0.0041) and that was accompanied by a significant increase of reported quality of life measures (p = 0.03). Anatomical analysis revealed that individual stimulating electrodes were located in the red nucleus, posterior hypothalamic region, mesencephalic pretectal area and centromedian nucleus of the thalamus.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings confirming long-term effectiveness of deep brain stimulation for chronic cluster headaches suggest that the neuroanatomical substrate of deep brain stimulation-induced headache relief is probably not restricted to the posterior hypothalamic area but encompasses a more widespread area.

Neurostimulation for the treatment of chronic migraine and cluster headache

Small subsets of patients who fail to respond to pharmacological treatment may benefit from alternative treatment methods. In the last decade, neurostimulation is being explored as a potential treatment option for the patients with chronic, severely disabling refractory primary headaches. To alleviate pain, specific nerves and brain areas have been stimulated, and various methods have been explored: deep brain stimulation, occipital nerve stimulation, and sphenopalatine ganglion stimulation are among the more invasive ones, whereas transcranial magnetic stimulation and supraorbital nerve stimulation are noninvasive. Vagal nerve stimulation can be invasive or noninvasive, though this review included only data for noninvasive VNS. Most of these methods have been tested in small open-label patient series; recently, more data from randomized, controlled, and blinded studies are available. Although neurostimulation treatments have demonstrated good efficacy in many studies, it still has not been established as a standard treatment in refractory patients. This review analyzes the available evidence regarding efficacy and safety of different neurostimulation modalities for the treatment of chronic migraine and cluster headache.

Neuromodulation for Pain Management

Pain is a salient and complex sensory experience with important affective and cognitive dimensions. The current definition of pain relies on subjective reports in both humans and experimental animals. Such definition lacks basic mechanistic insights and can lead to a high degree of variability. Research on biomarkers for pain has previously focused on genetic analysis. However, recent advances in human neuroimaging and research in animal models have begun to show the promise of a circuit-based neural signature for pain. At the treatment level, pharmacological therapy for pain remains limited. Neuromodulation has emerged as a specific form of treatment without the systemic side effects of pharmacotherapies. In this review, we will discuss some of the current neuromodulatory modalities for pain, research on newer targets, as well as emerging possibility for an integrated brain-computer interface approach for pain management.

Migraine and cluster headache - the common link

Although clinically distinguishable, migraine and cluster headache share prominent features such as unilateral pain, common pharmacological triggers such glyceryl trinitrate, histamine, calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) and response to triptans and neuromodulation. Recent data also suggest efficacy of anti CGRP monoclonal antibodies in both migraine and cluster headache. While exact mechanisms behind both disorders remain to be fully understood, the trigeminovascular system represents one possible common pathophysiological pathway and network of both disorders. Here, we review past and current literature shedding light on similarities and differences in phenotype, heritability, pathophysiology, imaging findings and treatment options of migraine and cluster headache. A continued focus on their shared pathophysiological pathways may be important in paving future treatment avenues that could benefit both migraine and cluster headache patients.

Long-Term Outcome of Patients With Intractable Chronic Cluster Headache Treated With Injection of Onabotulinum Toxin A Toward the Sphenopalatine Ganglion - An Observational Study

Objectives

To investigate long‐term outcomes in per‐protocol chronic cluster headache patients (n = 7), 18 and 24 months after participation in “Pilot study of sphenopalatine injection of onabotulinumtoxinA for the treatment of intractable chronic cluster headache.”

Methods

Data were collected prospectively through headache diaries, HIT‐6, and open questionnaire forms at 18 and 24 months after the first treatment. Patients had access to repeated injections when needed.

Results

An overall significant reduction in cluster headache attack frequency per month (57.3 ± 35.6 at baseline vs 12.4 ± 15.2 at month 18 and 24.6 ± 19.2 at month 24) was found. In addition, there was a reduction in attacks with severe and unbearably intensity (50.0 ± 38.3 at baseline vs 10.1 ± 14.7 at month 18 and 16.6 ± 13.7 at month 24) and an increase in attack free days (4.2 ± 5.9 at baseline vs 19.1 ± 9.4 at month 18 and 12.9 ± 8.8 at month 24).

Conclusions

Our findings suggest sustained headache relief after repeated onabotulinumtoxinA injections toward the sphenopalatine ganglion in intractable chronic cluster headache. A placebo‐controlled trial with long‐term follow‐up is warranted.

Anodal frontal tDCS for chronic cluster headache treatment: a proof-of-concept trial targeting the anterior cingulate cortex and searching for nociceptive correlates

BACKGROUND

Percutaneous occipital nerve stimulation (ONS) is effective in refractory chronic cluster headache (rCCH) patients. Responders to ONS differ from non-responders by greater glucose metabolism in subgenual anterior cingulate cortex (sgACC). We reasoned that transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), a non-invasive approach, might be able to activate this area and thus improve rCCH patients. Our objective was to explore in a pilot trial the therapeutic potential of tDCS (anode at Fz, cathode over C7) and its possible effects on pain perception, frontal executive functions and mood in rCCH patients.

