Safety and efficacy of deep brain stimulation in refractory cluster headache: a randomized placebo-controlled double-blind trial followed by a 1-year open extension

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.

Emerging relevance of circadian rhythms in headaches and neuropathic pain

Circadian rhythms of physiology are the keys to health and fitness, as dysregulation, by genetic mutations or environmental factors, increases disease risk and aggravates progression. Molecular and physiological studies have shed important light on an intrinsic clock that drives circadian rhythms and serves essential roles in metabolic homoeostasis, organ physiology and brain functions. One exciting new area in circadian research is pain, including headache and neuropathic pain for which new mechanistic insights have recently emerged. For example, cluster headache is an intermittent pain disorder with an exceedingly precise circadian timing, and preliminary evidence is emerging linking several circadian components (eg, Clock and Nr1d1) with the disease. In this review, we first discuss the broad metabolic and physiological relevance of the circadian timing system. We then provide a detailed review of the circadian relevance in pain disease and physiology, including cluster headache, migraine, hypnic headache and neuropathic pain. Finally, we describe potential therapeutic implications, including existing pain medicines and novel clock-modulating compounds. The physiological basis for the circadian rhythms in pain is an exciting new area of research with profound basic and translational impact.

A new era in headache treatment

Primary headache disorders, such as migraine and cluster headache, are common and often debilitating. When preventive therapy is needed, several oral medications are used. Patients tend to have poor adherence and persistence on their preventive therapy. The introduction of treatments blocking calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) is anticipated to begin a new era in migraine preventive treatment. In addition, non-triptan serotonin receptor agonists, newer delivery systems for older therapies, and innovative devices represent other exciting advances in acute and preventive migraine and cluster treatment and shall also be discussed in this review.

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.

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.

Treatment of Cluster Headache

Cluster headache (CH) is a debilitating primary headache disorder. Although uncommon, affecting only 0.1% of population, it is one of the most painful conditions known to humankind. Three strategies are employed for effective treatment of CH, namely, abortive therapy, transitional therapy, and preventive therapy. Being an uncommon condition, there is a paucity of large-scale controlled trials and evidence of various therapies are based on smaller studies. This review primarily focuses on therapies with highest quality of evidence and also on the emerging therapies for CH.

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.

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.

Cluster headache: present and future therapy

Cluster headache is characterized by severe, unilateral headache attacks of orbital, supraorbital or temporal pain lasting 15-180 min accompanied by ipsilateral lacrimation, rhinorrhea and other cranial autonomic manifestations. Cluster headache attacks need fast-acting abortive agents because the pain peaks very quickly; sumatriptan injection is the gold standard acute treatment. First-line preventative drugs include verapamil and carbolithium. Other drugs demonstrated effective in open trials include topiramate, valproic acid, gabapentin and others. Steroids are very effective; local injection in the occipital area is also effective but its prolonged use needs caution. Monoclonal antibodies against calcitonin gene-related peptide are under investigation as prophylactic agents in both episodic and chronic cluster headache. A number of neurostimulation procedures including occipital nerve stimulation, vagus nerve stimulation, sphenopalatine ganglion stimulation and the more invasive hypothalamic stimulation are employed in chronic intractable cluster headache.

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.

Treatment of Cluster Headache: The American Headache Society Evidence-Based Guidelines

BACKGROUND

Cluster headache (CH), the most common trigeminal autonomic cephalalgia, is an extremely debilitating primary headache disorder that is often not optimally treated. New evidence-based treatment guidelines for CH will assist clinicians with identifying and choosing among current treatment options.

OBJECTIVES

In this systematic review we appraise the available evidence for the acute and prophylactic treatment of CH, and provide an update of the 2010 American Academy of Neurology (AAN) endorsed systematic review.

METHODS

Medline, PubMed, and EMBASE databases were searched for double-blind, randomized controlled trials that investigated treatments of CH in adults. Exclusion and inclusion criteria were identical to those utilized in the 2010 AAN systematic review.

RESULTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

For acute treatment, sumatriptan subcutaneous, zolmitriptan nasal spray, and high flow oxygen remain the treatments with a Level A recommendation. Since the 2010 review, a study of sphenopalatine ganglion stimulation was added to the current guideline and has been administered a Level B recommendation for acute treatment. For prophylactic therapy, previously there were no treatments that were administered a Level A recommendation. For the current guidelines, suboccipital steroid injections have emerged as the only treatment to receive a Level A recommendation with the addition of a second Class I study. Other newly evaluated treatments since the 2010 guidelines have been given a Level B recommendation (negative study: deep brain stimulation), a Level C recommendation (positive study: warfarin; negative studies: cimetidine/chlorpheniramine, candesartan), or a Level U recommendation (frovatriptan).

