1
|
Abstract
BACKGROUND In this study, we will assess the efficacy and safety of metoclopramide for the treatment of acute migraine (AM). METHODS We will comprehensively search Cochrane Library, PUMBED, EMBASE, Google Scholar, Web of Science, Allied and Complementary Medicine Database, Chinese Biomedical Literature Database, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure from the inception to July 1, 2019 to identify any eligible studies. Only randomized controlled trials will be considered for inclusion. The study selection, data collection, and management will be completed by two authors independently. The risk of bias will be assessed using Cochrane risk of bias tool. RevMan 5.3 software will be used for statistical analysis. RESULTS The primary outcome includes pain intensity, as measured by visual analogue scale or others. The secondary outcomes are success rate, requirement of rescue medicine, quality of life, relapse, and adverse events. CONCLUSIONS This study will summarize the latest evidence for the clinical efficacy and safety of metoclopramide for the treatment of AM. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER PROSPERO CRD42019142795.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Chao Jiang
- The Third Department of Neurology, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Xi’an Medical University, Xi’an
- Department of Emergency, Longhua Hospital Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shanghai
| | - Ting Wang
- School of Economics and Management, Xi Dian University, Xi’an
| | - Zheng-guo Qiu
- Department of Anesthesiology, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Xi’an Medical University
| | - Bo Chen
- Department of Anesthesiology, The Hospital of Xidian Group, Xi’an, Shaanxi, China
| | - Bang-jiang Fang
- Department of Emergency, Longhua Hospital Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shanghai
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Xu H, Han W, Wang J, Li M. Network meta-analysis of migraine disorder treatment by NSAIDs and triptans. J Headache Pain 2016; 17:113. [PMID: 27957624 PMCID: PMC5153398 DOI: 10.1186/s10194-016-0703-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 34] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/16/2016] [Accepted: 11/28/2016] [Indexed: 11/25/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Migraine is a neurological disorder resulting in large socioeconomic burden. This network meta-analysis (NMA) is designed to compare the relative efficacy and tolerability of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory agents (NSAIDs) and triptans. Methods We conducted systematic searches in database PubMed and Embase. Treatment effectiveness was compared by synthesizing direct and indirect evidences using NMA. The surface under curve ranking area (SUCRA) was created to rank those interventions. Results Eletriptan and rizatriptan are superior to sumatriptan, zolmitriptan, almotriptan, ibuprofen and aspirin with respect to pain-relief. When analyzing 2 h-nausea-absence, rizatriptan has a better efficacy than sumatriptan, while other treatments indicate no distinctive difference compared with placebo. Furthermore, sumatriptan demonstrates a higher incidence of all-adverse-event compared with diclofenac-potassium, ibuprofen and almotriptan. Conclusion This study suggests that eletriptan may be the most suitable therapy for migraine from a comprehensive point of view. In the meantime ibuprofen may also be a good choice for its excellent tolerability. Multi-component medication also attracts attention and may be a promising avenue for the next generation of migraine treatment. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s10194-016-0703-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Haiyang Xu
- The First hospital of Jilin University, No. 71 Xinmin Street, Changchun, 130021, Jilin, China
| | - Wei Han
- The First hospital of Jilin University, No. 71 Xinmin Street, Changchun, 130021, Jilin, China
| | - Jinghua Wang
- The First hospital of Jilin University, No. 71 Xinmin Street, Changchun, 130021, Jilin, China
| | - Mingxian Li
- The First hospital of Jilin University, No. 71 Xinmin Street, Changchun, 130021, Jilin, China.