METHODS

Thirty-one patients were asked to apply daily 20-min sessions of 2 mA tDCS for 4 or 8 weeks after a 1-month baseline. CH attacks were monitored with paper diaries. The primary outcome measure was change in weekly attacks between baseline and the last week of tDCS. Twenty-three patients were available for a modified ITT analysis, 21 for per-protocol analysis. We also explored treatment-related changes in thermal pain thresholds and nociceptive blink reflexes (nBR), frontal lobe function and mood scales.

RESULTS

In the per-protocol analysis there was a mean 35% decrease of attack frequency (p = 0.0001) with 41% of patients having a ≥ 50% decrease. Attack duration and intensity were also significantly reduced. After 8 weeks (n = 10), the 50% responder rate was 45%, but at follow-up 2 weeks after tDCS (n = 16) mean attack frequency had returned to baseline levels. The treatment effect was significant in patients with high baseline thermal pain thresholds in the forehead (n = 12), but not in those with low thresholds (n = 9). The Frontal Assessment Battery score increased after tDCS (p = 0.01), while there was no change in depression scores or nBR.

CONCLUSION

tDCS with a Fz-C7 montage may have a preventive effect in rCCH patients, especially those with low pain sensitivity, suggesting that a sham-controlled trial in cluster headache is worthwhile. Whether the therapeutic effect is due to activation of the sgACC that can in theory be reached by the electrical field, or of other prefrontal cortical areas remains to be determined.

Deep brain stimulation for trigeminal autonomic cephalalgias

Introduction: Deep brain stimulation (DBS) of the posterior hypothalamic region (pHyr) has been shown to be efficacious for more than a half of patients suffering from trigeminal autonomic cephalalgias (TACs); nonetheless, controversies about the mechanisms of action and the actual site of stimulation have arisen in recent years.Areas covered: Firstly, a review of the most recent literature on the subject is presented, stressing the critical points that could, in the future, make a difference for optimal management of patients afflicted by these life-threating diseases. Hypothalamic functional anatomy, experimental data and pathophysiological hypotheses are reported.Expert commentary: About 32% of patients who underwent DBS for TACs are pain-free. The determination of the pHyr region seems to be crucial for the generation of pain attack in these pathologies, although other structures are involved in complex mechanisms and circuits that interact with each other. Neurophysiological data, combined with more advanced experimental models, are of primary importance regarding our understanding of what the real target is, and how to overcome the issue of refractory patients.

Targeted Acid-Sensing Ion Channel Therapies for Migraine

Acid-sensing ion channels (ASICs) are a family of ion channels, consisting of four members; ASIC1 to 4. These channels are sensitive to changes in pH and are expressed throughout the central and peripheral nervous systems-including brain, spinal cord, and sensory ganglia. They have been implicated in a number of neurological conditions such as stroke and cerebral ischemia, traumatic brain injury, and epilepsy, and more recently in migraine. Their expression within areas of interest in the brain in migraine, such as the hypothalamus and PAG, their demonstrated involvement in preclinical models of meningeal afferent signaling, and their role in cortical spreading depression (the electrophysiological correlate of migraine aura), has enhanced research interest into these channels as potential therapeutic targets in migraine. Migraine is a disorder with a paucity of both acute and preventive therapies available, in which at best 50% of patients respond to available medications, and these medications often have intolerable side effects. There is therefore a great need for therapeutic development for this disabling condition. This review will summarize the understanding of the structure and CNS expression of ASICs, the mechanisms for their potential role in nociception, recent work in migraine, and areas for future research and drug development.

Cluster Headache: Epidemiology, Pathophysiology, Clinical Features, and Diagnosis

Cluster headache is a primary headache disorder affecting up to 0.1% of the population. Patients suffer from cluster headache attacks lasting from 15 to 180 min up to 8 times a day. The attacks are characterized by the severe unilateral pain mainly in the first division of the trigeminal nerve, with associated prominent unilateral cranial autonomic symptoms and a sense of agitation and restlessness during the attacks. The male-to-female ratio is approximately 2.5:1. Experimental, clinical, and neuroimaging studies have advanced our understanding of the pathogenesis of cluster headache. The pathophysiology involves activation of the trigeminovascular complex and the trigeminal-autonomic reflex and accounts for the unilateral severe headache, the prominent ipsilateral cranial autonomic symptoms. In addition, the circadian and circannual rhythmicity unique to this condition is postulated to involve the hypothalamus and suprachiasmatic nucleus. Although the clinical features are distinct, it may be misdiagnosed, with patients often presenting to the otolaryngologist or dentist with symptoms. The prognosis of cluster headache remains difficult to predict. Patients with episodic cluster headache can shift to chronic cluster headache and vice versa. Longitudinally, cluster headache tends to remit with age with less frequent bouts and more prolonged periods of remission in between bouts.