CONCLUSIONS

This AHS guideline can be utilized for understanding which therapies have superiority to placebo or sham treatment in the management of CH. In clinical practice, these recommendations should be considered in concert with other variables including safety, side effects, patient preferences, clinician experience, cost, and the invasiveness of the intervention. Given the lack of Class I evidence and Level A recommendations, particularly for a number of commonly used preventive therapies, further studies are warranted to demonstrate safety and efficacy for established and emerging therapies.

Central and Peripheral Neural Targets for Neurostimulation of Chronic Headaches

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Chronic headache sufferers are estimated to be around 3% of the population. These patients have a high disease burden. When prophylactic treatments have low efficacy and tolerability, patients are in need of alternative therapeutic strategies and options.

RECENT FINDINGS

In the last decade, a number of neuromodulation procedures have been introduced as treatment of chronic intractable headache patients when pharmacological treatments fail or are not well tolerated. Neurostimulation of peripheral and central nervous system has been carried out, and now, various non-invasive and invasive stimulation devices are available. Non-invasive neurostimulation options include vagus nerve stimulation, supraorbital stimulation and single-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation; invasive procedures include occipital nerve stimulation, sphenopalatine ganglion stimulation and hypothalamic deep brain stimulation. In many cases, results supporting their use derive from open-label series and small controlled trial studies. Lack of adequate placebo hampers adequate randomized controlled trials. In this paper, we give an overview on the main neurostimulation procedures in terms of results and putative mechanism of cation.

Current Approaches to Neuromodulation in Primary Headaches: Focus on Vagal Nerve and Sphenopalatine Ganglion Stimulation

Neuromodulation is a promising, novel approach for the treatment of primary headache disorders. Neuromodulation offers a new dimension in the treatment that is both easily reversible and tends to be very well tolerated. The autonomic nervous system is a logical target given the neurobiology of common primary headache disorders, such as migraine and the trigeminal autonomic cephalalgias (TACs). This article will review new encouraging results of studies from the most recent literature on neuromodulation as acute and preventive treatment in primary headache disorders, and cover some possible underlying mechanisms. We will especially focus on vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) and sphenopalatine ganglion (SPG) since they have targeted autonomic pathways that are cranial and can modulate relevant pathophysiological mechanisms. The initial data suggests these approaches will find an important role in headache disorder management going forward.

Occipital nerve stimulation improves the quality of life in medically-intractable chronic cluster headache: Results of an observational prospective study

Background Occipital nerve stimulation (ONS) has been proposed to treat chronic medically-intractable cluster headache (iCCH) in small series of cases without evaluation of its functional and emotional impacts. Methods We report the multidimensional outcome of a large observational study of iCCH patients, treated by ONS within a nationwide multidisciplinary network ( https://clinicaltrials.gov NCT01842763), with a one-year follow-up. Prospective evaluation was performed before surgery, then three and 12 months after. Results One year after ONS, the attack frequency per week was decreased >30% in 64% and >50% in 59% of the 44 patients. Mean (Standard Deviation) weekly attack frequency decreased from 21.5 (16.3) to 10.7 (13.8) ( p = 0.0002). About 70% of the patients responded to ONS, 47.8% being excellent responders. Prophylactic treatments could be decreased in 40% of patients. Functional (HIT-6 and MIDAS scales) and emotional (HAD scale) impacts were significantly improved, as well as the health-related quality of life (EQ-5D). The mean (SD) EQ-5D visual analogic scale score increased from 35.2 (23.6) to 51.9 (25.7) ( p = 0.0037). Surgical minor complications were observed in 33% of the patients. Conclusion ONS significantly reduced the attack frequency per week, as well as the functional and emotional headache impacts in iCCH patients, and dramatically improved the health-related quality of life of responders.

Cluster headache and other TACs: Pathophysiology and neurostimulation options

BACKGROUND

The trigeminal autonomic cephalalgias (TACs) are highly disabling primary headache disorders. There are several issues that remain unresolved in the understanding of the pathophysiology of the TACs, although activation of the trigeminal-autonomic reflex and ipsilateral hypothalamic activation both play a central role. The discovery of the central role of the hypothalamus led to its use as a therapeutic target. After the good results obtained with hypothalamic stimulation, other peripheral neuromodulation targets were tried in the management of refractory cluster headache (CH) and other TACs.

