Cluster headache: to scan or not to scan

Is conventional brain MRI useful for the diagnosis of cluster headache in patients who meet ICHD-3 criteria? Experience in three hospitals in Spain

OBJECTIVE

To assess the frequency of symptomatic structural lesions and the diagnostic yield of conventional brain MRI in cluster headache (CH).

BACKGROUND

In contrast to migraine, brain MRI is recommended in patients with CH to exclude potential mimics. The prevalence of symptomatic CH is not known.

METHODS

We retrospectively analysed in detail the brain MRIs of patients diagnosed as CH in 3 Neurology Services in Spain and reviewed their clinical history. Clinical diagnoses were reassessed based on the ICHD-3 criteria.

RESULTS

We included 130 patients: 113 (86.9%) were male; mean age at diagnosis being 41.4 years (range 7-82). Forty-nine (37.7%) showed some abnormal MRI finding. Only in two cases potential symptomatic lesions were found: one trigeminal schwannoma and one craneopharyngioma, but both presented atypical features (facial hypoesthesia on examination and episodes of prolonged duration that had progressed to continuous refractory pain without specific pattern, respectively) and therefore did not fulfil the ICHD-3 CH criteria. The remaining abnormal MRI findings were: white matter lesions (24 patients; 18.4%), sinus inflammatory changes (13; 10.0%), small arachnoid cysts (5; 3.8%), empty sella turca (3; 2.3%), and other unspecific findings (8; 6.2%). All of them were not symptomatic based on neuroimaging characteristics, clinical course and response to treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Brain MRI in patients who meet ICHD-3 CH criteria, with no atypical clinical features, does not show any clinically-relevant findings, suggesting that these criteria are highly predictive of its primary origin and that systematic MRI is not useful for the diagnosis of typical CH.

Is pituitary MRI screening necessary in cluster headache?

Objective

To determine the prevalence and clinical predictors of pituitary adenomas in cluster headache patients, in order to determine the necessity of performing dedicated pituitary magnetic resonance imaging in patients with cluster headache.

Methods

A retrospective study was conducted of all consecutive patients diagnosed with cluster headache and with available brain magnetic resonance imaging between 2007 and 2017 in a tertiary headache center. Data including demographics, attack characteristics, response to treatments, results of neuroimaging, and routine pituitary function tests were recorded.

Results

Seven hundred and eighteen cluster headache patients attended the headache clinic; 643 underwent a standard magnetic resonance imaging scan, of whom 376 also underwent dedicated pituitary magnetic resonance imaging. Pituitary adenomas occurred in 17 of 376 patients (4.52%). Non-functioning microadenomas (n = 14) were the most common abnormality reported. Two patients, one of whom lacked the symptoms of pituitary disease, required treatment for their pituitary lesion. No clinical predictors of those adenomas were identified after multivariate analysis using random forests. Systematic pituitary magnetic resonance imaging scanning did not benefit even a single patient in the entire cohort.

Conclusion

The prevalence of pituitary adenomas in cluster headache is similar to that reported in the general population, thereby precluding an over-representation of pituitary lesions in cluster headache. We conclude that the diagnostic assessment of cluster headache patients should not include specific pituitary screening. Only patients with standard brain magnetic resonance imaging findings or symptoms suggestive of a pituitary disorder require brain magnetic resonance imaging with dedicated pituitary views.

Secondary (Symptomatic) Trigeminal Autonomic Cephalalgia

Primary trigeminal autonomic cephalalgias (TACs) are uncommon group of headache disorders. These are defined and diagnosed by the criteria given by the International Classification of Headache Disorders 3β version. Over the past few decades, a number of secondary (symptomatic) cases have been described in the literature with headache features indistinguishable from primary TACs. Many structural and other pathologies have been found in these patients that can be causally related to the headaches. This review attempts to critically analyze the existing literature including the new cases published during 2015–2017.

[Cluster headache and brain imagery]

Cluster headache is defined on clinical international criteria developed by International Headache Society (IHS, 2013). The realization of a brain MRI with arterial angio-MRI is required according to the French recommendations (Donnet et al., 2014) based on recent the literature. Numerous causes or diseases can mimic typical or atypical AVF (Edvardsson, 2014). Identification of these causes allows an appropriate treatment in addition with symptomatic treatment.

Further evidence for a pain pathway involving the cingulate gyrus: a case of chronic cluster headache cured by glioblastoma

The authors report a case of a 49-year-old man with long-standing, chronic cluster headache (CH) refractory to medical therapy and occipital nerve stimulation that resolved a few weeks prior to the diagnosis of glioblastoma involving primarily the right cingulate gyrus. An attempt to explore the underlying role of the cingulate cortex in pain modulation by appraising the current literature is presented. This report suggests that the cingulate gyri could be a potential target for neuromodulation in patients with medically refractory chronic CH.

It IS a tumor -- current review of headache and brain tumor

"Do I have a tumor?" This is a question in every person's mind when first confronted with a new-onset headache, a question that causes considerable anxiety among patients, leading them to seek medical evaluation. This publication reviews the current literature with respect to the epidemiology, pathophysiology presentation, and treatment of headaches in association with intracranial neoplasm.

Cluster headache associated with a clinically non-functioning pituitary adenoma: a case report

INTRODUCTION

Cluster headache belongs to a group of primary headache entities: the trigeminal autonomic cephalalgias. Cluster headache is the most common variant. The headache is usually severe and it is also associated with autonomic symptoms. Secondary causes of cluster headache have been reported, such as intracranial artery aneurysms and tumors. The question of when to carry out neuroimaging in patients with cluster headache is yet unsettled. To the best of the author's knowledge, cluster headache associated with a clinically non-functioning pituitary adenoma (chromophobe adenoma) has not been described. This case report describes the case of a man with cluster headache where the evaluation showed a clinically non-functioning pituitary adenoma.

