A case report of hemicrania continua-like headache due to ipsilateral inflammatory orbital pseudotumor

The critical role of neuroimaging in hemicrania continua: A systematic review and case series

BACKGROUND

Hemicrania continua is a primary unilateral headache characterized by ipsilateral parasympathetic and sympathetic autonomic features. A key diagnostic criterion is its dramatic response to indomethacin treatment; however, various vascular or structural abnormalities have been reported to cause secondary hemicrania continua, presenting with clinical features similar to those of the primary headache presentation.

OBJECTIVE

We reviewed the literature to compile secondary hemicrania continua cases, highlighting the importance of imaging during the evaluation. Additionally, we also contributed our three cases to the existing studies.

METHODS

We conducted a review of articles from the PubMed and EMBASE databases that described reported cases of secondary hemicrania continua, covering the period from 1993 to 2021. Our review included detailed patient information, signs, and symptoms of hemicrania continua, as well as information on indomethacin usage and headache resolution (if pertinent).

RESULTS

Secondary hemicrania continua can result from a remarkably diverse range of structural and vascular lesions, yet clinical reports on long-term follow-up are lacking. Notably, cases may exhibit a classical response to indomethacin, emphasizing the importance of neuroimaging in excluding secondary cases. Our search yielded 41 cases meeting our criteria. We excluded six cases that were not treated with indomethacin or were unresponsive to it. Additionally, we present three cases that highlight the necessity of neuroimaging in evaluating hemicrania continua, along with short- and long-term clinical outcomes following indomethacin and lesion-directed treatments. Case 1 presented with daily right-sided headaches and cranial autonomic symptoms. Her pain completely resolved with indomethacin use. Neuroimaging of the brain revealed a laterally directed saccular aneurysm of the right internal carotid artery. Case 2 presented with continuous left-sided unilateral headaches with superimposed exacerbations. She complained of left-sided photophobia with a dull sensation in the left ear. Her symptoms decreased after 2 weeks of indomethacin use. Neuroimaging of the head indicated a benign tumor with mass effect into the left lateral medulla and inferior cerebellar peduncle. Case 3 presented with a right side-locked headache with daily, severe superimposed exacerbations. She had photophobia in the right eye and a right-sided Horner's syndrome, along with tearing during her exacerbations. Neuroimaging of the brain revealed a pituitary tumor and her pain completely resolved with indomethacin.

CONCLUSION

Hemicrania continua is a rare headache disorder that can be either primary or secondary. Importantly, response to indomethacin can still occur in secondary hemicrania continua. Thus, neuroimaging should be considered to rule out underlying structural etiology in all cases, regardless of their clinical responsiveness to indomethacin therapy.

Hemicrania continua: clinical review, diagnosis and management

Hemicrania continua (HC) is an indomethacin-responsive primary headache disorder which is currently classified under the heading of trigeminal autonomic cephalalgias (TACs). It is a highly misdiagnosed and underreported primary headache. The pooled mean delay of diagnosis of HC is 8.0 ± 7.2 years. It is not rare. We noted more than 1000 cases in the literature. It represents 1.7% of total headache patients attending headache or neurology clinic. Just like other TACs, it is characterized by strictly unilateral pain in the trigeminal distribution, cranial autonomic features in the same area and agitation during exacerbations/attacks. It is different from other TACs in one aspect. While all other TACs are episodic, HC patients have continuous headaches with superimposed severe exacerbations. The central feature of HC is continuous background headache. However, the patients may be worried only for superimposed exacerbations. Focusing only on exacerbations and ignoring continuous background headache are the most important factors for the misdiagnosis of HC. A large number of patients may have migrainous features during exacerbation phase. Up to 70% patients may fulfill the diagnostic criteria for migraine during exacerbations. Besides migraine, its exacerbations can mimic a large number of other primary and secondary headaches. The other specific feature of HC is a remarkable response to indomethacin. However, a large number of patients develop side effects because of the long-term use of indomethacin. A few other medications may also be effective in a subset of patients with HC. Various surgical interventions have been suggested for patients who are intolerant to indomethacin. Several aspects of HC are still not defined. There is a great heterogeneity in types of patients or articles on the HC in the literature. Diagnostic criteria have been modified several times over the years. The current diagnostic criteria are too restrictive in some aspects. We suggest a more accommodating type of criteria for the appendix of International Classification of Headache Disorder (ICHD).

