An MRI Deep Brain Adult Template With An Advanced Atlas-Based Tool For Diffusion Tensor Imaging Analysis

Understanding the architecture of the human deep brain is especially challenging because of the complex organization of the nuclei and fascicles that support most sensorimotor and behaviour controls. There are scant dedicated tools to explore and analyse this region. Here we took a transdisciplinary approach to build a new deep-brain MRI architecture atlas drawing on advanced clinical experience of MRI-based deep brain mapping. This new tool comprises a young-male-adult MRI template spatially normalized to the ICBM152, containing T1, inversion-recovery, and diffusion MRI datasets (in vivo acquisition), and an MRI atlas of 118 labelled deep brain structures. It is open-source and gives users high resolution image datasets to describe nuclear-based and axonal architecture, combining pioneering and recent knowledge. It is a useful addition to current 3D atlases and clinical tools.

Somatosensory Profiling of Patients With Cluster Headache: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

The objectives were 1) to synthesize quantitative sensory testing results in cluster headache (CH) patients and to identify somatosensory differences from healthy subjects (HS), and 2) between symptomatic and asymptomatic sides in CH patients. Two independent reviewers conducted a literature search in MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, and CINAHL databases. Studies with observational designs were included. Methodological quality and risk of bias were assessed with the Newcastle Ottawa Scale. The selected studies underwent qualitative and quantitative analyses. The qualitative analysis showed inconsistent findings among multiple studies. Meta-analysis showed lower pressure pain thresholds (PPTs) on the symptomatic side of CH patients than HS in V2 (standardized mean difference [SMD] -1.01 [95% confidence interval (CI) -1.79, -.23], P = .01, I2 = 73%, n = 114), V3 (SMD -1 [95% CI -1.54, .45], P < .01, I2 = 82%, n = 354), and cervical region (SMD -1.25 [95% CI -2.07, -.44], P < .01, I2 = 84%, n = 194). Furthermore, lower PPTs than those detected in HS were found on the asymptomatic side in V3 (SMD -.77 [95% CI -1.27, -.27], P < .01, I2 = 79%, n = 354) and in the cervical region (SMD -1.13 [95% CI -1.97, -.3], P < .01, I2 = 85%, n = 194). However, no differences were found in V1 or the extratrigeminal points between these groups. No significant changes were found between symptomatic and asymptomatic sides in trigeminal and extratrigeminal regions. Mechanical hyperalgesia in the trigemino-cervical region of patients with CH could suggest the presence of central pain mechanisms. These results are of clinical relevance because their presence could be associated with a poorer prognosis, chronification, and treatment response. PERSPECTIVE: This study provides consistent findings on the somatosensory profile characterizing patients with CH. Clinicians should assess PPTs and other quantitative sensory testing variables in the trigeminal and extratrigeminal (cervical) regions.

A pilot study on a patient with refractory headache: Personalized deep brain stimulation through stereoelectroencephalography

The integration of stereoelectroencephalography with therapeutic deep brain stimulation (DBS) holds immense promise as a viable approach for precise treatment of refractory disorders, yet it has not been explored in the domain of headache or pain management. Here, we implanted 14 electrodes in a patient with refractory migraine and integrated clinical assessment and electrophysiological data to investigate personalized targets for refractory headache treatment. Using statistical analyses and cross-validated machine-learning models, we identified high-frequency oscillations in the right nucleus accumbens as a critical headache-related biomarker. Through a systematic bipolar stimulation approach and blinded sham-controlled survey, combined with real-time electrophysiological data, we successfully identified the left dorsal anterior cingulate cortex as the optimal target for the best potential treatment. In this pilot study, the concept of the herein-proposed data-driven approach to optimizing precise and personalized treatment strategies for DBS may create a new frontier in the field of refractory headache and even pain disorders.

Ten-Year Durability of Hypothalamic Deep Brain Stimulation in Treatment of Chronic Cluster Headaches: A Case Report and Literature Review

Chronic cluster headache (CCH) is a debilitating primary headache that causes excruciating pain without remission. Various medical and surgical treatments have been implemented over the years, yet many provide only short-term relief. Deep brain stimulation (DBS) is an emerging treatment alternative that has been shown to dramatically reduce the intensity and frequency of headache attacks. However, reports of greater than 10-year outcomes after DBS for CCH are scant. Here, we report the durability of DBS in the posterior inferior hypothalamus after 10 years on a patient with CCH. Our patient experienced an 82% decrease in the frequency of headaches after DBS, which was maintained for over 10 years. The side effects observed included depression, irritability, anxiety, and dizziness, which were alleviated by changing programming settings. In the context of current literature, DBS shows promise for long-term relief of cluster headaches when other treatments fail.

