Parenteral dexamethasone for acute severe migraine headache: meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials for preventing recurrence

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.

Managing and Preventing Migraine in the Emergency Department: A Review

Migraine is a leading cause of disability worldwide, and acute migraine attacks are a common reason for patients to seek care in the emergency department (ED). There have been recent advancements in the care of patients with migraine, specifically emerging evidence for nerve blocks and new pharmacological classes of medications like gepants and ditans. This article serves as a comprehensive review of migraine in the ED, including diagnosis and management of acute complications of migraine (eg, status migrainosus, migrainous infarct, persistent aura without infarction, and aura-triggered seizure) and use of evidence-based migraine-specific treatments in the ED. It highlights the role of migraine preventive medications and provides a framework for emergency physicians to prescribe them to eligible patients. Finally, it evaluates the evidence for nerve blocks in the treatment of migraine and introduces the possible role of gepants and ditans in the care of patients with migraine in the ED.

Randomized Trial Comparing Low- vs High-Dose IV Dexamethasone for Patients With Moderate to Severe Migraine

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Dexamethasone decreases the frequency of migraine recurrence after emergency department (ED) discharge. However, the optimal dose of dexamethasone is unknown. We hypothesized that dexamethasone 16 mg IV would allow greater rates of sustained headache relief than 4 mg when coadministered with metoclopramide 10 mg IV.

METHODS

This was a randomized double-blind study. Adults who presented with a headache meeting International Classification of Headache Disorders, 3rd edition, migraine criteria were eligible if they rated the headache as moderate or severe in intensity. Pain intensity was assessed for up to 2 hours in the ED and through telephone 48 hours and 7 days later. The primary outcome was sustained headache relief. Secondary outcomes included headache relief within 2 hours and the number of headache days during the subsequent week. Relying on a priori criteria, the data safety monitoring committee recommended halting the study early for futility.

RESULTS

A total of 1,823 patients were screened, and 209 patients were randomized. The mean age was 38 years (SD 11). One hundred seventy-nine of 209 (86%) identified as women. One hundred fifty-one of 209 (72%) of the population reported severe intensity; the rest reported moderate. Thirty-five of 102 (34%) participants in the metoclopramide +4 mg arm achieved sustained headache relief as did 42/102 (41%) participants in the metoclopramide +16 mg arm (absolute difference 7%, 95% CI -6% to 20%). Headache relief within 2 hours occurred in 77/104 (74%) low-dose and 82/105 (78%) high-dose participants (absolute difference 4%, 95% CI -8% to 16%). During the week after ED discharge, low-dose participants reported a median of 2 headache days (25th, 75th percentile 1, 5); in the high-dose arm, this was also 2 (25th, 75th percentile 0, 4) (mean difference 0.4, 95% CI -0.3 to 1.2).

DISCUSSION

When added to 10 mg IV metoclopramide, doses of dexamethasone greater than 4 mg are unlikely to benefit patients in the ED with migraine.

TRIAL REGISTRATION INFORMATION

This study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov on October 2, 2019 (NCT04112823). The first patient was enrolled on December 22, 2019.

CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE

This study provides Class I evidence that 16 mg of IV dexamethasone is unlikely to provide greater rates of sustained headache relief than 4 mg of IV dexamethasone among patients in the ED with migraine treated concurrently with IV metoclopramide.

Steroids in Headache: A Comprehensive Review of Recent Research

Background

Headache is an extremely common symptom of the general outpatient department and also the headache clinic, with prevalence of 48.9% in the general population. None has ever experienced headache in life time. Headache is seen in 1 patient out of 10 general practitioner (GP) consultations, 1 referral out of 3 is headache in neurology OPD, and 1 in 5 of all emergency medical admissions. Of all headaches, around 98% constitute primary headache: migraine without aura, tension headache, and cluster headache. With advancement in various drug modalities, certain headache forms respond less well to the regular approved medications, and some headaches are complicated by the analgesic itself. Steroids have been tried in many subtypes of headache, especially in primary forms of headache with dysautonomia, headache with trigeminal pathway activation and disinhibition, and in certain medication-culprit headaches. This subgroup of headaches is almost a challenge in an emergency for the headache expert as well. So, we need to assess the role of steroids in less well-responsive headaches.