METHODS

This review is a summary both of CH pathophysiology and of efficacy of the different neuromodulation techniques.

RESULTS

In chronic cluster headache (CCH) patients, hypothalamic deep brain stimulation (DBS) produced a decrease in attack frequency of more than 50% in 60% of patients. Occipital nerve stimulation (ONS) also elicited favorable outcomes with a reduction of more than 50% of attacks in around 70% of patients with medically intractable CCH. Stimulation of the sphenopalatine ganglion (SPG) with a miniaturized implanted stimulator produced a clinically significant improvement in 68% of patients (acute, preventive, or both). Vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) with a portable device used in conjunction with standard of care in CH patients resulted in a reduction in the number of attacks. DBS and ONS have been used successfully in some cases of other TACs, including hemicrania continua (HC) and short-lasting unilateral headache attacks (SUNHA).

CONCLUSIONS

DBS has good results, but it is a more invasive technique and can generate serious adverse events. ONS has good results, but frequent and not serious adverse events. SPG stimulation (SPGS) is also efficacious in the acute and prophylactic treatment of refractory cluster headache. At this moment, ONS and SPG stimulation techniques are recommended as first line therapy in refractory cluster patients. New recent non-invasive approaches such as the non-invasive vagal nerve stimulator (nVNS) have shown efficacy in a few trials and could be an interesting alternative in the management of CH, but require more testing and positive randomized controlled trials.

Deep brain stimulation in headache

BACKGROUND

Deep brain stimulation of the posterior hypothalamic area was first introduced in 2000 to treat drug-refractory chronic cluster headache (CH).

FINDINGS

So far, hypothalamic stimulation has been employed in 79 patients suffering from various forms of intractable short-lasting unilateral headache forms, mainly trigeminal autonomic cephalalgias. The majority were (88.6%) chronic CH, including one patient who suffered from symptomatic chronic CH-like attacks; the remaining were short-lasting unilateral neuralgiform headache attacks with conjunctival injection and tearing (SUNCT), one had paroxysmal hemicranias and one symptomatic trigeminal neuralgia. Overall, after a mean follow up of 2.2 years, 69.6% (55) hypothalamic-stimulated patients showed a ≥50% improvement.

CONCLUSIONS

These observations need confirmation in randomised, controlled trials. A key role of the posterior hypothalamic area in the pathophysiology of unilateral short-lasting headaches, possibly by regulating the duration rather than triggering the attacks, can be hypothesised. Because of its invasiveness, hypothalamic stimulation can be proposed only after other, less-invasive, neurostimulation procedures have been tried.

Transcranial magnetic stimulation and potential cortical and trigeminothalamic mechanisms in migraine

A single pulse of transcranial magnetic stimulation has been shown to be effective for the acute treatment of migraine with and without aura. Here we aimed to investigate the potential mechanisms of action of transcranial magnetic stimulation, using a transcortical approach, in preclinical migraine models. We tested the susceptibility of cortical spreading depression, the experimental correlate of migraine aura, and further evaluated the response of spontaneous and evoked trigeminovascular activity of second order trigemontothalamic and third order thalamocortical neurons in rats. Single pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation significantly inhibited both mechanical and chemically-induced cortical spreading depression when administered immediately post-induction in rats, but not when administered preinduction, and when controlled by a sham stimulation. Additionally transcranial magnetic stimulation significantly inhibited the spontaneous and evoked firing rate of third order thalamocortical projection neurons, but not second order neurons in the trigeminocervical complex, suggesting a potential modulatory effect that may underlie its utility in migraine. In gyrencephalic cat cortices, when administered post-cortical spreading depression, transcranial magnetic stimulation blocked the propagation of cortical spreading depression in two of eight animals. These results are the first to demonstrate that cortical spreading depression can be blocked in vivo using single pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation and further highlight a novel thalamocortical modulatory capacity that may explain the efficacy of magnetic stimulation in the treatment of migraine with and without aura.