Deep Brain Stimulation for Chronic Cluster Headaches: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Chronic cluster headache (CCH) is a severe and debilitating sub-type of trigeminal autonomic cephalalgia that can be resistant to medical management and associated with significant impairment in quality of life. Studies of deep brain stimulation (DBS) for CCH have provided promising results but have not been assessed in a comprehensive systematic review/meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE

The objective was to perform a systematic literature review and meta-analysis of patients with CCH treated with DBS to provide insight on safety and efficacy.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed according to PRISMA 2020 guidelines. 16 studies were included in final analysis. A random-effects model was used to meta-analyze data.

RESULTS

Sixteen studies reported 108 cases for data extraction and analysis. DBS was feasible in >99% of cases and was performed either awake or asleep. Meta-analysis revealed that the mean difference in headache attack frequency and headache intensity after DBS were statistically significant (p < 0.0001). Utilization of microelectrode recording was associated with statistically significant improvement in headache intensity postoperatively (p = 0.006). The average overall follow-up period was 45.4 months and ranged from 1 to 144 months. Death occurred in <1%. The rate of major complications was 16.67%.

CONCLUSIONS

DBS for CCHs is a feasible surgical technique with a reasonable safety profile that can be successfully performed either awake or asleep. In carefully selected patients, approximately 70% of patients achieve excellent control of their headaches.

Preventive treatment of refractory chronic cluster headache: systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Preventive treatment for refractory chronic cluster headache (rCCH) is challenging and many therapies have been tried.

OBJECTIVE

To study what could be considered the therapy of choice in rCCH through a systematic review and meta-analysis.

METHODS

This review was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. The protocol was registered in PROSPERO (ID CRD42021290983). A systematic search was performed in MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane, clinicaltrials.gov, and the WHO's-International-Clinical-Trials-Registry-Platform. Studies on the preventive treatment for rCCH as defined by the European Headache Federation consensus statement were included. A meta-analysis of the pooled response rate was conducted for the different therapies.

RESULTS

Of 336 results, 45 were eligible for inclusion. Most articles studied the effect of neuromodulation as a preventive treatment for rCCH. The most studied neuromodulation technique was occipital nerve stimulation (ONS), with a pooled response rate in the meta-analysis of 57.3% (95% CI 0.481-0.665). Deep brain stimulation (DBS) was the second most studied treatment with a pooled response rate of 77.0% (95% CI 0.594-0.957). DBS results were more heterogeneous than ONS, which could be related to the different stimulation targets in DBS studies, and reported more serious adverse events than in ONS studies. The remaining therapies (anti-CGRP pathway drugs, warfarin, ketamine-magnesium infusions, serial occipital nerve blocks, clomiphene, onabotulinum toxin A, ketogenic diet, sphenopalatine ganglion radiofrequency or stimulation, vagus nerve stimulation, percutaneous bioelectric current stimulation, upper cervical cord stimulation, and vidian neurectomy) present weaker results or have less quality of evidence.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this systematic review and meta-analysis suggest that ONS could be the first therapeutic strategy for patients with rCCH based on the current evidence.

Cluster headache pathophysiology: What we have learned from advanced neuroimaging

Background

Although remarkable progress has been achieved in understanding cluster headache (CH) pathophysiology, there are still several gaps about the mechanisms through which independent subcortical and cortical brain structures interact with each other. These gaps could be partially elucidated by structural and functional advanced neuroimaging investigations.

Objective

Although we are aware that substantial achievements have come from preclinical, neurophysiological, and biochemical experiments, the present narrative review aims to summarize the most significant findings from structural, microstructural, and functional neuroimaging investigations, as well as the consequent progresses in understanding CH pathophysiological mechanisms, to achieve a comprehensive and unifying model.

Results

Advanced neuroimaging techniques have contributed to overcoming the peripheral hypothesis that CH is of cavernous sinus pathology, in transitioning from the pure vascular hypothesis to a more comprehensive trigeminovascular model, and, above all, in clarifying the role of the hypothalamus and its connections in the genesis of CH.

Conclusion

Altogether, neuroimaging findings strongly suggest that, beyond the theoretical model of the “pain matrix,” the model of the “neurolimbic pain network” that is accepted in migraine research could also be extended to CH. Indeed, although the hypothalamus’ role is undeniable, the genesis of CH attacks is complex and seems to not be just the result of a single “generator.” Cortical‐hypothalamic‐brainstem functional interconnections that can switch between out‐of‐bout and in‐bout periods, igniting the trigeminovascular system (probably by means of top‐down mechanisms) and the consensual trigeminal autonomic reflexes, may represent the “neuronal background” of CH.

