Surgical Management of Migraine Headaches: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Surgical interventions for intractable migraine: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Migraine affects ~14-15% of the global population, contributing to nearly 5% of the world's health burden. When drug treatments prove ineffective for intractable migraines, highly specific surgical interventions emerge as potential solutions. The authors aimed to analyze surgical approaches for these refractory or intractable migraines through a systematic review and meta-analysis.

METHODS

The authors conducted a literature search across databases such as PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Embase, focusing on studies related to migraines and surgical outcomes. The authors considered clinical trials or observational studies that included any surgical intervention for refractory or intractable migraines, emphasizing key outcomes such as reductions in migraine intensity, Migraine Disability Assessment scores (MIDAS), and 50% Migraine Headache Index (MHI) reduction rates. Statistical analyses were performed using R version 4.3.

RESULTS

Eleven studies were included in the systematic review. A meta-analysis of four studies involving overall 95 patients showed a significant reduction in mean migraine intensity scores using ONS (-2.27, 95% CI: -3.92 to -0.63, P =0.021). Three studies with 85 patients showed an average MIDAS score reduction of -52.3, though this was not statistically significant (95% CI: -136.85 to 32.19, P =0.116). Two additional studies corroborated these reductions in MIDAS scores. Nerve decompression surgery showed a substantial decrease in the average migraine intensity (from 8.31 down to 4.06). Median MIDAS score dropped from 57 to 20. Two studies indicated a success rate of 40 and 82%, respectively, in achieving a 50% reduction in the migraine MHI through nerve decompression. Findings from two studies suggest that septorhinoplasty and sinus surgery effectively decrease migraine intensity scores.

CONCLUSION

The existing evidence emphasizes the potential advantages of surgical interventions as a promising approach to managing intractable or refractory migraines. However, robust and comprehensive research is crucial to refine and solidify the efficacy of these surgical methods, aiming for widespread benefits for patients, considering cost-effectiveness factors.

Comparing Migraine Headache Index versus Monthly Migraine Days after Headache Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Nerve deactivation surgery for the treatment of migraine has evolved rapidly over the past 2 decades. Studies typically report changes in migraine frequency (attacks/month), attack duration, attack intensity, and their composite score-the Migraine Headache Index-as primary outcomes. However, the neurology literature predominantly reports migraine prophylaxis outcomes as change in monthly migraine days (MMD). The goal of this study was to foster common communication between plastic surgeons and neurologists by assessing the effect of nerve deactivation surgery on MMD and motivating future studies to include MMD in their reported outcomes.

METHODS

An updated literature search was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. The National Library of Medicine (PubMed), Scopus, and Embase were systematically searched for relevant articles. Data were extracted and analyzed from studies that met the inclusion criteria.

RESULTS

A total of 19 studies were included. There was a significant overall reduction in MMDs [mean difference (MD), 14.11; 95% CI, 10.95 to 17.27; I 2 = 92%], total migraine attacks per month (MD, 8.65; 95% CI, 7.84 to 9.46; I 2 = 90%), Migraine Headache Index (MD, 76.59; 95% CI, 60.85 to 92.32; I 2 = 98%), migraine attack intensity (MD, 3.84; 95% CI, 3.35 to 4.33; I 2 = 98%), and migraine attack duration (MD, 11.80; 95% CI, 6.44 to 17.16; I 2 = 99%) at follow-up (range, 6 to 38 months).

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrates the efficacy of nerve deactivation surgery on the outcomes used in both the plastic and reconstructive surgery and neurology literature.

A Cross-Sectional Evaluation of Publication Bias in the Plastic Surgery Literature

BACKGROUND

Publication bias (PB) is the preferential publishing of studies with statistically significant results. PB can skew findings of systematic reviews (SRs) and meta-analyses (MAs), with potential consequences for patient care and health policy. This study aims to determine the extent to which SRs and MAs in the plastic surgery literature evaluate and report PB.