Summary

Current reviewed evidence on the role of steroids in primary headache suggests that steroids have a role in status migrainosus and medication overuse headache when used in the mentioned and monitored manner. Consideration and further exploration of its role in other primary headaches may reveal insight into steroid efficacy as a treatment modality in various subtypes of headache.

Key message

Steroids, when used cautiously in specifically selected primary headaches under supervision, proved miraculous where other modalities failed.

Migraine

Migraine affects about 1 billion people worldwide, and up to 15% of adults in the United States have migraine attacks in any given year. Migraine is associated with substantial adverse socioeconomic and personal effects. It is the second leading cause of years lived with disability worldwide for all ages and the leading cause in women aged 15 to 49 years. Diagnostic uncertainty increases the likelihood of unnecessary investigations and suboptimal management. This article advises clinicians about diagnosing migraine, ruling out secondary headache disorders, developing acute and preventive treatment plans, and deciding when to refer the patient to a specialist.

Efficacy of ketorolac in the treatment of acute migraine attack: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

This review was designated to evaluate the efficacy of parenteral ketorolac in treating acute migraine headache.

METHODS

We searched databases Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Medline, and Google Scholar up to January 2021 and identified randomized controlled trials comparing ketorolac to any other medications in treating patients presenting with migraine headache.

RESULTS

Thirteen trials were included in our review, comprising 944 participants. We derived seven comparisons: ketorolac versus phenothiazines, metoclopramide, sumatriptan, dexamethasone, sodium valproate, caffeine, and diclofenac. There were no significant differences in the reduction of pain intensity at 1 h under the comparisons between ketorolac and phenothiazines (standard mean difference [SMD] = 0.09, p = 0.74) or metoclopramide (SMD = 0.02, p = 0.95). We also found no difference in the outcome recurrence of headache (ketorolac vs. phenothiazines (risk ratio [RR] =0.98, p = 0.97)], ability to return to work or usual activity (ketorolac vs. metoclopramide [RR = 0.64, p = 0.13]), need for rescue medication (ketorolac vs. phenothiazines [RR = 1.72, p = 0.27], ketorolac vs. metoclopramide [RR 2.20, p = 0.18]), and frequency of adverse effects (ketorolac vs. metoclopramide [RR = 1.07, p = 0.82]). Limited trials suggested that ketorolac offered better pain relief at 1 h compared to sumatriptan and dexamethasone; had lesser frequency of adverse effects than phenothiazines; and was superior to sodium valproate in terms of reduction of pain intensity at 1 h, need for rescue medication, and sustained headache freedom within 24 h.

CONCLUSIONS

Ketorolac may have similar efficacy to phenothiazines and metoclopramide in treating acute migraine headache. Ketorolac may also offer better pain control than sumatriptan, dexamethasone, and sodium valproate. However, given the lack of evidence due to inadequate number of trials available, future studies are warranted.

Stroke-Like Migraine after Radiation Treatment Syndrome in Children with Cancer

Stroke-like migraine attacks after radiation therapy (SMART) syndrome is a symptom complex of transient neurological deficits, headache, and abnormal cortical contrast enhancement on brain MRI. Pathophysiology is unclear, but exposure to cranial radiation (RT) is a sine qua non. We report five children with SMART syndrome treated with RT therapy for medulloblastoma (n = 3), atypical teratoid rhabdoid tumor (n = 1), and pleomorphic xanthoastrocytoma (n = 1). Median age at tumor diagnosis was 9.4 years (range 5.1–14.7). Median follow-up from cancer diagnosis was 3.1 years (range 1.4–12.9). All patients had 54 Gy focal RT treatment and medulloblastoma children had additional 36 Gy craniospinal irradiation. Median time from the end of RT to first transient neurological deficit was 1 year (range 0.7–12.1). The median follow-up since first SMART episode was 0.6 years (range 0.3–2.6). Presenting symptoms included the gradual development of unilateral weakness (n = 4), non-fluent dysphasia (n = 1), somnolence (n = 1), and headaches (n = 3). Neurological deficits resolved within 30 minutes to 10 days. Transient cortical enhancement on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) was confirmed in two children and was absent in the other three. Two children had a single and three had multiple episodes over the next few months. Two children with protracted symptoms responded to 3 days treatment with high dose intravenous methylprednisolone. Symptoms ultimately resolved in all patients. SMART syndrome is a rare disorder characterized by slow evolution of neurological deficits with variable abnormal cortical contrast enhancement. The use of steroids may improve symptoms and speed resolution.