Diverging prefrontal cortex fiber connection routes to the subthalamic nucleus and the mesencephalic ventral tegmentum investigated with long range (normative) and short range (ex-vivo high resolution) 7T DTI

Uncertainties concerning anatomy and function of cortico-subcortical projections have arisen during the recent years. A clear distinction between cortico-subthalamic (hyperdirect) and cortico-tegmental projections (superolateral medial forebrain bundle, slMFB) so far is elusive. Deep Brain Stimulation (DBS) of the slMFB (for major depression, MD and obsessive compulsive disorders, OCD) has on the one hand been interpreted as actually involving limbic (prefrontal) hyperdirect pathways. On the other hand slMFB’s stimulation region in the mesencephalic ventral tegmentum is said to impact on other structures too, going beyond the antidepressant (or anti OCD) efficacy of sole modulation of the cortico-tegmental reward-associated pathways. We have here used a normative diffusion MRT template (HCP, n = 80) for long-range tractography and augmented this dataset with ex-vivo high resolution data (n = 1) in a stochastic brain space. We compared this data with histological information and used the high resolution ex-vivo data set to scrutinize the mesencephalic tegmentum for small fiber pathways present. Our work resolves an existing ambiguity between slMFB and prefrontal hyperdirect pathways which—for the first time—are described as co-existent. DBS of the slMFB does not appear to modulate prefrontal hyperdirect cortico-subthalamic but rather cortico-tegmental projections. Smaller fiber structures in the target region—as far as they can be discerned—appear not to be involved in slMFB DBS. Our work enfeebles previous anatomical criticism and strengthens the position of the slMFB DBS target for its use in MD and OCD.

Deep brain stimulation in Alzheimer's disease

Benefits from symptomatic and etiologic treatments in Alzheimer's Disease (AD), the most frequent dementia, are still insufficient. During the last decade, several studies showed that electrical stimulation of memory circuits could enhance memory in humans without memory impairment. First, improvement of verbal recollection was reported after deep brain stimulation (DBS) of the fornix in the hypothalamus in a patient treated for morbid obesity. Several studies in epileptic patients explored by deep electrodes reported that visuo-spatial memorization was facilitated by electrical stimulation of the entorhinal cortex or theta burst stimulation of the fornix. Recent studies suggested that DBS could be useful to modulate memory circuits in patients with cognitive decline. Phase I and II studies (about 50 patients) showed that chronic fornix DBS was safe and could achieved to stabilize or slow the memory decline of some patients with mild to moderate AD, especially older ones with less severe and/or advanced disease. DBS of the cholinergic nucleus of Meynert also has been explored in phase I studies in AD and Parkinson-related dementia. Growing experimental data suggest several mechanisms of action: restoration of hippocampal theta rhythms, enhanced long term potentiation, increase of hippocampal neurogenesis, neuroprotection by release of neurotrophic factors, diffuse reactivation of hypoactive neocortical associative regions. However, DBS in AD is still investigational and numerous issues remain to be solved before envisaging its use in clinical practice, including optimal anatomical DBS target, stimulation modalities (continuous, intermittent, theta-bursts, closed loop stimulation), best candidate patients, relevant targeted symptoms, ethical considerations.

The neurobiology of cluster headache

Cluster headache is a primary headache form occurring in paroxysmal excruciatingly severe unilateral head pain attacks usually grouped in periods lasting 1-2months, the cluster periods. A genetic component is suggested by the familial occurrence of the disease but a genetic linkage is yet to be identified. Contemporary activation of trigeminal and cranial parasympathetic systems-the so-called trigemino-parasympathetic reflex-during the headache attacks seem to cause the pain and accompanying oculo-facial autonomic phenomena respectively. At peripheral level, the increased calcitonin gene related peptide (CGRP) plasma levels suggests trigeminal system activation during cluster headache attacks. The temporal pattern of the disease both in terms of circadian rhythmicity and seasonal recurrence has suggested involvement of the hypothalamic biological clock in the pathophysiology of cluster headache. The posterior hypothalamus was investigate as the cluster generator leading to activation of the trigemino-parasympathetic reflex, but the accumulated experience after 20 years of hypothalamic electrical stimulation to treat the condition indicate that this brain region rather acts as pain modulator. Efficacy of monoclonal antibodies to treat episodic cluster headache points to a key role of CGRP in the pathophysiology of the condition.