Deep brain stimulation versus motor cortex stimulation for neuropathic pain: A minireview of the literature and proposal for future research

The treatment of neuropathic pain remains a public health concern. A growing cohort of patients is plagued by medically refractory, unrelenting severe neuropathic pain that ruins their quality of life and productivity. For this group, neurosurgery can offer two different kinds of neuromodulation that may help: deep brain simulation (DBS) and motor cortex stimulation (MCS). Unfortunately, there is no consensus on how to perform these procedures, which stimulation parameters to select, how to measure success, and which patients may benefit. This brief review highlights the literature supporting each technique and attempts to provide some comparisons and contrasts between DBS and MCS for the treatment of neuropathic pain. Finally, we highlight the current unanswered questions in the field and suggest future research strategies that may advance the care of our patients with neuropathic pain.

Non-Invasive Neuromodulation for Headache Disorders

Migraine and other chronic headache disorders are common and if inadequately treated, can lead to significant disability. The effectiveness of medications can be limited by side effects, drug interactions, and comorbid diseases necessitating alternative methods. Technological developments in the past 5 years have made it possible to use non-invasive methods of neuromodulation to treat primary headache disorders. This field includes technologies such as supraorbital transcutaneous stimulation (STS), transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS), and non-invasive vagal nerve stimulation (nVNS). Existing trials show these modalities are safe and well tolerated and can be combined with standard pharmacotherapy. We review the technologies, biological rationales, and trials involving non-invasive neuromodulation for the treatment of primary headache disorders.

Endoventricular Deep Brain Stimulation of the Third Ventricle

BACKGROUND:

The third ventricle (3rd V) is surrounded by centers related to satiety, homeostasis, hormones, sleep, memory, and pain. Stimulation of the wall of the 3rd V could be useful to treat disorders related to dysfunction of the hypothalamus.

OBJECTIVE:

To assess safety and efficacy of endoventricular electrical stimulation of the hypothalamus using a floating deep brain stimulation (DBS) lead laid on the floor of the 3rd V to treat refractory cluster headaches (CH).

METHODS:

Seven patients, aged 24 to 60 years, experiencing chronic CH (mean chronic duration 5.8 ± 2.5 years) were enrolled in this pilot, prospective, open study assessing the safety and potential efficacy of chronic DBS of the 3rd V. Number of attacks was collected during baseline and was compared with those occurring at 3, 6, and 12 months postoperation. Any side effects that occurred during or after surgery were reported. Effect on mood was assessed using the Hospital Anxiety and Depression scale during baseline and at 6 and 12 months postoperation.

RESULTS:

Insertion of the lead into the posterior 3rd V and chronic stimulation was feasible and safe in all patients. The voltage ranged from 0.9 to 2.3 volts. The most common side effect was transient trembling vision during stimulation. At 12 months, 3 of 7 patients were pain free, 2 had 90% improvement, 1 of 7 had 75% improvement, and 1 of 7 was not significantly improved.

CONCLUSION:

This proof of concept demonstrates the feasibility, safety, and potential efficacy of 3rd V DBS using an endoventricular road that could be applied to treat various diseases involving hypothalamic areas.

Long-term effectiveness of sphenopalatine ganglion stimulation for cluster headache

Objectives

The sphenopalatine ganglion (SPG) plays a pivotal role in cluster headache (CH) pathophysiology as the major efferent parasympathetic relay. We evaluated the long-term effectiveness of SPG stimulation in medically refractory, chronic CH patients.

Methods

Thirty-three patients were enrolled in an open-label follow-up study of the original Pathway CH-1 study, and participated through 24 months post-insertion of a microstimulator. Response to therapy was defined as acute effectiveness in ≥ 50% of attacks or a ≥ 50% reduction in attack frequency versus baseline.

Results

In total, 5956 attacks (180.5 ± 344.8, range 2–1581 per patient) were evaluated. At 24 months, 45% (n = 15) of patients were acute responders. Among acute responders, a total of 4340 attacks had been treated, and in 78% of these, effective therapy was achieved using only SPG stimulation (relief from moderate or greater pain or freedom from mild pain or greater). A frequency response was observed in 33% (n = 11) of patients with a mean reduction of attack frequency of 83% versus baseline. In total, 61% (20/33) of all patients were either acute or frequency responders or both. The majority maintained their therapeutic response through the 24-month evaluation.

Conclusions

In the population of disabled, medically refractory chronic CH patients treated in this study, SPG stimulation is an effective acute therapy in 45% of patients, offering sustained effectiveness over 24 months of observation. In addition, a maintained, clinically relevant reduction of attack frequency was observed in a third of patients. These long-term data provide support for the use of SPG stimulation for disabled patients and should be considered after medical treatments fail, are not tolerated or are inconvenient for the patients.