Headache infusion centers: A survey on treatments provided, infusion center operations, and barriers to developing new infusion centers

BACKGROUND

Infusion therapy refers to the intravenous administration of medicines and fluids for the treatment of status migrainosus, severe persistent headaches, or chronic headache. Headache practices and centers offer this treatment for patients as an alternative to the emergency department (ED) setting. However, little information is available in the literature on understanding the operations of an infusion center.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to survey the Inpatient Headache & Emergency Medicine specialty section and the Academic Program Directors listserv of the American Headache Society (AHS) to better understand current practices.

METHODS

A survey was advertised and distributed to the listservs of both the Inpatient Headache & Emergency Medicine specialty section and the Academic Program Directors, which combined included both academic and private practices. In addition, the survey was available on laptops at related events at an annual AHS meeting in Scottsdale.

RESULTS

Of the 127 members of the combined group of both listservs, 50 responded with an overall survey response rate of 39%. Ten out of fifty were from programs with more than one responder completing the survey, leaving 40 unique headache programs. Academic programs made up the majority of programs (85%, 34/40). The total of 40 participating programs is comparable with the 47 academic headache programs listed on the American Migraine Foundation website at the time of the survey. Of the academic programs surveyed, most were hospital based (n = 23) compared with a satellite location (n = 11). Of all programs surveyed, 68% (27/40) offered infusion therapy. Of those that did not have an infusion practice (n = 13), the most common reason cited was insufficient staffing (n = 8). Key highlights of the survey included the following: The majority of programs offering infusions obtain prior authorization before scheduling (70%, 19/27) and offer patient availability 5 days/week (78%, 21/27) typically only during business hours (81%, 22/27). Programs reported that they typically give three to four medications during each infusion session (72%, 18/25). Treatment paradigms varied between programs. Programs surveyed were concentrated in the Northeast and Midwest regions of the United States.

CONCLUSION

The limited number of headache infusion centers overall may contribute to the limited ability of headache infusion centers to prevent ED migraine visits. Headache patients can have unpredictable headache onset, and most of the infusion practices surveyed appeared to adapt to this by offering infusions most days during a work week. However, this need for multiple days per week may also explain the most common reason for not having an infusion practice, which is insufficient staffing. Various treatment paradigms are implemented by different practitioners, and future studies will have to focus on investigation of best practice.

Comprehensive management of adults with chronic migraine: Clinical practice guidelines in Mexico

Introduction:

Migraine is a polygenic multifactorial disorder with a neuronal initiation of a cascade of neurochemical processes leading to incapacitating headaches. Headaches are generally unilateral, throbbing, 4–72 h in duration, and associated with nausea, vomiting, photophobia, and sonophobia. Chronic migraine (CM) is the presence of a headache at least 15 days per month for ≥3 months and has a high global impact on health and economy, and therapeutic guidelines are lacking.

Methods:

Using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations system, we conducted a search in MEDLINE and Cochrane to investigate the current evidence and generate recommendations of clinical practice on the identification of risk factors and treatment of CM in adults.

Results:

We recommend avoiding overmedication of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs); ergotamine; caffeine; opioids; barbiturates; and initiating individualized prophylactic treatment with topiramate eptinezumab, galcanezumab, erenumab, fremanezumab, or botulinum toxin. We highlight the necessity of managing comorbidities initially. In the acute management, we recommend NSAIDs, triptans, lasmiditan, and gepants alone or with metoclopramide if nausea or vomiting. Non-pharmacological measures include neurostimulation.

Conclusions:

We have identified the risk factors and treatments available for the management of CM based on a grading system, which facilitates selection for individualized management.