Neuromodulation for chronic pain

Neuromodulation is an expanding area of pain medicine that incorporates an array of non-invasive, minimally invasive, and surgical electrical therapies. In this Series paper, we focus on spinal cord stimulation (SCS) therapies discussed within the framework of other invasive, minimally invasive, and non-invasive neuromodulation therapies. These therapies include deep brain and motor cortex stimulation, peripheral nerve stimulation, and the non-invasive treatments of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation, transcranial direct current stimulation, and transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation. SCS methods with electrical variables that differ from traditional SCS have been approved. Although methods devoid of paraesthesias (eg, high frequency) should theoretically allow for placebo-controlled trials, few have been done. There is low-to-moderate quality evidence that SCS is superior to reoperation or conventional medical management for failed back surgery syndrome, and conflicting evidence as to the superiority of traditional SCS over sham stimulation or between different SCS modalities. Peripheral nerve stimulation technologies have also undergone rapid development and become less invasive, including many that are placed percutaneously. There is low-to-moderate quality evidence that peripheral nerve stimulation is effective for neuropathic pain in an extremity, low quality evidence that it is effective for back pain with or without leg pain, and conflicting evidence that it can prevent migraines. In the USA and many areas in Europe, deep brain and motor cortex stimulation are not approved for chronic pain, but are used off-label for refractory cases. Overall, there is mixed evidence supporting brain stimulation, with most sham-controlled trials yielding negative findings. Regarding non-invasive modalities, there is moderate quality evidence that repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation does not provide meaningful benefit for chronic pain in general, but conflicting evidence regarding pain relief for neuropathic pain and headaches. For transcranial direct current stimulation, there is low-quality evidence supporting its benefit for chronic pain, but conflicting evidence regarding a small treatment effect for neuropathic pain and headaches. For transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation, there is low-quality evidence that it is superior to sham or no treatment for neuropathic pain, but conflicting evidence for non-neuropathic pain. Future research should focus on better evaluating the short-term and long-term effectiveness of all neuromodulation modalities and whether they decrease health-care use, and on refining selection criteria and treatment variables.

Current advances in the management of cluster headaches

Introduction: Cluster headache (CH) is probably the most severe idiopathic pain condition, yet its current medical management remains poor.Areas covered: Only repurpose medicines are currently in use for the prevention of CH, partially because the pathophysiology of the condition is still elusive. In this article we performed a systematic review to evaluate the evidence for efficacy of the currently available or emerging treatments for CH.Expert opinion: We found several ongoing randomized clinical trials testing prophylactic treatments for CH and only few for the standard ones. Recent data from randomized trials with monoclonal antibodies targeting the calcitonin gene related peptide pathway (anti-CGRP mAbs) are controversial, although its role in the pathogenesis of the condition is well documented. This inconsistency may depict inadequacies in clinical trial designing. Anti-CGRP mAbs and antagonists of pituitary adenylate cyclase-activating polypeptide (PACAP) along with neuromodulation techniques, are curing the necessary valuable evidence that could illuminate the therapeutical future for cluster headache. Orexin pathway is another attractive target for CH treatment. To improve the evidence for efficacy, we further propose that the design of the clinical trials for CH needs to be radically reviewed to allow more patients to participate.

Occipital nerve stimulation and deep brain stimulation for refractory cluster headache: a prospective analysis of efficacy over time

OBJECTIVE

Occipital nerve stimulation (ONS) and deep brain stimulation (DBS) are widely used surgical treatments for chronic refractory cluster headache (CH). However, there is little literature regarding long-term follow-up of these treatments.

METHODS

The authors describe two prospective cohorts of patients with refractory CH treated with ONS and DBS and compare preoperative to postoperative status at 6 and 12 months after the surgery and at final follow-up. Efficacy analysis using objective and subjective variables is reported, as well as medication reduction and complications.

RESULTS

The ONS group consisted of 13 men and 4 women, with a median age of 44 years (range 31-61 years). The median number of attacks per week (NAw) before surgery was 28 (range 7-70), and the median follow-up duration was 48 months. The DBS group comprised 5 men and 2 women, with a median age of 50 years (range 29-64 years). The median NAw before surgery was 56 (range 14-140), and the median follow-up was 36 months. The NAw and visual analog scale score were significantly reduced for the ONS and DBS groups after surgery. However, while all the patients from the DBS group were considered responders at final follow-up, with more than 85% being satisfied with the treatment, approximately 29% of initial responders to ONS became resistant by the final follow-up (p = 0.0253).

CONCLUSIONS

ONS is initially effective as a treatment for refractory CH, although a trend toward loss of efficacy was observed. No clear predictors of good clinical response were found in the present study. Conversely, DBS appears to be effective and provide a more stable clinical response over time with an acceptable rate of surgical complications.