METHODS

This cross-sectional study assessed PB reporting and analysis from plastic surgery studies published between January 1, 2015, and June 19, 2020. Full texts of SRs and MAs were assessed by two reviewers for PB assessment methodology and analysis. Post hoc assessment of studies that did not originally analyze PB was performed using Egger regression, Duval, Tweedie trim-and-fill, and Copas selection models.

RESULTS

There were 549 studies evaluated, of which 531 full texts were included. PB was discussed by 183 studies (34.5%), and formally assessed by 97 studies (18.3%). Among SRs and MAs that formally assessed PB, PB was present in 24 studies (10.7%), not present in 52 (23.1%), and inconclusive in eight (3.6%); 141 studies (62.7%) did not report the results of their PB assessment. Funnel plots were the most common assessment method [ n = 88 (39.1%)], and 60 studies (68.2%) published funnel plots. The post hoc assessment revealed PB in 17 of 20 studies (85.0%).

CONCLUSIONS

PB is inadequately reported and analyzed among studies in the plastic surgery literature. Most studies that assessed PB found PB, as did post hoc analysis of nonreporting studies. Increased assessment and reporting of PB among SRs and MAs would improve the quality of evidence in plastic surgery.

The Efficacy of Trigger Site Surgery in the Elimination of Chronic Migraine Headache: An Update in the Rate of Success and Failure

Migraine headache (MH) is a prevalent neurovascular disorder that affects approximately 15% of the global population. They are more common in women and typically affect young and middle-aged individuals. Chronic MH is characterized by headaches occurring on ≥15 days per month for over three months. While only 5% of MHs are refractory, about 20%-50% do not respond to pharmacologic treatments. As a result, surgical interventions have emerged as an alternative method to eliminate MH since 2000 AD. These surgical treatments primarily target the peripheral mechanisms of MH, focusing on common trigger sites. Migraine surgery involves neurolysis of sensory branches of trigeminal and occipital nerves that supply the face and back of the head. Numerous clinical studies conducted between 2000 and 2021 have extensively described surgical interventions and their prognostic outcomes. After surgery, up to 80% of patients reported complete elimination of headaches, while 20%-35% experienced no relief. The failure to achieve complete elimination of MH can be attributed to various factors. The most common reason for a partial clinical response is the failure to identify all trigger sites or inadequate surgery on the trigger sites. In this review, we aim to provide an overview of current surgical interventions for MH at different trigger sites, including recent updates, success and failure rates, and potential causes of failure.

Functional outcomes between headache surgery and targeted botox injections: A prospective multicenter pilot study

Introduction

Chronic migraine headaches (MH) are a principal cause of disability worldwide. This study evaluated and compared functional outcomes after peripheral trigger point deactivation surgery or botulinum neurotoxin A (BTA) treatment in patients with MH.

Methods

A long-term, multicenter, and prospective study was performed. Patients with chronic migraine were recruited at the Ohio State University and Massachusetts General Hospital and included in each treatment group according to their preference (BTA or surgery). Assessment tools including the Migraine Headache Index (MHI), Migraine Disability Assessment Questionnaire (MIDAS) total, MIDAS A, MIDAS B, Migraine Work and Productivity Loss Questionnaire-question 7 (MWPLQ7), and Migraine-Specific Quality of Life Questionnaire (MSQ) version 2.1 were used to evaluate functional outcomes. Patients were evaluated prior to treatment and at 1, 2, and 2.5 years after treatment.

Results

A total of 44 patients were included in the study (surgery=33, BTA=11). Patients treated surgically showed statistically significant improvement in headache intensity as measured on MIDAS B (p = 0.0464) and reduced disability as measured on MWPLQ7 (p = 0.0120) compared to those treated with BTA injection. No statistical difference between groups was found for the remaining functional outcomes. Mean scores significantly improved over time independently of treatment for MHI, MIDAS total, MIDAS A, MIDAS B, and MWPLQ 7 (p<0.05). However, no difference in mean scores over time was observed for MSQ.

