MAGraine: Magnesium compared to conventional therapy for treatment of migraines

2023 U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs and U.S. Department of Defense Clinical Practice Guideline for the Management of Headache

DESCRIPTION

Headache medicine and therapeutics evidence have been rapidly expanding and evolving since the 2020 U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) and U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) clinical practice guideline (CPG) for the management of headache. Therefore, the CPG was revised in 2023, earlier than the standard 5-year cycle. This article reviews the 2023 CPG recommendations relevant to primary care clinicians for treatment and prevention of migraine and tension-type headache (TTH).

METHODS

Subject experts from the VA and the DoD developed 12 key questions, which guided a systematic search using predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. After reviewing evidence from 5 databases published between 6 March 2019 and 16 August 2022, the work group considered the strength and quality of the evidence, patient preferences, and benefits versus harms on critical outcomes before making consensus recommendations.

RECOMMENDATIONS

The revised CPG includes 52 recommendations on evaluation, pharmacotherapy, invasive interventions, and nonpharmacologic interventions for selected primary and secondary headache disorders. In addition to triptans and aspirin-acetaminophen-caffeine, newer calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) inhibitors (gepants) are options for treatment of acute migraine. Medications to prevent episodic migraine (EM) include angiotensin-receptor blockers, lisinopril, magnesium, topiramate, valproate, memantine, the newer CGRP monoclonal antibodies, and atogepant. AbobotulinumtoxinA can be used for prevention of chronic migraine but not EM. Gabapentin is not recommended for prevention of EM. Ibuprofen (400 mg) and acetaminophen (1000 mg) can be used for treatment of TTH, and amitriptyline for prevention of chronic TTH. Physical therapy or aerobic exercise can be used in management of TTH and migraines.

Neurasites®-A Standardized Plant Extract in the Treatment and Prevention of Migraine Attacks

Background/Objectives: Migraine is one of the most common diseases in highly developed countries, being even more common than diabetes and asthma. Migraines can affect emotional, social, and physical wellbeing as well as professional life. The most common symptoms are severe headaches associated with nausea, vomiting, photophobia and sonophobia, difficulty concentrating, sensitivity and emotional disorders. Many studies have been published to establish the best migraine-management drugs, but not many of them refer to plant extracts, which have been given more attention by patients lately. Among these generically called herbal medicines, the effect of tussilago hybrida standardized extract has been studied since the early twenties. This stands as the fundamental component of Neurasites® and the reason for research on materials and methods, results on treatment schemes for diminishing migraine attack features, as well as migraine prevention. Methods: There are two directions of research (herbal and placebo medicine) considered to be of interest due to the actual trend toward natural medicine and against chemicals and associated drugs. For quantitative research, the research tool used was that of the Neurasites® Questionnaire Survey (NQS). Results: The obtained results prove the efficacy of treatment by reducing the duration of headache attacks, diminishing pain intensity and decreasing the frequency of migraine episodes. Conclusions: Further research development should focus on other dosages and treatment schemes and on other similar natural products to be used in migraine attack treatment.

Challenges and Pitfalls of Research Designs Involving Magnesium-Based Biomaterials: An Overview

Magnesium-based biomaterials hold remarkable promise for various clinical applications, offering advantages such as reduced stress-shielding and enhanced bone strengthening and vascular remodeling compared to traditional materials. However, ensuring the quality of preclinical research is crucial for the development of these implants. To achieve implant success, an understanding of the cellular responses post-implantation, proper model selection, and good study design are crucial. There are several challenges to reaching a safe and effective translation of laboratory findings into clinical practice. The utilization of Mg-based biomedical devices eliminates the need for biomaterial removal surgery post-healing and mitigates adverse effects associated with permanent biomaterial implantation. However, the high corrosion rate of Mg-based implants poses challenges such as unexpected degradation, structural failure, hydrogen evolution, alkalization, and cytotoxicity. The biocompatibility and degradability of materials based on magnesium have been studied by many researchers in vitro; however, evaluations addressing the impact of the material in vivo still need to be improved. Several animal models, including rats, rabbits, dogs, and pigs, have been explored to assess the potential of magnesium-based materials. Moreover, strategies such as alloying and coating have been identified to enhance the degradation rate of magnesium-based materials in vivo to transform these challenges into opportunities. This review aims to explore the utilization of Mg implants across various biomedical applications within cellular (in vitro) and animal (in vivo) models.