Posterior hypothalamus as a target in the treatment of aggression: From lesioning to deep brain stimulation

Intermittent explosive disorder can be described as a severe "affective aggression" condition, for which drugs and other supportive therapies are not fully effective. In the first half of the 19th century, experimental studies progressively increased knowledge of aggressive disorders. A neurobiologic approach revealed the posterior hypothalamic region as a key structure for the modulation of aggression. In the 1960s, patients with severe aggressive disorder, frequently associated with intellectual disability, were treated by bilateral stereotactic lesioning of the posterior hypothalamic area, with efficacy. This therapy was later abandoned because of issues related to the misuse of psychosurgery. In the last 2 decades, however, the same diencephalic target has been selected for the reversible treatment by deep brain stimulation, with success. This chapter presents a comprehensive approach to posterior hypothalamic surgery for the treatment of severely aggressive patients and discusses the experimental steps that allowed this surgical target to be selected. Surgical experiences are reported, together with considerations on target features and related encephalic circuits.

MRI maps, segregation, and white matter connectivity of the human hypothalamus in health

The human hypothalamus is composed of several gray matter territories, forming 10 different structures mainly referred to as nuclei: the preoptic, suprachiasmatic, supraoptic, infundibular, paraventricular, dorsomedial, ventromedial, posterior (dorsal; dorsal hypothalamic area), and tuberomamillary nuclei, and the lateral hypothalamic area. The macroconnectivity, described since the middle of the 19th century, is currently probed using MRI methods, notably those relying on diffusion techniques. The structural connections can be grouped as follows: connections with the olfactory system; stria terminalis connections; stria medullaris connections; ansa lenticularis connections; subthalamus connections; optic tract connections; intrahypothalamic connections; hypothalamo-hypophysis connections; hypothalamic commissures; cortex connections.

Short-Lasting Unilateral Neuralgiform Headache With Conjunctival Injection and Tearing (SUNCT) Improves With Bilateral Ventral Tegmental Area Deep Brain Stimulation

BACKGROUND

Short-lasting unilateral neuralgiform headache with conjunctival injection and tearing (SUNCT) is a severe headache disorder characterized by clustered episodes of extreme pain. Refractory to most interventions, ipsilateral unilateral ventral tegmental area (VTA) deep brain stimulation (DBS) has been previously reported to be efficacious in 14 cases.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Herein, we report the first case of an individual with medically refractory SUNCT who underwent bilateral VTA DBS. The patient experienced better improvement of his headaches with bilateral stimulation compared to unilateral stimulation. He also had a return of severe headaches within a few hours after his stimulator was switched off during sleep, with rebound worsening of his headaches over several days. The main side effects were double vision and difficulty focusing while reading, which were observed primarily with unipolar stimulation that required high voltages, high frequencies, and multiple negative contacts to control the headaches. The side effects were minimized with bipolar and interleaving stimulation with comparable control of his headaches.

CONCLUSION

Bilateral VTA DBS may be effective in alleviating medical refractory SUNCT.

Neuromodulation in headache and craniofacial neuralgia: guidelines from the Spanish Society of Neurology and the Spanish Society of Neurosurgery

INTRODUCTION

Numerous invasive and non-invasive neuromodulation devices have been developed and applied to patients with headache and neuralgia in recent years. However, no updated review addresses their safety and efficacy, and no healthcare institution has issued specific recommendations on their use for these 2 conditions.

METHODS

Neurologists from the Spanish Society of Neurology's (SEN) Headache Study Group and neurosurgeons specialising in functional neurosurgery, selected by the Spanish Society of Neurosurgery (SENEC), performed a comprehensive review of articles on the MEDLINE database addressing the use of the technique in patients with headache and neuralgia.

RESULTS

We present an updated review and establish the first set of consensus recommendations of the SEN and SENC on the use of neuromodulation to treat headache and neuralgia, analysing the current levels of evidence on its effectiveness for each specific condition.

CONCLUSIONS

Current evidence supports the indication of neuromodulation techniques for patients with refractory headache and neuralgia (especially migraine, cluster headache, and trigeminal neuralgia) selected by neurologists and headache specialists, after pharmacological treatment options are exhausted. Furthermore, we recommend that invasive neuromodulation be debated by multidisciplinary committees, and that the procedure be performed by teams of neurosurgeons specialising in functional neurosurgery, with acceptable rates of morbidity and mortality.