Conclusions

Headache surgery and targeted BTA injections are both effective means of addressing peripheral trigger sites causing headache pain. However, lower pain intensity and work-related disabilities were found in the surgical group.

Nonpharmacologic Treatments for Chronic and Episodic Migraine: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive techniques for treatment-resistant migraine have been developed on recent insights into the peripheral pathogenesis of migraines. Although there is a growing body of evidence supporting these techniques, no study has yet compared the effects of these treatments on headache frequency, severity, duration, and cost.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were searched to identify randomized placebo-controlled trials that compared radiofrequency ablation, botulinum toxin type A (BT-A), nerve block, neurostimulation, or migraine surgery to placebo for preventive treatment. Data on changes from baseline to follow-up in headache frequency, severity, duration, and quality of life were analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 30 randomized controlled trials and 2680 patients were included. Compared with placebo, there was a significant decrease in headache frequency in patients with nerve block ( P = 0.04) and surgery ( P < 0.001). Headache severity decreased in all treatments. Duration of headaches was significantly reduced in the BT-A ( P < 0.001) and surgery cohorts ( P = 0.01). Quality of life improved significantly in patients with BT-A, nerve stimulator, and migraine surgery. Migraine surgery had the longest lasting effects (11.5 months) compared with nerve ablation (6 months), BT-A (3.2 months), and nerve block (11.9 days).

CONCLUSIONS

Migraine surgery is a cost-effective, long-term treatment to reduce headache frequency, severity, and duration without significant risk of complication. BT-A reduces headache severity and duration, but it is short-lasting and associated with greater adverse events and lifetime cost. Although efficacious, radiofrequency ablation and implanted nerve stimulators have high risks of adverse events and explantation, whereas benefits of nerve blocks are short in duration.

A longitudinal prospective study of septoplasty impact on headache and allergic rhinitis in patients with septal deviation

OBJECTIVE

To measure the severity of allergic rhinitis (AR) and different types of headaches in patients with septal deviation before and after septoplasty.

METHODS

This multicentre, prospective, longitudinal, observational study enrolled patients with deviated nasal septum, nasal symptoms and headaches associated with persistent AR lasting at least 2 months without resolution. The nasal obstruction evaluation (NOSE) scale, immunoglobulin-E (Ig-E) levels and visual analogue scale (VAS) for headache pain severity were evaluated before and after septoplasty using Wilcoxon signed-rank test.

RESULTS

A total of 196 patients were enrolled in the study (102 males; 94 females). A total of 134 patients (68%) were diagnosed with severe AR and 166 (85%) experienced headaches with AR. The majority (100 of 166 patients; 60%) had sinusoidal headaches, while 25% (42 of 166 patients) reported a combination of sinusoidal headache and migraine and 14% (24 of 166 patients) experienced migraines. A comparison of preoperative and postoperative Ig-E levels, NOSE and VAS scores demonstrated that septoplasty significantly improved AR symptoms and headaches. Although there were significant improvements in headaches overall post-septoplasty, only the sinusoidal components improved, while migraine remained unaffected.

CONCLUSION

Septoplasty improved AR and sinusoidal headaches in patients with septal deviation, but migraines remained unaffected.

The Surgical Management of Migraines and Chronic Headaches: A Cross-sectional Review of American Insurance Coverage

BACKGROUND

Migraine headache can be an extremely debilitating condition, with pharmacotherapy for prophylaxis or treatment of acute symptoms being unsuccessful in a large proportion of patients. Surgical management of migraine has recently gained popularity as an alternative to pharmacotherapy for severe disease. However, the novel nature of these procedures may lead to variable insurance coverage, limiting access to care.