Unveiling the comparative efficacy and tolerability of comprehensive treatments for migraine: A protocol of systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Migraine is a chronic paroxysmal incapacitating neurological disorder, which endangers the health of human worldwide ranking as the third most prevalent medical condition. There are no comprehensive estimates of treatments for migraine. We will conduct this systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA) to synthesis quantitative and comparative evidence on the efficacy and tolerability of all the known pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions for migraine.

METHOD

We will perform the systematic electronic search of the literature utilizing MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Cumulative Index to Nursing & Allied Health (CINAHL), and PsycINFO. We will only include randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of high quality which appraise the efficacy or safety of any potential pharmacological or non-pharmacological interventions in the treatment of patients with migraine. The traditional pairwise meta-analyses will be performed to anticipate the heterogeneities and publication bias and the NMA will be conducted within a Bayesian hierarchical model framework to obtain estimates for all valuable treatments for migraine. The entire heterogeneity will be quantified by Q statistic and I2 index. Other analyses included sensitivity analyses, meta-regression, and subgroup analyses will also be conducted. The whole process will be conducted using in R-3.6.0 software.

RESULTS

This study will obtain the efficacy and tolerability of all potential treatments for migraine, aiming at providing consolidated evidence to help make the best choice of interventions. The results will be published in a peer-reviewed journal.

DISCUSSION

This Bayesian network meta-analysis may be the first attempt to quantitatively synthesize the efficacy and tolerability of all potential treatments for migraine. And this method can ensure us to fully utilize both the direct and indirect evidence as well as gain the comparative estimates displayed in the derived hierarchies. Besides, we have registered this protocol on the international prospective register of systematic review (PROSPERO) (CRD42020157278).

Headaches in Adults in Primary Care: Evaluation, Diagnosis, and Treatment

Headaches are common in primary care. The diagnosis is made by a careful history and physical examination. Imaging is generally not warranted. Several general principles underlie the acute treatment of headache: early initiation of therapy and adequate dosing at first dose. Careful attention to avoiding too frequent administration of acute therapy is important to avoid medication overuse headaches. Opioids should always be avoided. Preventive treatment is indicated for frequent headaches. Successful treatment entails low-dose medication with careful titration and monitoring of headache frequency. Behavioral strategies are important and should be part of any comprehensive headache management plan.

Effectiveness of Emergency Department Treatment of Pediatric Headache and Relation to Rebound Headache

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to assess the association between the degree of headache relief obtained in the pediatric emergency department (PED) with abortive treatment and unscheduled return visits to the PED for a recurrent or persistent headache within 72 hours.

METHODS

This was a retrospective observational study with 369 patients, all younger than 18 years, who presented to the PED with a primary complaint of either a headache or migraine. Patient and visit details were collected from the medical chart, along with presenting and discharge pain score. Percent pain reduction at discharge was determined through the following calculation: (Presenting Pain Score - Discharge Pain Score)/Presenting Pain Score. Associations were assessed using multivariable logistic regression.

RESULTS

No significant association was found between the percent pain reduction and return to the PED (P = 0.49). Mean presenting pain score at the index visit was statistically higher for those who ended up returning to the PED versus those who did not (8.1 vs 7.4; P = 0.02). A trend toward increase in return visits was seen among patients who had a headache duration greater than 3 days (odds ratio, 1.99) and patients who experienced less than 50% pain reduction in the PED (odds ratio, 1.77).

CONCLUSIONS

Complete resolution in the PED may not be necessary, given the lack of association between the degree of pain relief and revisit rates. Perhaps, the goal should be to achieve at least 50% pain reduction before discharge.