Deep brain stimulation modulates hypothalamic-brainstem fibers in cluster headache: case report

Hypothalamic deep brain stimulation (DBS) has been used for more than a decade to treat cluster headache (CH) but its mechanisms remain poorly understood. The authors have successfully treated a patient with CH using hypothalamic DBS and found that the contact used for chronic stimulation was located in a white matter region posterior to the mammillary bodies. Fiber tracts crossing that region were the medial forebrain bundle and those interconnecting the hypothalamus and brainstem, including the dorsal longitudinal fasciculus. Because the stimulation of axons is an important mechanism of DBS, some of its clinical effects in CH may be related to the stimulation of fibers interconnecting the hypothalamus and brainstem.

Neurostimulation methods in the treatment of chronic pain

The goal of this narrative review was to give an up-to-date overview of the peripheral and central neurostimulation methods that can be used to treat chronic pain. Special focus has been given to three pain conditions: neuropathic pain, nociplastic pain and primary headaches. Both non-invasive and invasive techniques are briefly presented together with their pain relief potentials. For non-invasive stimulation techniques, data concerning transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS), transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS), remote electrical neuromodulation (REN) and vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) are provided. Concerning invasive stimulation techniques, occipital nerve stimulation (ONS), vagus nerve stimulation (VNS), epidural motor cortex stimulation (EMCS), spinal cord stimulation (SCS) and deep brain stimulation (DBS) are presented. The action mode of all these techniques is only partly understood but can be very different from one technique to the other. Patients' selection is still a challenge. Recent consensus-based guidelines for clinical practice are presented when available. The development of closed-loop devices could be of interest in the future, although the clinical benefit over open loop is not proven yet.

Deep brain stimulation of chronic cluster headaches: Posterior hypothalamus, ventral tegmentum and beyond

OBJECTIVE

We present long-term follow-up results and analysis of stimulation sites of a prospective cohort study of six patients with chronic cluster headaches undergoing deep brain stimulation of the ipsilateral posterior hypothalamic region.

METHODS

The primary endpoint was the postoperative change in the composite headache severity score "headache load" after 12 months of chronic stimulation. Secondary endpoints were the changes in headache attack frequency, headache attack duration and headache intensity, quality of life measures at 12, 24, and 48 months following surgery. Stimulating contact positions were analysed and projected onto the steroetactic atlas of Schaltenbrand and Wahren.

RESULTS

There was a significant reduction of headache load of over 93% on average at 12 months postoperatively that persisted over the follow-up period of 48 months (p = 0.0041) and that was accompanied by a significant increase of reported quality of life measures (p = 0.03). Anatomical analysis revealed that individual stimulating electrodes were located in the red nucleus, posterior hypothalamic region, mesencephalic pretectal area and centromedian nucleus of the thalamus.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings confirming long-term effectiveness of deep brain stimulation for chronic cluster headaches suggest that the neuroanatomical substrate of deep brain stimulation-induced headache relief is probably not restricted to the posterior hypothalamic area but encompasses a more widespread area.

Ventral tegmental area deep brain stimulation for chronic cluster headache: Effects on cognition, mood, pain report behaviour and quality of life

Background

Deep brain stimulation in the ventral tegmental area (VTA-DBS) has provided remarkable therapeutic benefits in decreasing headache frequency and severity in patients with medically refractory chronic cluster headache (CH). However, to date the effects of VTA-DBS on cognition, mood and quality of life have not been examined in detail.

Methods

The aim of the present study was to do so in a case series of 18 consecutive patients with cluster headache who underwent implantation of deep brain stimulation electrodes in the ventral tegmental area. The patients were evaluated preoperatively and after a mean of 14 months of VTA-DBS on tests of global cognition (Mini Mental State Examination), intelligence (Wechsler Abbreviated Scale of Intelligence), verbal memory (California Verbal Learning Test-II), executive function (Delis–Kaplan Executive Function System), and attention (Paced Auditory Serial Addition Test). Depression (Beck Depression Inventory and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Rating Scale-D), anxiety (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Rating Scale-A), apathy (Starkstein Apathy Scale), and hopelessness (Beck Hopelessness Scale) were also assessed. Subjective pain experience (McGill Pain Questionnaire), behaviour (Pain Behaviour Checklist) and quality of life (Short Form-36) were also evaluated at the same time points.

Results

VTA-DBS resulted in significant improvement of headache frequency (from a mean of five to two attacks daily, p < .001) and severity (from mean Verbal Rating Scale [VRS] of 10 to 7, p < .001) which was associated with significant reduction of anxiety (from mean HADS-A of 11.94 to 8.00, p < .001) and help-seeking behaviours (from mean PBC of 4.00 to 2.61, p < .001). VTA-DBS did not produce any significant change to any tests of cognitive function and any other outcome measures (BDI, HADS-D, SAS, BHS, McGill Pain Questionnaire, Short Form-36).