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Thorlund K, Toor K, Wu P, Chan K, Druyts E, Ramos E, Bhambri R, Donnet A, Stark R, Goadsby PJ. Comparative tolerability of treatments for acute migraine: A network meta-analysis. Cephalalgia 2016; 37:965-978. [DOI: 10.1177/0333102416660552] [Citation(s) in RCA: 31] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
Introduction Migraine headache is a neurological disorder whose attacks are associated with nausea, vomiting, photophobia and phonophobia. Treatments for migraine aim to either prevent attacks before they have started or relieve attacks (abort) after onset of symptoms and range from complementary therapies to pharmacological interventions. A number of treatment-related adverse events such as somnolence, fatigue, and chest discomfort have previously been reported in association with triptans. The comparative tolerability of available agents for the abortive treatment of migraine attacks has not yet been systematically reviewed and quantified. Methods We performed a systematic literature review and Bayesian network meta-analysis for comparative tolerability of treatments for migraine. The literature search targeted all randomized controlled trials evaluating oral abortive treatments for acute migraine over a range of available doses in adults. The primary outcomes of interest were any adverse event, treatment-related adverse events, and serious adverse events. Secondary outcomes were fatigue, dizziness, chest discomfort, somnolence, nausea, and vomiting. Results Our search yielded 141 trials covering 15 distinct treatments. Of the triptans, sumatriptan, eletriptan, rizatriptan, zolmitriptan, and the combination treatment of sumatriptan and naproxen were associated with a statistically significant increase in odds of any adverse event or a treatment-related adverse event occurring compared with placebo. Of the non-triptans, only acetaminophen was associated with a statistically significant increase in odds of an adverse event occurring when compared with placebo. Overall, triptans were not associated with increased odds of serious adverse events occurring and the same was the case for non-triptans. For the secondary outcomes, with the exception of vomiting, all triptans except for almotriptan and frovatriptan were significantly associated with increased risk for all outcomes. Almotriptan was significantly associated with an increased risk of vomiting, whereas all other triptans yielded non-significant lower odds compared with placebo. Generally, the non-triptans were not associated with decreased tolerability for the secondary outcomes. Discussion In summary, triptans were associated with higher odds of any adverse event or a treatment-related adverse event occurring when compared to placebo and non-triptans. Non-significant results for non-triptans indicate that these treatments are comparable with one another and placebo regarding tolerability outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kristian Thorlund
- Department of Clinical Epidemiology & Biostatistics, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
- Redwood Outcomes, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| | - Kabirraaj Toor
- Redwood Outcomes, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
- School of Population and Public Health, Faculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| | - Ping Wu
- Redwood Outcomes, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| | - Keith Chan
- Redwood Outcomes, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| | - Eric Druyts
- Redwood Outcomes, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
- Department of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| | | | | | - Anne Donnet
- Department of Evaluation and Treatment of Pain, Clinical Neuroscience Federation, La Timone Hospital, Marseille, France
| | - Richard Stark
- Neurology Department, Alfred Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
- Department of Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Peter J Goadsby
- NIHR-Wellcome Trust Clinical Research Facility, King’s College London, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Tfelt-Hansen PC. Delayed absorption of many (paracetamol, aspirin, other NSAIDs and zolmitriptan) but not all (sumatriptan, rizatriptan) drugs during migraine attacks and most likely normal gastric emptying outside attacks. A review. Cephalalgia 2016; 37:892-901. [PMID: 27330004 DOI: 10.1177/0333102416644745] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/28/2022]
Abstract
Background In most pharmacokinetic studies, the oral absorption of drugs is impaired during migraine attacks but exceptions occur. A study on gastric emptying using gastric scintigraphy indicated that gastric stasis also occurs interictally in migraine. These studies were reviewed critically. Results In seven studies, mainly investigating NSAIDs and analgesics, the early absorption of the drugs during 112 migraine attacks was delayed. The absorption of sumatriptan is usual in therapeutic doses, and rizatriptan was normal during 131 migraine attacks. The interictal gastric stasis observed using gastric emptying scintigraphy (GES) with solids ( n = 13) could not be confirmed in a larger study ( n = 27) using the same method. Also gastric emptying measured with GES with liquids ( n = 7) and epigastric impedance ( n = 64) was normal outside migraine attacks. Conclusions and possible clinical implications Drug absorption is not generally impaired during migraine attacks. Gastric emptying is most likely normal in the majority of migraine patients outside attacks. Prokinetic and antiemetic drugs such as metoclopramide and domperidone should not be routinely combined with oral analgesics or oral triptans. If, however, nausea is severe or vomiting occurs, treatment with an antiemetic with proven efficacy on the nausea of migraine can be indicated.