The effectiveness of parenteral agents for pain reduction in patients with migraine presenting to emergency settings: A systematic review and network analysis

OBJECTIVES

To assess the comparative effectiveness and safety of parenteral agents for pain reduction in patients with acute migraine.

BACKGROUND

Parenteral agents have been shown to be effective in treating acute migraine pain; however, the comparative effectiveness of different approaches is unclear.

METHODS

Nine electronic databases and gray literature sources were searched to identify randomized clinical trials assessing parenteral agents to treat acute migraine pain in emergency settings. Two independent reviewers completed study screening, data extraction, and Cochrane risk-of-bias assessment, with differences being resolved by adjudication. The protocol of the review was registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO; CRD42018100096).

RESULTS

A total of 97 unique studies were included, with most studies reporting a high or unclear risk of bias. Monotherapy, as well as combination therapy, successfully reduced pain scores prior to discharge. They also increased the proportion of patients reporting pain relief and being pain free. Across the pain outcomes assessed, combination therapy was one of the higher ranked approaches and provided robust improvements in pain outcomes, including lowering pain scores (mean difference -3.36, 95% confidence interval [CI] -4.64 to -2.08) and increasing the proportion of patients reporting pain relief (risk ratio [RR] 2.83, 95% CI 1.74-4.61). Neuroleptics and metoclopramide also ranked high in terms of the proportion of patients reporting pain relief (neuroleptics RR 2.76, 95% CI 2.12-3.60; metoclopramide RR 2.58, 95% CI 1.90-3.49) and being pain free before emergency department discharge (neuroleptics RR 4.8, 95% CI 3.61-6.49; metoclopramide RR 4.1, 95% CI 3.02-5.44). Most parenteral agents were associated with increased adverse events, particularly combination therapy and neuroleptics.

CONCLUSIONS

Various parenteral agents were found to provide effective pain relief. Considering the consistent improvements across various outcomes, combination therapy, as well as monotherapy of either metoclopramide or neuroleptics are recommended as first-line options for managing acute migraine pain. There are risks of adverse events, especially akathisia, following treatment with these agents. We recommend that a shared decision-making model be considered to effectively identify the best treatment option based on the patient's needs.

Second-line interventions for migraine in the emergency department: A narrative review

OBJECTIVE

Millions of patients present to US emergency departments (ED) annually for the treatment of migraine. First-line treatments, including metoclopramide, prochlorperazine, and sumatriptan, fail to provide sufficient relief in up to one-third of treated patients. In this narrative review, we discuss the evidence supporting the use of injectable (intravenous, intramuscular, or subcutaneous) medications for patients in the ED who fail to improve sufficiently after treatment with first-line medication.

METHODS

We used the American Headache Society's guideline, "Management of Adults with Acute Migraine in the Emergency Department: The American Headache Society Evidence Assessment of Parenteral Pharmacotherapies," published in 2016, to identify first-line medications for migraine. We then conducted a PubMed search to determine whether any evidence supported the use of these medications as second-line therapy and whether any evidence existed to support the use of injectable therapies not discussed in the guideline as second-line therapy.

RESULTS

We identified only scant high-quality randomized data of second-line therapy. Therefore, we based our recommendations on medications that have reliably demonstrated efficacy as first-line treatment of migraine. These medications include injectable non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and acetaminophen. Dihydroergotamine and valproic acid have some data supporting efficacy. More recently, greater occipital nerve blocks (GONBs) have been shown to be efficacious. With the exception of meperidine, opioids have been shown to be not efficacious. Most data published to date demonstrate no role for propofol and ketamine.