Conclusion

We confirm the efficacy of VTA-DBS in the treatment of medically refractory chronic cluster headache. The reduction of headache frequency and severity was associated with a significant reduction of anxiety. Furthermore, the result suggests that VTA-DBS for chronic cluster headache improves pain-related help-seeking behaviours and does not produce any change in cognition.

Deep brain stimulation of posterior hypothalamic area for cluster headache

Background:

Deep brain stimulation of the posterior hypothalamic area is one of the neuromodulation treatments used for chronic cluster headache, but the number of published patients remains low.

Aim:

The aim of this article was to present the retrospective results of 12 consecutive chronic cluster headache patients treated with deep brain stimulation at Helsinki University Hospital.

Materials and Methods:

All chronic cluster headache patients treated with deep brain stimulation between 2004 and 2012 were included in the study. Patients were interviewed and their hospital files analyzed. Treatment effect was classified as good, partial, or no effect.

Results:

Of the 12 patients, four had a good treatment effect, five had partial, and three had no effect of deep brain stimulation. In contrast to previous studies, our patients reported an almost immediate benefit after the onset of stimulation.

Conclusions:

Deep brain stimulation provides clinically meaningful benefit to a subgroup of chronic cluster headache patients.

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.

Defective functional connectivity between posterior hypothalamus and regions of the diencephalic-mesencephalic junction in chronic cluster headache

OBJECTIVE

We tested the hypothesis of a defective functional connectivity between the posterior hypothalamus and diencephalic-mesencephalic regions in chronic cluster headache based on: a) clinical and neuro-endocrinological findings in cluster headache patients; b) neuroimaging findings during cluster headache attacks; c) neuroimaging findings in drug-refractory chronic cluster headache patients improved after successful deep brain stimulation.

METHODS

Resting state functional magnetic resonance imaging, associated with a seed-based approach, was employed to investigate the functional connectivity of the posterior hypothalamus in chronic cluster headache patients (n = 17) compared to age and sex-matched healthy subjects (n = 16). Random-effect analyses were performed to study differences between patients and controls in ipsilateral and contralateral-to-the-pain posterior hypothalamus functional connectivity.

RESULTS

Cluster headache patients showed an increased functional connectivity between the ipsilateral posterior hypothalamus and a number of diencephalic-mesencephalic structures, comprising ventral tegmental area, dorsal nuclei of raphe, and bilateral substantia nigra, sub-thalamic nucleus, and red nucleus ( p < 0.005 FDR-corrected vs . control group). No difference between patients and controls was found comparing the contralateral hypothalami.

CONCLUSIONS

The observed deranged functional connectivity between the posterior ipsilateral hypothalamus and diencephalic-mesencephalic regions in chronic cluster headache patients mainly involves structures that are part of (i.e. ventral tegmental area, substantia nigra) or modulate (dorsal nuclei of raphe, sub-thalamic nucleus) the midbrain dopaminergic systems. The midbrain dopaminergic systems could play a role in cluster headache pathophysiology and in particular in the chronicization process. Future studies are needed to better clarify if this finding is specific to cluster headache or if it represents an unspecific response to chronic pain.

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.

Optimal deep brain stimulation site and target connectivity for chronic cluster headache

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the mechanism of action of deep brain stimulation for refractory chronic cluster headache and the optimal target within the ventral tegmental area.

METHODS

Seven patients with refractory chronic cluster headache underwent high spatial and angular resolution diffusion MRI preoperatively. MRI-guided and MRI-verified electrode implantation was performed unilaterally in 5 patients and bilaterally in 2. Volumes of tissue activation were generated around active lead contacts with a finite-element model. Twelve months after surgery, voxel-based morphometry was used to identify voxels associated with higher reduction in headache load. Probabilistic tractography was used to identify the brain connectivity of the activation volumes in responders, defined as patients with a reduction of ≥30% in headache load.

RESULTS

There was no surgical morbidity. Average follow-up was 34 ± 14 months. Patients showed reductions of 76 ± 33% in headache load, 46 ± 41% in attack severity, 58 ± 41% in headache frequency, and 51 ± 46% in attack duration at the last follow-up. Six patients responded to treatment. Greatest reduction in headache load was associated with activation in an area cantered at 6 mm lateral, 2 mm posterior, and 1 mm inferior to the midcommissural point of the third ventricle. Average responders' activation volume lay on the trigeminohypothalamic tract, connecting the trigeminal system and other brainstem nuclei associated with nociception and pain modulation with the hypothalamus, and the prefrontal and mesial temporal areas.