Neurostimulation in the treatment of primary headaches

There is increasing interest in using neurostimulation to treat headache disorders. There are now several non-invasive and invasive stimulation devices available with some open-label series and small controlled trial studies that support their use. Non-invasive stimulation options include supraorbital stimulation (Cefaly), vagus nerve stimulation (gammaCore) and single-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation (SpringTMS). Invasive procedures include occipital nerve stimulation, sphenopalatine ganglion stimulation and ventral tegmental area deep brain stimulation. These stimulation devices may find a place in the treatment pathway of headache disorders. Here, we explore the basic principles of neurostimulation for headache and overview the available methods of neurostimulation.

Pilot study of sphenopalatine injection of onabotulinumtoxinA for the treatment of intractable chronic cluster headache

OBJECTIVE

The main object of this pilot study was to investigate the safety of administering onabotulinumtoxinA (BTA) towards the sphenopalatine ganglion (SPG) in intractable chronic cluster headache. Efficacy data were also collected to provide indication on whether future placebo-controlled studies should be performed.

METHOD

In a prospective, open-label, uncontrolled study, we performed a single injection of 25 IU (n = 5) or 50 IU BTA (n = 5) towards the SPG in 10 patients with intractable chronic cluster headache with a follow-up of 24 weeks. The primary outcome was adverse events (AEs) and the main efficacy outcome was attack frequency in weeks 3 and 4 post-treatment.

RESULTS

A total of 11 AEs were registered. There was one severe adverse event (SAE): posterior epistaxis. The number of cluster headache attacks (main efficacy outcome) was statistically significantly reduced in the intention-to-treat analysis from 18 ± 12 per week in baseline to 11 ± 14 (p = 0.038) in weeks 3 and 4, and five out of 10 patients had at least 50% reduction of attack frequency compared to baseline. The cluster attack frequency was significantly reduced for five out of six months post-treatment.

CONCLUSION

Randomised, placebo-controlled studies are warranted to establish the potential of this possible novel treatment of cluster headache.

Invasive occipital nerve stimulation for refractory chronic cluster headache: what evolution at long-term? Strengths and weaknesses of the method

Background

Invasive Occipital Nerve Stimulation (iONS) is a costly technique which appears effective in drug-refractory chronic cluster headache (drCCH) management. Available data on long-term effectiveness and safety of iONS in this indication are scarce, though they could be useful to neurologists and patients in daily practice. The purpose of this short report is to discuss the very long-term outcome of a drCCH cohort, including adverse events.

Findings

Previously, favourable results were obtained with iONS in 15 drCCH patients: 80 % were significantly improved and 60 % were pain free. We report here the very long-term follow-up (up to nine years) of 10 patients belonging to this cohort. Meanwhile 5 patients had to be definitively explanted because of device infection (3) or paresthesia intolerance (2). Four patients (40 %) evolved to an episodic form of CH. Six remained chronic but their attack frequency was decreased by 70 % on average. Intake of preventive drugs is still necessary in 80 % of patients. All patients needed at least one battery replacement.

Conclusions

Up to nine years after implantation, iONS is still effective in most patients with drCCH. Concomitant preventive drugs remain often necessary. Forty percent of patients reverse to episodic CH, possibly by natural history. iONS is not a benign procedure but device-related complications appear similar to those reported with other invasive neurostimulators.

A decade of emerging indications: deep brain stimulation in the United States

OBJECTIVE Deep brain stimulation (DBS) is an emerging treatment option for an expanding set of neurological and psychiatric diseases. Despite growing enthusiasm, the patterns and implications of this rapid adoption are largely unknown. National trends in DBS surgery performed for all indications between 2002 and 2011 are reported. METHODS Using a national database of hospital discharges, admissions for DBS for 14 indications were identified and categorized as either FDA approved, humanitarian device exempt (HDE), or emerging. Trends over time were examined, differences were analyzed by univariate analyses, and outcomes were analyzed by hierarchical regression analyses. RESULTS Between 2002 and 2011, there were an estimated 30,490 discharges following DBS for approved indications, 1647 for HDE indications, and 2014 for emerging indications. The volume for HDE and emerging indications grew at 36.1% annually in comparison with 7.0% for approved indications. DBS for emerging indications occurred at hospitals with more neurosurgeons and neurologists locally, but not necessarily at those with the highest DBS caseloads. Patients treated for HDE and emerging indications were younger with lower comorbidity scores. HDE and emerging indications were associated with greater rates of reported complications, longer lengths of stay, and greater total costs. CONCLUSIONS DBS for HDE and emerging indications underwent rapid growth in the last decade, and it is not exclusively the most experienced DBS practitioners leading the charge to treat the newest indications. Surgeons may be selecting younger and healthier patients for their early experiences. Differences in reported complication rates warrant further attention and additional costs should be anticipated as surgeons gain experience with new patient populations and targets.