METHODS

A cross-sectional analysis of 101 US insurance companies was conducted. Companies were chosen based on greatest market share and enrollment per state. A Web-based search or phone call identified whether each company had a publicly available policy on nonsurgical or surgical management of migraine or headache. For companies with an available policy, coverage was categorized into covered, covered on a case-by-case basis, or never covered, with criteria required for coverage collected and categorized.

RESULTS

Of the 101 evaluated insurers, significantly fewer companies had a policy on surgical treatment for migraine or headache (n = 52 [52%]) compared with nonsurgical treatment (n = 78 [78%]) (P < 0.001). For companies with a policy, the most frequently covered nonsurgical treatments were biofeedback (n = 23 [92%]) and botulism toxin injections (n = 61 [88%]). Headaches were an approved indication for occipital nerve stimulation in 4% (n = 2) of company policies and nerve decompression in 2% (n = 1) of policies. Migraines were never offered preauthorized coverage for surgical procedures.

CONCLUSION

Approximately half of US insurance companies have a publicly available policy on surgical management of migraine or headache. Surgical treatment was seldom covered for the indication of headache and would never receive preauthorized coverage for migraine. Lack of coverage may create challenges in accessing surgical treatment. Additional prospective, controlled studies are necessary to further support the efficacy of surgical treatment.

Outcomes of Surgical Treatment of Migraines: A Systematic Review & Meta-Analysis

Background: Migraine surgery at 1 of 6 identified "trigger sites" of a target cranial sensory nerve has rapidly grown in popularity since 2000. This study summarizes the effect of migraine surgery on headache severity, headache frequency, and the migraine headache index score which is derived by multiplying migraine severity, frequency, and duration. Materials and Methods: This is a PRISMA-compliant systematic review of 5 databases searched from inception through May 2020 and is registered under the PROSPERO ID: CRD42020197085. Clinical trials treating headaches with surgery were included. Risk of bias was assessed in randomized controlled trials. Meta-analyses were performed on outcomes using a random effects model to determine the pooled mean change from baseline and when possible, to compare treatment to control. Results: 18 studies met criteria including 6 randomized controlled trials, 1 controlled clinical trial, and 11 uncontrolled clinical trials treated 1143 patients with pathologies including migraine, occipital migraine, frontal migraine, occipital nerve triggered headache, frontal headache, occipital neuralgia, and cervicogenic headache. Migraine surgery reduced headache frequency at 1 year postoperative by 13.0 days per month as compared to baseline (I2 = 0%), reduced headache severity at 8 weeks to 5 years postoperative by 4.16 points on a 0 to 10 scale as compared to baseline (I2 = 53%), and reduced migraine headache index at 1 to 5 years postoperative by 83.1 points as compared to baseline (I2 = 2%). These meta-analyses are limited by a small number of studies that could be analyzed, including studies with high risk of bias. Conclusion: Migraine surgery provided a clinically and statistically significant reduction in headache frequency, severity, and migraine headache index scores. Additional studies, including randomized controlled trials with low risk-of-bias should be performed to improve the precision of the outcome improvements.

Migraine Surgery and Determination of Success over Time by Trigger Site: A Systematic Review of the Literature

BACKGROUND

Migraine headache is a debilitating disorder that produces high costs and compromises patient quality of life. This study aimed to evaluate surgery success and the longevity of the surgical benefit by trigger site.

METHODS

A systematic literature review was performed by querying the PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science databases. The keywords "surgery," "migraine," "outcomes," "headache index," and synonyms in titles and abstracts were used to perform the search.

RESULTS

A total of 17 articles published between 2009 and 2019 met the inclusion criteria. Six studies were prospective and 11 were retrospective. Most of the studies (77.8%, 77.8%, and 80%, respectively) reported success of migraine surgery at 12-month follow-up for trigger sites I, II, and III, respectively. For trigger site IV, the greatest Migraine Headache Index reduction (93.4%) was observed at 12-month follow-up, and the earliest Migraine Headache Index reductions (80.3% and 74.6%) were observed at 6-month follow-up. All studies that evaluated trigger sites V and VI identified surgery success at 12-month follow-up. Migraine surgery was found to remain beneficial at 22 months for trigger sites I, II, III, and IV.