CONCLUSIONS

There are no evidence-based second-line treatments of migraine in the ED setting. For patients with migraine, who fail to improve after treatment with a first-line medication, it is reasonable to use an intravenous NSAID or intravenous acetaminophen. Alternatively, clinicians adept at performing a GONB may offer this treatment.

Acute Treatments for Episodic Migraine in Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

IMPORTANCE

Migraine is common and can be associated with significant morbidity, and several treatment options exist for acute therapy.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the benefits and harms associated with acute treatments for episodic migraine in adults.

DATA SOURCES

Multiple databases from database inception to February 24, 2021.

STUDY SELECTION

Randomized clinical trials and systematic reviews that assessed effectiveness or harms of acute therapy for migraine attacks.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Independent reviewers selected studies and extracted data. Meta-analysis was performed with the DerSimonian-Laird random-effects model with Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman variance correction or by using a fixed-effect model based on the Mantel-Haenszel method if the number of studies was small.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The main outcomes included pain freedom, pain relief, sustained pain freedom, sustained pain relief, and adverse events. The strength of evidence (SOE) was graded with the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Methods Guide for Effectiveness and Comparative Effectiveness Reviews.

FINDINGS

Evidence on triptans and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs was summarized from 15 systematic reviews. For other interventions, 115 randomized clinical trials with 28 803 patients were included. Compared with placebo, triptans and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs used individually were significantly associated with reduced pain at 2 hours and 1 day (moderate to high SOE) and increased risk of mild and transient adverse events. Compared with placebo, calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor antagonists (low to high SOE), lasmiditan (5-HT1F receptor agonist; high SOE), dihydroergotamine (moderate to high SOE), ergotamine plus caffeine (moderate SOE), acetaminophen (moderate SOE), antiemetics (low SOE), butorphanol (low SOE), and tramadol in combination with acetaminophen (low SOE) were significantly associated with pain reduction and increase in mild adverse events. The findings for opioids were based on low or insufficient SOE. Several nonpharmacologic treatments were significantly associated with improved pain, including remote electrical neuromodulation (moderate SOE), transcranial magnetic stimulation (low SOE), external trigeminal nerve stimulation (low SOE), and noninvasive vagus nerve stimulation (moderate SOE). No significant difference in adverse events was found between nonpharmacologic treatments and sham.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

There are several acute treatments for migraine, with varying strength of supporting evidence. Use of triptans, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, acetaminophen, dihydroergotamine, calcitonin gene-related peptide antagonists, lasmiditan, and some nonpharmacologic treatments was associated with improved pain and function. The evidence for many other interventions, including opioids, was limited.

Magnesium for Pain Treatment in 2021? State of the Art

Background: Magnesium (Mg) is commonly used in clinical practice for acute and chronic pain and has been reported to reduce pain intensity and analgesics consumption in a number of studies. Results are, however, contested. Objectives: This review aims to investigate randomised clinical trials (RCTs) on the effectiveness of Mg treatment on pain and analgesics consumption in situations including post-operative pain, migraine, renal pain, chronic pain, neuropathic pain and fibromyalgia. Results: The literature search identified 81 RCTs (n = 5447 patients) on Mg treatment in pain (50 RCTs in post-operative pain, 18 RCTs in migraine, 5 RCTs in renal pain, 6 RCTs in chronic/neuropathic pain, 2 RCTs in fibromyalgia). Conclusion: The level of evidence for the efficacy of Mg in reducing pain and analgesics consumption is globally modest and studies are not very numerous in chronic pain. A number of gaps have been identified in the literature that need to be addressed especially in methodology, rheumatic disease, and cancer. Additional clinical trials are needed to achieve a sufficient level of evidence and to better optimize the use of Mg for pain and pain comorbidities in order to improve the quality of life of patients who are in pain.