[Cluster headache treatment]

Acute treatment: sumatriptan, oxygen inhalation. Prophylactic treatment: verapamil, lithium carbonate. Transitional treatment.

SURGICAL TREATMENT

deep brain stimulation, occipital nerve stimulation, stimulation of the sphenopalatin ganglion.

Non-invasive vagus nerve stimulation for PREVention and Acute treatment of chronic cluster headache (PREVA): A randomised controlled study

Background

Chronic cluster headache (CH) is a debilitating disorder for which few well-controlled studies demonstrate effectiveness of available therapies. Non-invasive vagus nerve stimulation (nVNS) was examined as adjunctive prophylactic treatment of chronic CH.

Methods

PREVA was a prospective, open-label, randomised study that compared adjunctive prophylactic nVNS (n = 48) with standard of care (SoC) alone (control (n = 49)). A two-week baseline phase was followed by a four-week randomised phase (SoC plus nVNS vs control) and a four-week extension phase (SoC plus nVNS). The primary end point was the reduction in the mean number of CH attacks per week. Response rate, abortive medication use and safety/tolerability were also assessed.

Results

During the randomised phase, individuals in the intent-to-treat population treated with SoC plus nVNS (n = 45) had a significantly greater reduction in the number of attacks per week vs controls (n = 48) (−5.9 vs −2.1, respectively) for a mean therapeutic gain of 3.9 fewer attacks per week (95% CI: 0.5, 7.2; p = 0.02). Higher ≥50% response rates were also observed with SoC plus nVNS (40% (18/45)) vs controls (8.3% (4/48); p < 0.001). No serious treatment-related adverse events occurred.

Conclusion

Adjunctive prophylactic nVNS is a well-tolerated novel treatment for chronic CH, offering clinical benefits beyond those with SoC.

Neurostimulation for Treatment of Migraine and Cluster Headache

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this narrative review is to summarize the current state of neurostimulation therapies for the treatment of migraine and/or cluster.

METHODS

For this narrative review, publications were identified by searching PubMed using the search terms "migraine" or "cluster" combined with "vagal nerve stimulation," "transcranial magnetic stimulation," "supraorbital nerve stimulation," "sphenopalatine ganglion stimulation," "occipital nerve stimulation," "deep brain stimulation," "neurostimulation," or "neuromodulation." Publications were chosen based on the quality of data that were provided and their relevance to the chosen topics of interest for this review. Reference lists of chosen articles and the authors' own files were used to identify additional publications. Current clinical trials were identified by searching clinicaltrials.org.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

Neurostimulation of the vagal nerve, supraorbital nerve, occipital nerve and sphenopalatine ganglion, transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS), and deep brain stimulation have been investigated for the treatment of migraine and/or cluster. Whereas invasive methods of neurostimulation would be reserved for patients with very severe and treatment refractory migraine or cluster, noninvasive methods of stimulation might serve as useful adjuncts to more conventional therapies. Currently, transcutaneous supraorbital nerve stimulation is FDA approved and commercially available for migraine prevention and TMS is FDA approved for the treatment of migraine with aura. The potential utility of each type of neurostimulation has yet to be completely defined.

Deep brain stimulation for chronic pain

Deep brain stimulation (DBS) is a neurosurgical intervention popularised in movement disorders such as Parkinson's disease, and also reported to improve symptoms of epilepsy, Tourette's syndrome, obsessive compulsive disorders and cluster headache. Since the 1950s, DBS has been used as a treatment to relieve intractable pain of several aetiologies including post stroke pain, phantom limb pain, facial pain and brachial plexus avulsion. Several patient series have shown benefits in stimulating various brain areas, including the sensory thalamus (ventral posterior lateral and medial), the periaqueductal and periventricular grey, or, more recently, the anterior cingulate cortex. However, this technique remains "off label" in the USA as it does not have Federal Drug Administration approval. Consequently, only a small number of surgeons report DBS for pain using current technology and techniques and few regions approve it. Randomised, blinded and controlled clinical trials that may use novel trial methodologies are desirable to evaluate the efficacy of DBS in patients who are refractory to other therapies. New imaging techniques, including tractography, may help optimise electrode placement and clinical outcome.