Diagnosis and treatment of migraine: Russian experts' recommendations

Migraine is one of the most common types of headache, which can lead to a significant decrease in quality of life. Researchers identify migraine with aura, migraine without aura, and chronic migraine that substantially reduces the ability of patients to work and is frequently concurrent with mental disorders and drug-induced headache. The complications of migraine include status migrainosus, persistent aura without infarction, migrainous infarction (stroke), and a migraine aura-induced seizure. The diagnosis of migraine is based on complaints, past medical history, objective examination data, and the diagnostic criteria as laid down in the International Classification of Headache Disorders, 3 rd edition. Add-on trials are recommended only in the presence of red flags, such as the symptoms warning about the secondary nature of headache. Migraine treatment is aimed at reducing the frequency and intensity of attacks and the amount of analgesics taken. It includes three main approaches: behavioral therapy, seizure relief therapy, and preventive therapy. Behavioral therapy focuses on lifestyle modification. Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, simple and combined analgesics, triptans, and antiemetic drugs for severe nausea or vomiting are recommended for seizure relief. Preventive therapy which includes antidepressants, anticonvulsants, beta-blockers, angiotensin II receptor antagonists, botulinum toxin type A-hemagglutinin complex and monoclonal antibodies to calcitonin gene-related peptide or its receptors, is indicated for frequent or severe migraine attacks and for chronic migraine. Pharmacotherapy is recommended to be combined with non-drug methods that involves cognitive behavioral therapy; progressive muscle relaxation; mindfulness; biofeedback; post-isometric relaxation; acupuncture; therapeutic exercises; greater occipital nerve block; non-invasive high-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation; external stimulation of first trigeminal branch; and electrical stimulation of the occipital nerves (neurostimulation).

Multiple sclerosis and related challenges to young women's health: Canadian expert review

Multiple sclerosis (MS) is among the most common chronic neurological diseases, with a highly variable degree of disability during its long-term course. The majority of patients develop significant permanent disability later in life. MS is often diagnosed in women of childbearing age, with a 3:1 ratio of young women to young men with MS. Comorbidities such as depression, anxiety, migraines and reproductive, urological and bowel issues are common and negatively impact patients' quality of life. The objective of this supplement is to review the most common comorbidities occurring in young women with MS, and to propose a multidisciplinary, holistic approach to management.

Non-invasively triggered spreading depolarizations induce a rapid pro-inflammatory response in cerebral cortex

Cortical spreading depolarization (CSD) induces pro-inflammatory gene expression in brain tissue. However, previous studies assessing the relationship between CSD and inflammation have used invasive methods that directly trigger inflammation. To eliminate the injury confounder, we induced CSDs non-invasively through intact skull using optogenetics in Thy1-channelrhodopsin-2 transgenic mice. We corroborated our findings by minimally invasive KCl-induced CSDs through thinned skull. Six CSDs induced over 1 h dramatically increased cortical interleukin-1β (IL-1β), chemokine (C-C motif) ligand 2 (CCL2), and tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α) mRNA expression peaking around 1, 2 and 4 h, respectively. Interleukin-6 (IL-6) and intercellular adhesion molecule-1 (ICAM-1) were only modestly elevated. A single CSD also increased IL-1β, CCL2, and TNF-α, and revealed an ultra-early IL-1β response within 10 min. The response was blunted in IL-1 receptor-1 knockout mice, implicating IL-1β as an upstream mediator, and suppressed by dexamethasone, but not ibuprofen. CSD did not alter systemic inflammatory indices. In summary, this is the first report of pro-inflammatory gene expression after non-invasively induced CSDs. Altogether, our data provide novel insights into the role of CSD-induced neuroinflammation in migraine headache pathogenesis and have implications for the inflammatory processes in acute brain injury where numerous CSDs occur for days.

Acute headache management in emergency department. A narrative review

Headache is a significant reason for access to Emergency Departments (ED) worldwide. Though primary forms represent the vast majority, the life-threatening potential of secondary forms, such as subarachnoid hemorrage or meningitis, makes it imperative for the ED physician to rule out secondary headaches as first step, based on clinical history, careful physical (especially neurological) examination and, if appropriate, hematochemical analyses, neuroimaging or lumbar puncture. Once secondary forms are excluded, distinction among primary forms should be performed, based on the international headache classification criteria. Most frequent primary forms motivating ED observation are acute migraine attacks, particularly status migrainous, and cluster headache. Though universally accepted guidelines do not exist for headache management in an emergency setting, pharmacological parenteral treatment remains the principal approach worldwide, with NSAIDs, neuroleptic antinauseants, triptans and corticosteroids, tailored to the specific headache type. Opioids should be avoided, for their scarce effectiveness in the acute phase, while IV hydration should be limited in cases of ascertained dehydration. Referral of the patient to a Headache Center should subsequently be an integral part of the ED approach to the headache patients, being ascertained that lack of this referral involves a high rate of relapse and new accesses to the ED. More controlled studies are needed to establish specific protocols of management for the headache patient in the ED.

