Cluster Headache: Potential Options for Medically Refractory Patients (When All Else Fails)

Are psychedelics the answer to chronic pain: A review of current literature

AIMS

We aim to provide an evidence-based overview of the use of psychedelics in chronic pain, specifically LSD and psilocybin.

CONTENT

Chronic pain is a common and complex problem, with an unknown etiology. Psychedelics like lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD) and psilocybin, may play a role in the management of chronic pain. Through activation of the serotonin-2A (5-HT2A) receptor, several neurophysiological responses result in the disruption of functional connections in brain regions associated with chronic pain. Healthy reconnections can be made through neuroplastic effects, resulting in sustained pain relief. However, this process is not fully understood, and evidence of efficacy is limited and of low quality. In cancer and palliative related pain, the analgesic potential of psychedelics was established decades ago, and the current literature shows promising results on efficacy and safety in patients with cancer-related psychological distress. In other areas, patients suffering from severe headache disorders like migraine and cluster headache who have self-medicated with psychedelics report both acute and prophylactic efficacy of LSD and psilocybin. Randomized control trials are now being conducted to study the effects in cluster headache Furthermore, psychedelics have a generally favorable safety profile especially when compared to other analgesics like opioids. In addition, psychedelics do not have the addictive potential of opioids.

IMPLICATIONS

Given the current epidemic use of opioids, and that patients are in desperate need of an alternative treatment, it is important that further research is conducted on the efficacy of psychedelics in chronic pain conditions.

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.

Vidian Neurectomy for Management of Chronic Cluster Headache

BACKGROUND

Management of chronic cluster headache (CCH) remains a challenging endeavor, and the optimal surgical approach for medically refractory CCH remains controversial.

OBJECTIVE

To conduct a preliminary evaluation of the efficacy and safety of vidian neurectomy (VN) in patients with medically refractory CCH.

METHODS

Between March 2013 and December 2015, 9 CCH patients, all of whom had failed to respond to conservative therapy, underwent VN with a precise nerve cut and maximal preservation of the sphenopalatine ganglion. Data included demographic variables, cluster headache onset and duration, mean attack frequency, mean attack intensity, and pain disability index measures pre- and through 12-mo postsurgery.

RESULTS

Seven of the 9 cases (77.8%) showed immediate improvement. Improvement was delayed by 1 mo in 1 patient, after which the surgical effects of pain relief were maintained throughout the follow-up period. One patient (11.1%) did not improve after surgery. One year after VN, patients' mean attack frequency, mean attack intensity, and pain disability index decreased by 54.5%, 52.9%, and 56.4%, respectively. No patient experienced treatment-related side effects or complications.

CONCLUSION

VN is an effective treatment method for CCH patients. Precise Vidian nerve identification and maximal preservation of the sphenopalatine ganglion may achieve good surgical outcomes and dramatically improve quality of life among patients, without significant adverse events.

Efficacy of Sphenopalatine Ganglion Radiofrequency in Refractory Chronic Cluster Headache

BACKGROUND

In the literature, there are only short series of radiofrequency of the sphenopalatine ganglion (SPG) to treat chronic refractory cluster headache (CCHr) with variable results. Furthermore, there is no consensus on which methodology to use: radiofrequency ablation (RFA) or pulsed radiofrequency (PRF).

METHODS

We conducted a prospective analysis of 37 patients with CCHr who underwent RFA or PRF of the SPG in our center between 2004 and 2015.

RESULTS

The mean age of the patients was 40 years (range, 26-59 years). PRF was performed in 24 patients, and RFA was performed in 13 patients. A total of 5 patients (13.5%) experienced complete clinical relief of both pain and parasympathetic symptoms, 21 patients (56.8%) had partial and transient relief, and 11 patients (29.7%) did not improve. There was no evidence of significant superiority of one radiofrequency modality over the other (P = 0.48). There were no complications associated with the technique. The passage of time tended to decrease the efficacy of both techniques (P < 0.001). The mean follow-up was 68.1 months (range, 15-148 months). To our knowledge, this is the series with the largest number of patients and the longest follow-up period published in the literature.

CONCLUSIONS

Radiofrequency of the SPG is a safe, fast, and partially effective method for the treatment of CCHr. Given its low rate of complications and its low economic cost, we think it should be one of the first invasive treatment options, prior to techniques with greater morbidity and mortality, such as neuromodulation.

Psychoactive substances as a last resort-a qualitative study of self-treatment of migraine and cluster headaches

BACKGROUND

Treatment resistant cluster headache and migraine patients are exploring alternative treatments online. The aim of this study was to improve comprehension regarding the use of non-established or alternative pharmacological treatments used by sufferers of cluster headaches and migraines.

METHODS

A qualitative thematic analysis of the users' own accounts presented in online forum discussions were conducted. The forum boards https://shroomery.org/ , http://bluelight.org , and https://clusterbusters.org/ met the inclusion criteria and were used for the study.

RESULTS

The analysis resulted in six themes: a desperate need for effective treatments; the role of the forum-finding alternative treatments and community support; alternative treatment substances; dosage and regimens; effects and treatment results; and adverse effects. The results provide an insight into why, how, and by which substances and methods sufferers seek relief from cluster headache and migraines.

CONCLUSIONS

These patients are in a desperate and vulnerable situation, and illicit psychoactive substances are often considered a last resort. There appeared to be little or no interest in psychoactive effects per se as these were rather tolerated or avoided by using sub-psychoactive doses. Primarily, psilocybin, lysergic acid diethylamide, and related psychedelic tryptamines were reportedly effective for both prophylactic and acute treatment of cluster headache and migraines. Treatment results with cannabis were more unpredictable. No severe adverse events were reported, but it was observed how desperation sometimes spurred risky behavior when obtaining and testing various treatment alternatives. The forum discourse mainly revolved around maximizing treatment results and minimizing potential harms.