CONCLUSIONS

The symptomatic improvement may initially be evident at 6 months for trigger site IV and at 12 months for trigger sites I, II, III, V, and VI. Surgical benefit in trigger sites I, II, III, and IV can persist after 22 months. Further studies are required to evaluate results at longer follow-up.

Single midline incision approach for decompression of greater, lesser and third occipital nerves in migraine surgery

Background

The traditional approach for occipital migraine surgery encompasses three separate surgical incisions in the posterior neck to decompress the greater occipital nerves (GON), lesser occipital nerves (LON), and third occipital nerves (TON). Other incisions have been investigated, including singular transverse incisions. We sought to evaluate a single, vertical midline incision approach for decompression of all six occipital nerves.

Methods

Using 10 cadaveric hemi-sides (5 fresh cadaver head and necks). Anatomic landmarks and the location of the bilateral GON, LON, and TON were marked according to previous anatomic studies. A single, midline 9-cm incision was made, and lateral skin flaps were raised to decompress or avulse all six nerves.

Results

Through the midline incision, the GON and TON were identified at 3.5 and 6.2 cm, respectively, inferior to a line bisecting the external auditory canal (EAC) and 1.5 cm lateral to the midline. The LON was identified as 6-cm inferior and 6.5-cm medial to a line bisecting the EAC in the plane just above the investing layer of the deep cervical fascia until the posterior border of the sternocleidomastoid was encountered. The LON had the greatest amount of variation but was identified lateral to the posterior border of the SCM.

Conclusions

A single midline incision approach allows for successful identification and decompression of all six occipital nerves in migraine surgery.

Letter to the Editor: The Case for Publicly Funded Headache Surgery in Germany

Headache surgery has become a considerable therapeutic option in headache treatment and is of rising interest in the German medical sector. This viewpoint outlines the need for reimbursement of headache surgery in the German healthcare system and demonstrates its cost-effectiveness. Using state-of-the-art patient selection algorithms, the authors found headache surgery to be cost-effective within 7.2 to 6.3 years. Of note, the approach presented is not limited to the German healthcare system.

The Evolution of Migraine Surgery: Two Decades of Continual Research. My Current Thoughts

SUMMARY

A mere serendipitous finding has culminated in a life-changing development for patients and a colossally fulfilling field for many surgeons. The surgical treatment of migraine headaches has been embraced by many plastic surgeons after numerous investigations ensuring that the risks are minimal and the rewards inestimable. Seldom has a plastic surgery procedure been the subject of such scrutiny. Through retrospective, prospective pilot, prospective randomized, prospective randomized with sham surgery, and 5-year follow-up studies, the safety, efficacy, and longevity of the given operation have been confirmed. Although the first decade of this journey was focused on investigating effectiveness and risk profile, the second decade was largely devoted to improving results, reducing invasiveness, and shortening recovery. Multiple publications in peer-reviewed journals over the past 20 years, several independent studies from reputable surgeons at recognized centers, and over 40 studies from the author's center have established the surgical treatment of headaches as a standard practice.

Unveiling the comparative efficacy and tolerability of comprehensive treatments for migraine: A protocol of systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Migraine is a chronic paroxysmal incapacitating neurological disorder, which endangers the health of human worldwide ranking as the third most prevalent medical condition. There are no comprehensive estimates of treatments for migraine. We will conduct this systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA) to synthesis quantitative and comparative evidence on the efficacy and tolerability of all the known pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions for migraine.