Surgery for treatment of refractory chronic cluster headache: toward standard procedures

The degree of disability due to chronic cluster headache refractory to conservative treatments justifies surgical procedures as second-line treatments. Many studies and reports nowadays confirm the efficacy of the two mostly used surgical techniques in such cases. Both deep brain stimulation and occipital nerve stimulation are in fact currently utilized for this purpose but the surgical technique has not yet been standardized. We describe the surgical steps of both procedures.

Deep brain stimulation for chronic pain: intracranial targets, clinical outcomes, and trial design considerations

For over half a century, neurosurgeons have attempted to treat pain from a diversity of causes using acute and chronic intracranial stimulation. Targets of stimulation have included the sensory thalamus, periventricular and periaqueductal gray, the septum, the internal capsule, the motor cortex, posterior hypothalamus, and more recently, the anterior cingulate cortex. The current work focuses on presenting and evaluating the evidence for the efficacy of these targets in a historical context while also highlighting the major challenges to having a double-blind placebo-controlled clinical trial. Considerations for pain research in general and use of intracranial targets specifically are included.

Trigeminal autonomic cephalalgias: beyond the conventional treatments

The trigeminal autonomic cephalalgias include cluster headache, paroxysmal hemicrania, short-lasting unilateral neuralgiform headache attacks, and hemicrania continua. While the majority responds to conventional pharmacological treatments, a small but significant proportion of patients are intractable to these treatments. In these cases, alternative choices for these patients include oral and injectable drugs, lesional or resectional surgery, and neurostimulation. The evidence base for conventional treatments is limited, and the evidence for those used beyond convention is more so. At present, the most evidence exists for nerve blocks, deep brain stimulation, occipital nerve stimulation, sphenopalatine ganglion stimulation in chronic cluster headache, and microvascular decompression of the trigeminal nerve in short-lasting unilateral neuralgiform headache attacks.

The Neuropharmacology of Cluster Headache and other Trigeminal Autonomic Cephalalgias

Trigeminal autonomic cephalalgias (TACs) are a group of primary headaches including cluster headache (CH), paroxysmal hemicrania (PH) and short-lasting unilateral neuralgiform headache with conjunctival injection and tearing (SUNCT). Another form, hemicrania continua (HC), is also included this group due to its clinical and pathophysiological similarities. CH is the most common of these syndromes, the others being infrequent in the general population. The pathophysiology of the TACs has been partly elucidated by a number of recent neuroimaging studies, which implicate brain regions associated with nociception (pain matrix). In addition, the hypothalamic activation observed in the course of TAC attacks and the observed efficacy of hypothalamic neurostimulation in CH patients suggest that the hypothalamus is another key structure. Hypothalamic activation may indeed be involved in attack initiation, but it may also lead to a condition of central facilitation underlying the recurrence of pain episodes. The TACs share many pathophysiological features, but are characterised by differences in attack duration and frequency, and to some extent treatment response. Although alternative strategies for the TACs, especially CH, are now emerging (such as neurostimulation techniques), this review focuses on the available pharmacological treatments complying with the most recent guidelines. We discuss the clinical efficacy and tolerability of the currently used drugs. Due to the low frequency of most TACs, few randomised controlled trials have been conducted. The therapies of choice in CH continue to be the triptans and oxygen for acute treatment, and verapamil and lithium for prevention, but promising results have recently been obtained with novel modes of administration of the triptans and other agents, and several other treatments are currently under study. Indomethacin is extremely effective in PH and HC, while antiepileptic drugs (especially lamotrigine) appear to be increasingly useful in SUNCT. We highlight the need for appropriate studies investigating treatments for these rare, but lifelong and disabling conditions.