How to diagnose and treat benign headaches

A 19-year-old female, university student with a long-standing history of migraine headaches presented to the emergency department (ED) with a 36-hour history of gradual onset of left-sided headache, preceded by visual aura. She stated that her headache was worse than usual and now associated with nausea, vomiting, and photophobia, despite use of oral ibuprofen. On examination, she was afebrile, her SaO2 = 98% on room air, her pulse was 110 beats/minute, and she was breathing 20 breaths/minute. She received a Canadian Triage and Acuity Scale score of 2 due to her pain score of 8/10 on a Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). Her neurological examination was normal and her neck was supple with full range of motion. She was a non-smoker, infrequent cannabis user, and her last menstrual period was normal.

Comparing the Therapeutic Effects of Dexamethasone-Metoclopramide with Ketorolac in Relieving Headache in Patients with Acute Migraine Attacks Presenting to the Emergency Department

Introduction:

Migraine is a frequent chief complaint of patients in the emergency department. A wide range of treatments are used for acute migraine.

Objective:

This study aimed to compare the therapeutic effects of a combination of metoclopramide + dexamethasone with those of ketorolac for treatment of acute migraine in the emergency department.

Method:

This quasi-experimental study enrolled patients identified as migraine headache cases admitted to the emergency departments of Shohadaye Tajrish and Sina hospitals, Tehran, Iran. The patients were divided into two groups and treated with either 8 mg Dexamethasone + 10 mg Metoclopramide or 60 mg ketorolac, and then compared regarding the rate of pain control based on visual analogue scale (VAS) on arrival and 1 and 2 hours afterward.

Results:

Overall, 86 patients were recruited, of whom 50 were male (58.1%). Their mean age was 37.6 ± 10.3 years. Thirty-five (40.7%) were in the ketorolac group and 51 (59.3%) were in the dexamethasone + metoclopramide group. Treatment success was defined as a reduction of at least 3 points in pain severity in comparison to the admission time. One hour after administration of medications, the reported pain intensity was 4.7 ± 2.0 and 6.2 ± 2.3 in ketorolac group and dexamethasone + metoclopramide group, respectively. By the second hour, pain intensity was 3.4 ± 1.2 and 2.9 ± 1.3 in ketorolac group and dexamethasone + metoclopramide group, respectively. The two groups did not show a significant difference in terms of the reported pain at this time (p= 0.04).

Conclusion:

Based on our findings, the pain reduction time was relatively shorter for ketorolac in acute migraine, but the final response was identical in the two groups.

Investigating macrophage-mediated inflammation in migraine using ultrasmall superparamagnetic iron oxide-enhanced 3T magnetic resonance imaging

Background

Initiating mechanisms of migraine headache remain poorly understood and a biomarker of migraine does not exist. Inflammation pertaining to the wall of cerebral arteries and brain parenchyma has been suggested to play a role in migraine pathophysiology.

Objective

We conducted the first experimental human study to investigate macrophage-mediated inflammation as a possible biomarker of migraine.

Methods

Using ultrasmall superparamagnetic iron oxide (USPIO)-enhanced 3T magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), we investigated the presence of macrophages in cerebral artery walls and in brain parenchyma of patients with migraine without aura. We used the phosphodiesterase-3-inhibitor cilostazol as an experimental migraine trigger, and investigated both patients who received sumatriptan treatment, and patients who did not. To validate our use of USPIO-enhanced MRI, we included a preclinical mouse model with subcutaneous capsaicin injection in the trigeminal V1 area. The study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov with the identifier NCT02549898.

Results

A total of 28 female patients with migraine without aura underwent a baseline MRI scan, ingested cilostazol, developed a migraine-like attack, and underwent an USPIO-enhanced MRI scan > 24 hours after intravenous administration of USPIO. Twelve patients treated their attack with 6 mg s.c. sumatriptan, while the remaining 16 patients received no migraine-specific rescue medication. The preclinical model confirmed that USPIO-enhanced MRI detects macrophage-mediated inflammation. In patients, however, migraine attacks were not associated with increased USPIO signal on the pain side of the head compared to the non-pain side.