CONCLUSIONS

We identify the optimal stimulation site and structural connectivity of the deep brain stimulation target for cluster headache, explicating possible mechanisms of action and disease pathophysiology.

STN DBS for Advanced Parkinson Disease Simultaneously Alleviates Cluster Headache

BACKGROUND

STB DBS (deep brain stimulation of the subthalamic nucleus) is commonly used to treat advanced Parkinson disease (PD) while posterior hypothalamic DBS for cluster headache (CH) remains experimental.

METHODS

We present a case where a middle-aged man was diagnosed with both CH and PD and received medical treatment for both. The patient was treated with bilateral STN DBS after developing side effects related to L-dopa.

FINDINGS

STN DBS not only alleviated PD symptoms but also the CH, and hence the CH treatment could be withdrawn. During follow-up PD progressed but the effect on CH symptoms was sustained.

CONCLUSIONS

The anatomical proximity of the medial STN and hypothalamus, their similar connectivity via the hyperdirect pathway, and the autonomic effects of STN DBS could explain symptom relief for both PD and CH.

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.

Advances in the understanding of cluster headache

INTRODUCTION

Cluster headache is the worst primary headache form; it occurs in paroxysmal excruciatingly severe unilateral head pain attacks usually grouped in cluster periods. The familial occurrence of the disease indicates a genetic component but a gene abnormality is yet to be disclosed. Activation of trigeminal afferents and cranial parasympathetic efferents, the so-called trigemino-parasympathetic reflex, can explain pain and accompanying oculo-facial autonomic phenomena. In particular, pain in cluster headache is attributed, at least in part, to the increased CGRP plasma levels released by activated trigeminal system. Posterior hypothalamus was hypothesized to be the cluster generator activating the trigemino-parasympathetic reflex. Efficacy of monoclonal antibodies against CRGP is under investigation in randomized clinical trials. Areas covered: This paper will focus on main findings contributing to consider cluster headache as a neurovascular disorder with an origin from within the brain. Expert commentary: Accumulated evidence with hypothalamic stimulation in cluster headache patients indicate that posterior hypothalamus terminates rather than triggers the attacks. More extensive studies on the genetics of cluster headache are necessary to disclose anomalies behind the increased familial risk of the disease. Results from ongoing clinical trials in cluster headache sufferers using monoclonal antibodies against CGRP will open soon a new era.

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.

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.

Ventral tegmental area deep brain stimulation for refractory chronic cluster headache

OBJECTIVE

To present outcomes in a cohort of medically intractable chronic cluster headache (CCH) patients treated with ventral tegmental area (VTA) deep brain stimulation (DBS).

METHODS

In an uncontrolled open-label prospective study, 21 patients (17 male; mean age 52 years) with medically refractory CCH were selected for ipsilateral VTA-DBS by a specialist multidisciplinary team including a headache neurologist and functional neurosurgeon. Patients had also failed or were denied access to occipital nerve stimulation within the UK National Health Service. The primary endpoint was improvement in the headache frequency. Secondary outcomes included other headache scores (severity, duration, headache load), medication use, disability and affective scores, quality of life (QoL) measures, and adverse events.

RESULTS

Median follow-up was 18 months (range 4-60 months). At the final follow-up point, there was 60% improvement in headache frequency (p = 0.007) and 30% improvement in headache severity (p = 0.001). The headache load (a composite score encompassing frequency, severity, and duration of attacks) improved by 68% (p = 0.002). Total monthly triptan intake of the group dropped by 57% posttreatment. Significant improvement was observed in a number of QoL, disability, and mood scales. Side effects included diplopia, which resolved in 2 patients following stimulation adjustment, and persisted in 1 patient with a history of ipsilateral trochlear nerve palsy. There were no other serious adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

This study supports that VTA-DBS may be a safe and effective therapy for refractory CCH patients who failed conventional treatments.

CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE

This study provides Class IV evidence that VTA-DBS decreases headache frequency, severity, and headache load in patients with medically intractable chronic cluster headaches.

[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.

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.

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.

Deep brain stimulation

Deep brain stimulation (DBS) has provided remarkable therapeutic benefits for people with a variety of neurological disorders. Despite the uncertainty of the precise mechanisms underlying its efficacy, DBS is clinically effective in improving motor function of essential tremor, Parkinson's disease and primary dystonia and in relieving obsessive-compulsive disorder. Recently, this surgical technique has continued to expand to other numerous neurological diseases with encouraging results. This review highlighted the current and potential future clinical applications of DBS.