Neuromodulation in cluster headache

Medically refractory chronic cluster headache (CH) is a severely disabling headache condition for which several surgical procedures have been proposed as a prophylactic treatment. None of them have been evaluated in controlled conditions, only open studies and case series being available. Destructive procedures (radiofrequency lesioning, radiosurgery, section) and microvascular decompression of the trigeminal nerve or the sphenopalatine ganglion (SPG) have induced short-term improvement which did not maintain on long term in most of the patients. They carried a high risk of complications, including severe sensory loss and neuropathic pain, and consequently should not be proposed in first intention.Deep brain stimulation (DBS), targeting the presumed CH generator in the retro-hypothalamic region or fibers connecting it, decreased the attack frequency >50 in 60 % of the 52 patients reported. Complications were infrequent: gaze disturbances, autonomic disturbances, and intracranial hemorrhage (2).Occipital nerve stimulation (ONS) was efficient (decrease of attack frequency >50 %) in about 70 % of the 60 patients reported, with a low risk of complications (essentially hardware related). Considering their respective risks, ONS should be proposed first and DBS only in case of ONS failure.New on-demand chronically implanted SPG stimulation seemed to be efficient to abort CH attacks in a pilot controlled trial, but its long-term safety needs to be further studied.

[Neuromodulation for neuropathic pain]

In pain therapy neurostimulation procedures have replaced the previously used lesional methods with only very few exceptions. This is especially true for neuropathic pain, i.e. pain which occurs as a direct consequence of a lesion or disease of the somatosensory system. Nowadays, various stimulation procedures are included in the neurosurgical and anesthesiological armamentarium for pain therapy, depending on the site of damage. This article gives an overview of the currently used invasive stimulation procedures and the indications.

Supraspinal stimulation for treatment of refractory pain

Refractory pain syndromes often have far reaching effects and are quite a challenge for primary care providers and specialists alike to treat. With the help of site-specific neuromodulation and appropriate patient selection these difficult to treat pain syndromes may be managed. In this article, we focus on supraspinal stimulation (SSS) for treatment of intractable pain and discuss off-label uses of deep brain stimulation (DBS) and motor cortex stimulation (MCS) in context to emerging indications in neuromodulation. Consideration for neuromodulatory treatment begins with rigorous patient selection based on exhaustive conservative management, elimination of secondary gains, and a proper psychology evaluation. Trial stimulation prior to DBS is nearly always performed while trial stimulation prior to MCS surgery is symptom dependent. Overall, a review of the literature demonstrates that DBS should be considered for refractory conditions including nociceptive/neuropathic pain, phantom limb pain, and chronic cluster headache (CCH). MCS should be considered primarily for trigeminal neuropathic pain (TNP) and central pain. DBS outcome studies for post-stroke pain as well as MCS studies for complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) show more modest results and are also discussed in detail.

Stimulation of the sphenopalatine ganglion in intractable cluster headache: expert consensus on patient selection and standards of care

CONTEXT AND OVERVIEW

Chronic cluster headache (CCH) is a debilitating headache disorder with a significant impairment of the patients' lives. Within the past decade, various invasive neuromodulatory approaches have been proposed for the treatment of CCH refractory to standard preventive drug, but only very few randomized controlled studies exist in the field of neuromodulation for the treatment of drug-refractory headaches. Based on the prominent role of the cranial parasympathetic system in acute cluster headache attacks, high-frequency sphenopalatine ganglion (SPG) stimulation has been shown to abort ongoing attacks in some patients in a first small study. As preventive effects of SPG-stimulation have been suggested and the rate of long-term side effects was moderate, SPG stimulation appears to be a promising new treatment strategy.

AIMS AND CONCLUSION

As SPG stimulation is effective in some patients and the first commercially available CE-marked SPG neurostimulator system has been introduced for cluster headache, patient selection and care should be standardized to ensure maximal efficacy and safety. As only limited data have been published on SPG stimulation, standards of care based on expert consensus are proposed to ensure homogeneous patient selection and treatment across international headache centres. Given that SPG stimulation is still a novel approach, all expert-based consensus on patient selection and standards of care should be re-reviewed when more long-term data are available.

Supraorbital and supratrochlear stimulation for trigeminal autonomic cephalalgias

Trigeminal autonomic cephalalgias (TAC) is a rare primary headache disorder with challenging and limited treatment options for those unfortunate patients with severe and refractory pain. This article will review the conventional pharmacologic treatments as well as the new neuromodulation techniques designed to offer alternative and less invasive treatments. These techniques have evolved from the treatment of migraine headache, a much more common headache syndrome, and expanded towards application in patients with TAC. Specifically, the article will discuss the targeting of the supratrochlear and supraorbital nerves, both terminal branches of the trigeminal nerve.