Therapeutic Approaches for the Management of Trigeminal Autonomic Cephalalgias

Trigeminal autonomic cephalalgia (TAC) encompasses 4 unique primary headache types: cluster headache, paroxysmal hemicrania, hemicrania continua, and short-lasting unilateral neuralgiform headache attacks with conjunctival injection and tearing and short-lasting unilateral neuralgiform headache attacks with cranial autonomic symptoms. They are grouped on the basis of their shared clinical features of unilateral headache of varying durations and ipsilateral cranial autonomic symptoms. The shared clinical features reflect the underlying activation of the trigeminal-autonomic reflex. The treatment for TACs has been limited and not specific to the underlying pathogenesis. There is a proportion of patients who are refractory or intolerant to the current standard medical treatment. From instrumental bench work research and neuroimaging studies, there are new therapeutic targets identified in TACs. Treatment has become more targeted and aimed towards the pathogenesis of the conditions. The therapeutic targets range from the macroscopic and structural level down to the molecular and receptor level. The structural targets for surgical and noninvasive neuromodulation include central neuromodulation targets: posterior hypothalamus and, high cervical nerves, and peripheral neuromodulation targets: occipital nerves, sphenopalatine ganglion, and vagus nerve. In this review, we will also discuss the neuropeptide and molecular targets, in particular, calcitonin gene-related peptide, somatostatin, transient receptor potential vanilloid-1 receptor, nitric oxide, melatonin, orexin, pituitary adenylate cyclase-activating polypeptide, and glutamate.

Neuroendocrine Associations Underlying the Persistent Therapeutic Effects of Classic Serotonergic Psychedelics

Recent reports on the effects of psychedelic-assisted therapies for mood disorders and addiction, as well as the effects of psychedelics in the treatment of cluster headache, have demonstrated promising therapeutic results. In addition, the beneficial effects appear to persist well after limited exposure to the drugs, making them particularly appealing as treatments for chronic neuropsychiatric and headache disorders. Understanding the basis of the long-lasting effects, however, will be critical for the continued use and development of this drug class. Several mechanisms, including biological and psychological ones, have been suggested to explain the long-lasting effects of psychedelics. Actions on the neuroendocrine system are some such mechanisms that warrant further investigation in the study of persisting psychedelic effects. In this report, we review certain structural and functional neuroendocrinological pathologies associated with neuropsychiatric disorders and cluster headache. We then review the effects that psychedelic drugs have on those systems and provide preliminary support for potential long-term effects. The circadian biology of cluster headache is of particular relevance in this area. We also discuss methodologic considerations for future investigations of neuroendocrine system involvement in the therapeutic benefits of psychedelic drugs.

Cluster headache

Cluster headache is an excruciating, strictly one-sided pain syndrome with attacks that last between 15 minutes and 180 minutes and that are accompanied by marked ipsilateral cranial autonomic symptoms, such as lacrimation and conjunctival injection. The pain is so severe that female patients describe each attack as worse than childbirth. The past decade has seen remarkable progress in the understanding of the pathophysiological background of cluster headache and has implicated the brain, particularly the hypothalamus, as the generator of both the pain and the autonomic symptoms. Anatomical connections between the hypothalamus and the trigeminovascular system, as well as the parasympathetic nervous system, have also been implicated in cluster headache pathophysiology. The diagnosis of cluster headache involves excluding other primary headaches and secondary headaches and is based primarily on the patient's symptoms. Remarkable progress has been achieved in developing effective treatment options for single cluster attacks and in developing preventive measures, which include pharmacological therapies and neuromodulation.

Overview of Trigeminal Autonomic Cephalalgias: Nosologic Evolution, Diagnosis, and Management

The term trigeminal autonomic cephalalgias (TACs) encompasses four primary headache disorders – cluster headache, paroxysmal hemicrania (PH), hemicrania continua (HC), short-lasting unilateral neuralgiform headache attacks with conjunctival injection and tearing (SUNCT)/short-lasting unilateral neuralgiform headache attacks with cranial autonomic symptoms (SUNA). All of these except HC are characterized by short-lasting headaches. HC is characterized by a continuous unilateral headache that waxes and wanes in its intensity without complete resolution. It is included in the TACs group given the overlap in the activation of the posterior hypothalamic grey, and the shared clinical feature of unilateral head pain with ipsilateral cranial autonomic symptoms. The present review gives an overview of the nosologic evolution, diagnosis, and management of TACs.