METHOD

We will perform the systematic electronic search of the literature utilizing MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Cumulative Index to Nursing & Allied Health (CINAHL), and PsycINFO. We will only include randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of high quality which appraise the efficacy or safety of any potential pharmacological or non-pharmacological interventions in the treatment of patients with migraine. The traditional pairwise meta-analyses will be performed to anticipate the heterogeneities and publication bias and the NMA will be conducted within a Bayesian hierarchical model framework to obtain estimates for all valuable treatments for migraine. The entire heterogeneity will be quantified by Q statistic and I2 index. Other analyses included sensitivity analyses, meta-regression, and subgroup analyses will also be conducted. The whole process will be conducted using in R-3.6.0 software.

RESULTS

This study will obtain the efficacy and tolerability of all potential treatments for migraine, aiming at providing consolidated evidence to help make the best choice of interventions. The results will be published in a peer-reviewed journal.

DISCUSSION

This Bayesian network meta-analysis may be the first attempt to quantitatively synthesize the efficacy and tolerability of all potential treatments for migraine. And this method can ensure us to fully utilize both the direct and indirect evidence as well as gain the comparative estimates displayed in the derived hierarchies. Besides, we have registered this protocol on the international prospective register of systematic review (PROSPERO) (CRD42020157278).

The Cutting Edge of Headache Surgery: A Systematic Review on the Value of Extracranial Surgery in the Treatment of Chronic Headache

BACKGROUND

Migraine is a debilitating neurologic condition, with a large socioeconomic impact. There is a subgroup of patients that does not adequately respond to pharmacologic management and may have underlying neuralgia. Surgical decompression of extracranial sensory nerves has been proposed as an alternative therapy. The aim of this article is to review the evidence for the surgical treatment of neuralgias.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted to study the efficacy of decompression of extracranial sensory nerves as a treatment for neuralgia. Clinical studies were included that studied patients, aged 18 years or older, diagnosed with any definition of headache and were treated with extracranial nerve decompression surgery. Outcome parameters included intensity (on a 10-point scale), duration (in days), and frequency (of headaches per month).

RESULTS

Thirty-eight articles were found describing extracranial nerve decompression in patients with headaches. Postoperative decrease in headache intensity ranged from 2 to 8.2, reduction of duration ranged from 0.04 to 1.04 days, and reduction in frequency ranged between 4 and 14.8 headaches per month. Total elimination of symptoms was achieved in 8.3 to 83 percent of cases. A detailed summary of the outcome of single-site decompression is described. Statistical pooling and therefore meta-analysis was not possible, because of articles having the same surgeon and an overlapping patient database.

CONCLUSIONS

Nerve decompression surgery is an effective way of treating headaches in a specific population of patients with neuralgia. Although a meta-analysis of the current data was not possible, the extracranial decompression of peripheral head and neck sensory nerves has a high success rate.

Cost-Utility Analysis of Surgical Decompression Relative to Injection Therapy for Chronic Migraine Headaches

BACKGROUND

Common treatments for chronic migraine headaches include injection of corticosteroid and anesthetic agents at local trigger sites. However, the effects of therapy are short term, and lifelong treatment is often necessary. In contrast, surgical decompression of migraine trigger sites accomplishes the same goal yet demonstrates successful long-term elimination of chronic migraines.

OBJECTIVES

Our primary objective was to perform a cost-utility analysis to determine which patients would benefit most from available treatment options in a cost-conscious model.

METHODS

A cost-utility analysis was performed, taking into consideration costs, probabilities, and health state utility scores of various interventions.

RESULTS

Injection therapy offered a minor improvement in quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) compared with surgical decompression (QALY Δ = 0.6). However, long-term injection therapy was significantly costlier to society than surgical decompression: injection treatment was estimated to cost $106,887.96 more than surgery. The results of our cost-utility analysis thus conferred a positive incremental cost-utility ratio of $178,163.27 in favor of surgical decompression.

CONCLUSIONS

Surgery provides a durable intervention and has been shown in this study to be extremely cost effective despite a very minor QALY deficit compared with injection therapy. If patients are identified who require treatment in the form of injections for less than 8.25 years, they may fall into a group that should not be offered surgery.