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.

Hemicrania continua may respond to repetitive sphenopalatine ganglion block: A case report

BACKGROUND

Hemicrania continua (HC) is a chronic headache disorder characterized by a continuous, strictly unilateral head pain accompanied by cranial autonomic symptoms, which completely responds to indomethacin; however, few alternative treatment options exist for the patients with this disorder who cannot tolerate indomethacin. Sphenopalatine ganglion (SPG) block has been used for the treatment of various headaches, with the strongest evidence for efficacy in cluster headache.

CASE REPORT

A 52-year-old woman with a 7-year history of HC was evaluated in our clinic for management of her headaches after she had stopped using indomethacin due to a bleeding gastrointestinal ulcer. After failing multiple pharmacologic therapies, she was treated with repetitive SPG blocks using bupivacaine (0.6 mL at 0.5%) twice a week for 6 weeks and followed by maintenance therapy. This treatment protocol resulted in significant improvement in her headaches, mood, and functional capacity.

CONCLUSION

SPG block using a local anesthetic may be an effective treatment for patients with HC, specifically for those who cannot tolerate indomethacin, or when this drug is contraindicated.

Unsuccessful pulsed radiofrequency of the sphenopalatine ganglion in patients with chronic cluster headache and subsequent successful thermocoagulation

We present the results of pulsed and continuous radiofrequency (CRF) of the sphenopalatine ganglion in a case series of 3 patients with chronic cluster headache (CCH). Three patients were referred to our neurosurgical department because of CCH, which was refractory to pharmacological treatment. They underwent pulsed radiofrequency of the sphenopalatine ganglion (PRF-SPG), and the procedure was performed through an infrazygomatic approach. In the PRF procedures, we applied 2 cycles of PRF at 42°C and 45 V for 120 seconds, with a pulse frequency of 2 Hz and a pulse width of 20 ms. In those procedures where thermocoagulation was carried out, 2 CRF lesions at 80°C for 90 seconds each were performed. Following corticosteroid and local anesthetic (40 mg of methylprednisolone and 1 mL of 1% lidocaine) injection, 2 patients had no pain relief at all, whereas the third one experienced a partial response, which lasted only 1 month and his pain then returned to its baseline level. Thus, this outcome was assessed as a nonsustained partial response. Therefore, all of them underwent a CRF lesioning of the SPG, and after this procedure, they achieved complete pain relief until the end of the follow-up period. Furthermore, the associated autonomic manifestations disappeared. The 3 patients presented in this case series failed to achieve adequate pain relief after PRF-SPG. However, these same patients subsequently underwent a successful CRF of the SPG.

Refractory chronic cluster headache: a consensus statement on clinical definition from the European Headache Federation

Chronic cluster headache (CCH) often resists to prophylactic pharmaceutical treatments resulting in patients’ life damage. In this rare but pragmatic situation escalation to invasive management is needed but framing criteria are lacking. We aimed to reach a consensus for refractory CCH definition for clinical and research use. The preparation of the final consensus followed three stages. Internal between authors, a larger between all European Headache Federation members and finally an international one among all investigators that have published clinical studies on cluster headache the last five years. Eighty-five investigators reached by email. Proposed criteria were in the format of the International Classification of Headache Disorders III-beta (description, criteria, notes, comments and references). Following this evaluation eight drafts were prepared before the final. Twenty-four (28.2%) international investigators commented during two rounds. Refractory CCH is described in the present consensus as a situation that fulfills the criteria of ICHD-3 beta for CCH with at least three severe attacks per week despite at least three consecutive trials of adequate preventive treatments. The condition is rare, but difficult to manage and invasive treatments may be needed. The consensus addresses five specific clinical and paraclinical diagnostic criteria followed by three notes and specific comments. Although refractory CCH may be not a separate identity these specific diagnostic criteria should help clinicians and investigators to improve patient’s quality of life.

Alcohol percutaneous neurolysis of the sphenopalatine ganglion in the management of refractory cranio-facial pain

INTRODUCTION

The sphenopalatine ganglion (SPN) has been proven to be involved in various types of facial pain syndromes. Management of these cranio-facial pain syndromes can be challenging, and existing specific treatments are sometimes inefficient and may fail. The purpose of this study is to describe and evaluate alcohol SPN in the management of cranio-facial pain.

METHODS

Forty-two patients suffering from refractory facial pain who underwent 58 consecutive SPN were included in this study between 2000 and 2013. Patients were divided into three groups: group "cluster headache" (CH), group "persistent idiopathic facial pain" (PFIP), and group "Other". Pain was assessed using Visual Analogue Scale scores (measured immediately before and after procedure and at regular intervals following the procedure). Alcohol SPN was considered to be effective when pain relief was equal to or greater than 50 % and lasting for at least 1 month. All procedures were realized ambulatory under CT guidance and consisted of an injection of 1 ml of absolute alcohol.

RESULTS

Overall efficacy rate of alcohol SPN was 67.2 %, with mean pain relief duration of 10.3 months. Procedure was graded either not painful or tolerable by patients in 64.2 %. Analysis showed a higher efficacy rate in the groups CH (76.5 %) and PFIP (85.7 %) compared to the group Other (40 %). No difference was found between groups regarding the recurrence rate.

CONCLUSION

Alcohol SPN under CT guidance appears as a safe and effective treatment of refractory facial pain, especially in cases of cluster headache and persistent idiopathic facial pain.