CASE PRESENTATION

This case involved a 49-year-old Caucasian man who presented with a one-month history of side-locked attacks of pain located in the right orbit. His symptoms fulfilled the criteria for cluster headache and a diagnosis of cluster headache was made. The patient responded to symptomatic treatment. Enhanced magnetic resonance imaging showed a pituitary adenoma. Further evaluations including hormonal screening revealed a clinically non-functioning pituitary adenoma (chromophobe adenoma). After surgery to remove the tumor, his headache attacks resolved totally.

CONCLUSION

Tumors have been reported in patients with cluster headache whose clinical attacks are identical to genuine cluster headache. A clinically non-functioning pituitary adenoma can present as cluster headache. This case emphasizes the need of imaging procedures in patients with cluster headache. Contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging including the sella turcica should always be done in patients with cluster headache.

Symptomatic cluster headache: a review of 63 cases

Cluster headache is a primary headache by definition not caused by any known underlying structural pathology. Symptomatic cases have been described, for example tumours, dissections and infections, but a causal relationship between the underlying lesion and the headache is difficult to determine in many cases. The proper diagnostic evaluation of cluster headache is an issue unresolved. The literature has been reviewed for symptomatic cluster headache or cluster headache-like cases in which causality was likely. The review also attempted to identify clinical predictors of underlying lesions in order to formulate guidelines for neuroimaging. Sixty-three cluster headache or "cluster headache-like"/"cluster-like headache" cases in the literature were identified which were associated with an underlying lesion. A majority of the cases had a non-typical presentation that is atypical symptomatology and abnormal examination (including Horner’s syndrome). A striking finding in this appraisal was that a significant proportion of CH cases were secondary to diseases of the pituitary gland or pituitary region. Another notable finding was that a proportion of cluster headache cases were associated with arterial dissection. Even typical cluster headaches can be caused by structural lesions and the response to typical cluster headache treatments does not exclude a secondary form. It is difficult to draw definitive conclusions from this retrospective review of case reports especially considering the size of the material. However, based on this review, I suggest that neuroimaging, preferably contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging/magnetic resonance angiography should be undertaken in patients with atypical symptomatology, late onset, abnormal examination (including Horner’s syndrome), or those resistant to the appropriate medical treatment. The decision to perform magnetic resonance imaging in cases of typical cluster headache remains a matter of medical art.

Cluster-like headache and a cystic hypothalamic tumour as first presentation of sarcoidosis

INTRODUCTION

Sarcoidosis is a granulomatous, multisystem inflammatory disease of unknown cause, which presents with a wide variety of symptoms. We describe a rare case of a newly diagnosed sarcoidosis, with cluster-like headache as a presenting symptom.

CASE

A 31-year-old man presented with cluster headache with a cystic lesion in the hypothalamus. A non-caseating granuloma consistent with the diagnosis sarcoidosis was found at biopsy. Pulmonary involvement was confirmed on positron electron tomography-computed tomography (PET-CT). Treatment with prednisone led to regression of the hypothalamic lesion. Headache attacks did not recur.

DISCUSSION

Cluster-like headache with a cystic hypothalamic lesion as first presentation of sarcoidosis has never been reported. Their possible relationship seems to underline the role of the hypothalamus in the central pain-regulatory areas in the brain, but is not undisputed. This case clearly demonstrates once again the relevance of neuroimaging in new-onset cluster-like headache.

[Trigeminal autonomic cephalgias. After initial diagnosis, consider secondary causes]

Trigeminal autonomic cephalgias (TAC) are classified as primary headache syndromes. The use of instrumental procedures including neuroimaging in the diagnostic workup of the TACs is controversially discussed in the literature. Several case reports have been previously published, reporting trigeminal autonomic cephalgias related to structural lesions. We contribute two of our own cases of symptomatic TACs and demonstrate that a "classic" clinical presentation does not preclude a symptomatic etiology. Thus, we advocate a systematic diagnostic evaluation including neuroimaging in every patient presenting with symptoms indicative of TAC for the first time.

Neuroimaging in trigeminal autonomic cephalgias: when, how, and of what?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Trigeminal autonomic cephalgias (TACs) are characterized by frequent, short-lasting headache attacks with ipsilateral facial autonomic features. They include cluster headache, paroxysmal hemicrania, and short-lasting unilateral neuralgiform headache attacks with conjunctival injection and tearing. The pathogenesis of TACs is largely unknown, but many case reports in the literature suggest that TACs are secondary to structural lesions. Thus, the question arises whether TAC patients should undergo neuroimaging. Here, we review the recent literature on secondary TACs and attempt to formulate guidelines for neuroimaging.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recently, we published two reviews of, in total, 33 case reports of patients with a secondary TAC or TAC-like syndrome. Since then, 23 additional cases have been published. Here, we provide a summary of these 56 case reports. TACs were found to be associated with a wide range of both intracranial and extracranial neurovascular and structural lesions. We could not identify a 'typical' clinical warning profile for secondary TACs as these patients could present with clinical features that are entirely characteristic of a TAC, including alternating attack and attack-free periods, and excellent response to TAC-specific treatments.

SUMMARY

Even clinically typical TACs can be caused by structural lesions. There are no 'typical' warning signs or symptoms. Neuroimaging should be considered in all patients with TAC or TAC-like syndromes, notably in those with atypical presentation. Depending on the degree of suspicion, additional imaging should be considered assessing intracranial and cervical vasculature, and the sellar and paranasal region.