Hemicrania Continua-Like Headache Related to Transdermal Nitroglycerine Therapy

Several cases of symptomatic hemicrania continua (HC) have been reported. A 66-year-old man, suffering from migraine without aura, presented with a four month history of a new headache fulfilling the ICHD 3beta clinical criteria for HC. HC onset was strictly related to the use of transdermal nitroglycerine patch (TNP). In agreement with the cardiologist, TNP was discontinued and the headache promptly disappeared; symptoms reappeared within 6-12 hours after nitroglycerine reintroduction. After permanent discontinuation of TNP, headache disappeared at one year follow-up. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first report of the occurrence of an HC-like headache related to TNP.

Symptomatic Trigeminal Autonomic Cephalalgias

Trigeminal autonomic cephalalgias (TACs) are primary headache syndromes that share some clinical features such as a trigeminal distribution of the pain and accompanying ipsilateral autonomic symptoms. By definition, no underlying structural lesion for the phenotype is found. There are, however, many descriptions in the literature of patients with structural lesions causing symptoms that are indistinguishable from those of idiopathic TACs. In this article, we review the recent insights in symptomatic TACs by comparing and categorizing newly published cases. We confirm that symptomatic TACs can have typical phenotypes. It is of crucial importance to identify symptomatic TACs, as the underlying cause will influence treatment and outcome. Our update focuses on when a structural lesion should be sought.

Indomethacin Responsive Headaches: Exhaustive Systematic Review with Pooled Analysis and Critical Appraisal of 81 Published Clinical Studies

OBJECTIVES

The relationship between indomethacin (IMC) and headache treatment has long intrigued clinicians and clinical researchers in Headache Medicine. Why is it efficacious in many types of headache disorders when other medications are not, and what is the mechanism behind its efficacy? IMC and headache related topics that have been explored in detail in the literature include IMC-responsive headache disorders ("traditional"), pharmacology of IMC, symptomatic headaches responsive to IMC, "novel" headache conditions that respond, cluster headache and IMC, IMC provoking headache, the issue about" absolute" and "non-absolute" effect of IMC on headache disorders, and the morphing trigeminal autonomic cephalalgias (TACs).

DATA SOURCE

A PubMed/MEDLINE search was used for Clinical Studies Categories and Systematic Reviews on the PubMed Clinical Queries. The search details were "indomethacin" AND "headache" spanning all previous years until February 1, 2015. Methods were in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines.

REVIEW METHODS

Articles were excluded if IMC had not been used to treat headache disorders in adults, if the article concerned IMC-responsive headaches but made no reference to the use of IMC, and articles not addressing the above mentioned topics.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

The "velocity" of publications on IMC and headache seems to be decreasing, particularly on the use of IMC for the treatment of TACs. The science behind the understanding of the putative mechanisms of IMC's action on headache has moved forward, but the answer to why it works better than other nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs has been elusive. There are case reports of other rare headache disorders that may be responsive to IMC. The dosages of IMC used as a tool for detecting IMC responsive disorders vary according to different centers of investigation. In many circumstances, headache disorders similar to "primary" IMC-responsive disorders are actually symptomatic disorders. Cluster headache as an IMC-resistant headache disorder may not be as absolute as once thought. Sometimes, IMC has been found to provoke headache; differentiating IMC-provoked headache from IMC-resistant headache can make headache diagnosis and management difficult. As for the "absolute" responsiveness of IMC, it is possible that using higher dosages leads to higher sensitivity, probably at the expense of decreased specificity. There are many reports about the occurrence of two or more IMC-responsive disorders (latu sensu) in the same patient, which may be coincidental.