Conclusion

Our findings suggest that migraine without aura is not associated with macrophage-mediated inflammation specific to the head pain side.

The discovery and development of inhaled therapeutics for migraine

INTRODUCTION

Migraine is a disabling primary headache disorder that requires effective treatments. Inhalation is currently being explored for the delivery of drugs for migraine. Pulmonary-route delivery of drugs shows potential advantages for its use as a treatment, particularly compared the oral route. Areas covered: The authors highlight the current state of the literature and review multiple therapies for migraine-utilizing inhalation as the route of administration. The following therapeutics are discussed: inhaled ergotamine, inhaled dihydroergotamine mesylate (MAP0004), inhaled prochlorperazine, and inhaled loxapine. Coverage is also given to normobaric oxygen, hyperbaric oxygen, and nitrous oxide therapies. Expert opinion: Inhalation of MAP0004 showed promising results in terms of efficacy for acute migraine treatment in phase 3 studies, together with a more favorable tolerability profile compared to parenteral dosing and a better pharmacokinetic profile versus oral or intranasal delivery. In phase 2 trials, inhaled prochlorperazine shows good pharmacokinetics and efficacy, in contrast to inhaled loxapine that did not provide encouraging results in terms of efficacy. The authors see the potential for the use of dihydroergotamine mesylate in clinical practice pending regulatory approval.

Current Approach to Undifferentiated Headache Management in the Emergency Department

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To discuss pharmacological interventions in the emergency department (ED) setting for the management of acute primary headache.

RECENT FINDINGS

Acute headache treatment in the ED has seen an expansion in terms of possible pharmacological interventions in recent years. After a thorough evaluation ruling out dangerous causes of headache, providers should take the patient's history, comorbidities, and prior therapy into consideration. Antidopaminergics have an established role in the management of acute, severe, headache with manageable side-effect profiles. However, recent studies suggest anesthetic and anti-epileptic drugs may play roles in headache treatment in the ED. Current literature also suggest steroids as a promising tool for emergency department clinicians combating the readmission of patients with recurrent headaches. Emergency medicine providers must be cognizant of these traditional and emerging therapies in order to optimize the care of headache patients.

Effectiveness of intravenous dexamethasone, metoclopramide, ketorolac, and chlorpromazine for pain relief and prevention of recurrence in the migraine headache: a prospective double-blind randomized clinical trial

Dexamethasone, metoclopramide, ketorolac, and chlorpromazine have been used for the treatment of migraine headache. However, the effectiveness of these drugs in pain relief and prevention of recurrence and their side effects have not been compared yet. This was a randomized, double-blind clinical trial. Subjects were randomized to four groups; each received one of the following drugs intravenously: dexamethasone 8 mg, ketorolac 30 mg, metoclopramide 10 mg, and chlorpromazine 25 mg. The severity of headache in the two groups was assessed at starting point, 1 h and 24 h after the administration of drug using the visual analogue scale (VAS) on a scale of 0 to 10. No significant difference was found in the severity of symptoms between the four study groups before treatment, 1 h, and 24 h after treatment. The effect of all mentioned drugs on acute migraine headache was statistically significant at 1 and 24 h post-treatment compared to baseline. No significant difference was detected in the number of unresponsive cases between the four groups. There was a trend toward higher effectiveness of dexamethasone in prevention of recurrence (P = 0.05). Side effects were more common in chlorpromazine and less common in the dexamethasone-treated patients (P < 0.001). The present clinical trial shows the effectiveness of dexamethasone in prevention of recurrence and low frequency of treatment side effects.

A Randomized Trial of a Long-Acting Depot Corticosteroid Versus Dexamethasone to Prevent Headache Recurrence Among Patients With Acute Migraine Who Are Discharged From an Emergency Department

STUDY OBJECTIVE

Migraine patients continue to report headache during the days and weeks after emergency department (ED) discharge. Dexamethasone is an evidence-based treatment of acute migraine that decreases the frequency of moderate or severe headache within 72 hours of ED discharge. We hypothesize that intramuscular methylprednisolone acetate, a long-acting steroid that remains biologically active for 14 days, will decrease the number of days with headache during the week after ED discharge by at least 1 day compared with intramuscular dexamethasone.