Collapse
|
5
|
Lecchi M, D’Alonzo L, Negro A, Martelletti P. Pharmacokinetics and safety of a new aspirin formulation for the acute treatment of primary headaches. Expert Opin Drug Metab Toxicol 2014; 10:1381-95. [DOI: 10.1517/17425255.2014.952631] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/18/2022]
|
6
|
Kirthi V, Derry S, Moore RA. Aspirin with or without an antiemetic for acute migraine headaches in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2013; 2013:CD008041. [PMID: 23633350 PMCID: PMC6483629 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd008041.pub3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 36] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/13/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND This is an updated version of the original Cochrane review published in Issue 4, 2010 (Kirthi 2010). Migraine is a common, disabling condition and a burden for the individual, health services and society. Many sufferers choose not to, or are unable to, seek professional help and rely on over-the-counter analgesics. Co-therapy with an antiemetic should help to reduce nausea and vomiting commonly associated with migraine headaches. OBJECTIVES To determine the efficacy and tolerability of aspirin, 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 10 March 2010 for the original review and to 31 January 2013 for the update. SELECTION CRITERIA We included randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled or active-controlled studies, or both, using aspirin 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 numbers needed to treat (NNT) or harm (NNH) compared to placebo or other active treatment. MAIN RESULTS No new studies were found for this update. Thirteen studies (4222 participants) compared aspirin 900 mg or 1000 mg, alone or in combination with metoclopramide 10 mg, with placebo or other active comparators, mainly sumatriptan 50 mg or 100 mg. For all efficacy outcomes, all active treatments were superior to placebo, with NNTs of 8.1, 4.9 and 6.6 for 2-hour pain-free, 2-hour headache relief, and 24-hour headache relief with aspirin alone versus placebo, and 8.8, 3.3 and 6.2 with aspirin plus metoclopramide versus placebo. Sumatriptan 50 mg did not differ from aspirin alone for 2-hour pain-free and headache relief, while sumatriptan 100 mg was better than the combination of aspirin plus metoclopramide for 2-hour pain-free, but not headache relief; there were no data for 24-hour headache relief.Adverse events were mostly mild and transient, occurring slightly more often with aspirin than placebo.Additional metoclopramide significantly reduced nausea (P < 0.00006) and vomiting (P = 0.002) compared with aspirin alone. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS We found no new studies since the last version of this review. Aspirin 1000 mg is an effective treatment for acute migraine headaches, similar to sumatriptan 50 mg or 100 mg. Addition of metoclopramide 10 mg improves relief of nausea and vomiting. Adverse events were mainly mild and transient, and were slightly more common with aspirin than placebo, but less common than with sumatriptan 100 mg.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Varo Kirthi
- King's College HospitalDepartment of OphthalmologyLondonUKSE5 9RS
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
7
|
Kirthi V, Derry S, Moore RA, McQuay HJ. Aspirin with or without an antiemetic for acute migraine headaches in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2010:CD008041. [PMID: 20393963 PMCID: PMC4163048 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd008041.pub2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 29] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/13/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Migraine is a common, disabling condition and a burden for the individual, health services and society. Many sufferers choose not to, or are unable to, seek professional help and rely on over-the-counter analgesics. Co-therapy with an antiemetic should help to reduce nausea and vomiting commonly associated with migraine headaches. OBJECTIVES To determine the efficacy and tolerability of aspirin, 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 10 March 2010. SELECTION CRITERIA We included randomised, double-blind, placebo- or active-controlled studies using aspirin to treat a discrete 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 numbers needed to treat (NNT) or harm (NNH) compared to placebo or other active treatment. MAIN RESULTS Thirteen studies (4222 participants) compared aspirin 900 mg or 1000 mg, alone or in combination with metoclopramide 10 mg, with placebo or other active comparators, mainly sumatriptan 50 mg or 100 mg. For all efficacy outcomes, all active treatments were superior to placebo, with NNTs of 8.1, 4.9 and 6.6 for 2-hour pain-free, 2-hour headache relief, and 24-hour headache relief with aspirin alone versus placebo, and 8.8, 3.3 and 6.2 with aspirin plus metoclopramide versus placebo. Sumatriptan 50 mg did not differ from aspirin alone for 2-hour pain-free and headache relief, while sumatriptan 100 mg was better than the combination of aspirin plus metoclopramide for 2-hour pain-free, but not headache relief; there were no data for 24-hour headache relief.Associated symptoms of nausea, vomiting, photophobia and phonophobia were reduced with aspirin compared with placebo, with additional metoclopramide significantly reducing nausea (P < 0.00006) and vomiting (P = 0.002) compared with aspirin alone.Fewer participants needed rescue medication with aspirin than with placebo. Adverse events were mostly mild and transient, occurring slightly more often with aspirin than placebo. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS Aspirin 1000 mg is an effective treatment for acute migraine headaches, similar to sumatriptan 50 mg or 100 mg. Addition of metoclopramide 10 mg improves relief of nausea and vomiting. Adverse events were mainly mild and transient, and were slightly more common with aspirin than placebo, but less common than with sumatriptan 100 mg.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Varo Kirthi
- Pain Research and Nuffield Department of Anaesthetics, University of Oxford, West Wing (Level 6), John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford, Oxfordshire, UK, OX3 9DU
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
8
|
Abstract
Fixed drug combinations (FDCs) combine standardised doses of two or more drugs in a single tablet, injection, nasal spray or suppository. FDCs may improve treatment compliance, efficacy or tolerability through a variety of mechanisms. At present, FDCs are commonly used in migraine treatment, and more are in development. This systematic review identified 43 prospective trials of FDCs in use for the acute treatment of migraine. Quantitative combination and analysis of the data were not possible, but results of the review support the following qualitative conclusions. First, many FDCs in use for the acute treatment of migraine are older drugs. In these cases, clinical trial evidence that the FDC is efficacious or has important advantages over its treatment components is lacking. The benefits assumed for some common FDC ingredients such as caffeine and metoclopramide are not clearly confirmed in these trials. Secondly, the use of barbiturate-containing FDCs for the acute treatment of migraine is not evidence based, and these drugs are frequently implicated in the development of dependence or medication-induced headache syndromes. Thirdly, studied opioid-containing FDCs are generally superior to placebo, but evidence regarding the safety and tolerability of their repeated use in the treatment of migraine is lacking; clinical experience dictates caution in the use of these agents. Fourthly, ergotamine-containing FDCs are generally superior to placebo, but perform poorly in comparison with single-agent selective serotonin 5-HT(1B/1D) receptor agonists ('triptans'), NSAIDs or even isometheptene or opioid comparators, and are less well tolerated. Fifthly, the most consistent and impressive evidence of benefit is for NSAID-containing FDCs. These invariably outperform placebo and are equivalent or superior to active comparators. Finally, with renewed interest in the use of FDCs for the acute treatment of migraine, high-quality evidence of a benefit for such treatments is emerging. An FDC containing a triptan and NSAID seems most likely to provide efficacy and tolerability benefits in the acute treatment of migraine. Such an FDC is in development but not yet approved for use.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Elizabeth Loder
- Harvard Medical School, Pain and Headache Management Programs, Spaulding Rehabilitation Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts 02114, USA
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Linklater DR, Pemberton L, Taylor S, Zeger W. Painful Dilemmas: An Evidence-based Look at Challenging Clinical Scenarios. Emerg Med Clin North Am 2005; 23:367-92. [PMID: 15829388 DOI: 10.1016/j.emc.2004.12.007] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/25/2022]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Derek R Linklater
- College of Medicine, Texas A & M University, College Station, TX 77843, USA.
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
10
|
Abstract
Ergotamine and dihydroergotamine share structural similarities with the adrenergic, dopaminergic, and serotonergic neurotransmitters. As a result, they have wide-ranging effects on the physiologic processes that they mediate. Ergotamine and dihydroergotamine are highly potent at the 5-HT1B and 5-HT1D antimigraine receptors and, as a consequence, the plasma concentrations that are necessary to produce the appropriate therapeutic and physiologic effects are very low. The broad spectrum of activity at other monoamine receptors is responsible for their side effect profile (dysphoria, nausea, emesis, unnecessary vascular effects). Both ergotamine and dihydroergotamine have sustained vasoconstrictor actions. In acute migraine treatment, their mechanisms of action involve constricting the pain-producing intracranial extracerebral blood vessels at the 5-HT1B receptors and inhibiting the trigeminal neurotransmission at the peripheral and central 5-HT1D receptors. The scientific evidence for efficacy is stronger for dihydroergotamine than for ergotamine. Their wide use is based on long-term experience.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Stephen D Silberstein
- Department of Neurology, Thomas Jefferson University Hospital, Philadelphia, Pa. 19107, USA
| | | |
Collapse
|