METHODS

We conducted a randomized, blinded clinical trial comparing intravenous metoclopramide at 10 mg+intramuscular dexamethasone at 10 mg with intravenous metoclopramide at 10 mg+intramuscular methylprednisolone acetate at a dose of 160 mg for patients presenting to 2 different EDs with moderate or severe migraine. Outcomes were assessed by telephone with a standardized instrument. The primary outcome was number of days with headache during the week after ED discharge. Secondary outcomes were complete freedom from headache, without the necessity of additional headache medication for the entire week after ED discharge, and medication preference, as determined by asking the patient whether he or she would want to receive the same medication again.

RESULTS

One hundred nine patients received dexamethasone and 111 received methylprednisolone acetate. We obtained primary outcome data from 101 dexamethasone patients and 106 methylprednisolone acetate patients. Dexamethasone patients reported 3.0 headache days and methylprednisolone acetate 3.3 headache days (95% confidence interval for rounded mean difference of 0.4 days: -0.4 to 1.1). Of 107 dexamethasone patients with analyzable data, 10 (9%) reported complete freedom from headache at 1 week versus 6 of 110 (5%) methylprednisolone acetate patients (95% confidence interval for difference of 4%: -3% to 11%). In the dexamethasone group, 76 of 101 (75%) patients would want the same medication again versus 75 of 106 (71%) of methylprednisolone acetate patients (95% confidence interval for difference of 4%: -8% to 17%). Other than injection site reactions, which were more common in the methylprednisolone acetate group, there were no substantial differences in frequency of adverse events.

CONCLUSION

Methylprednisolone acetate does not decrease the frequency of post-ED discharge headache days compared with dexamethasone. Most migraine patients are likely to continue to experience headache during the week after ED discharge.

Oral dexamethasone for the prevention of acute migraine recurrence in pediatric patients presenting to the emergency department with migraine

Objective:

To assess the feasibility of a randomized controlled trial protocol that aims to determine the efficacy and safety of oral dexamethasone compared to placebo for the prevention of migraine recurrence in children and adolescents visiting the pediatric emergency department (ED) with migraine.

Methods:

This study was a two-arm, parallel-group, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind pilot trial of patients presenting to the pediatric ED with migraine. Eligible participants were randomized at 1:1 ratio to receive either oral dexamethasone 0.6 mg/kg (maximum 15 mg) or matched placebo as a single dose. Efficacy and safety outcomes were assessed at discharge, 48 h and 7 days after discharge. The primary outcome of the trial was feasibility and was assessed through participant recruitment rate, follow-up completion rates, participant satisfaction ratings and comparison of enrolled versus non-enrolled participants. Efficacy and safety outcomes were not analyzed given that this was a pilot study.

Results:

Twelve participants were enrolled over the 6-month recruitment period. This represents 60% of the planned sample size and a 10.5% recruitment rate. No other feasibility issues were identified and patients expressed high satisfaction rates with their treatment: 90.9% were satisfied with their treatment at discharge and at 48-h follow-up and 81.8% were satisfied with their treatment at 7-day follow-up (81.8%). There were no significant differences observed when comparing enrolled participants to those not enrolled.

Conclusion:

This pilot randomized controlled trial is the first to assess dexamethasone in the pediatric ED for the prevention of migraine recurrence. The protocol is feasible but recruitment in a single center was lower than expected. Future pediatric ED migraine studies may use innovative or pragmatic trial designs to maximize feasibility from a recruitment standpoint.

Diagnosis and Treatment of Primary Headache Disorders in Older Adults

OBJECTIVES

To provide a unique perspective on geriatric headache and a number of novel treatment options that are not well known outside of the headache literature.

DESIGN

Review of the most current and relevant headache literature for practitioners specializing in geriatric care.

RESULTS

Evaluation and management of headache disorders in older adults requires an understanding of the underlying pathophysiology and how it relates to age-related physiological changes. To treat headache disorders in general, the appropriate diagnosis must first be established, and treatment of headaches in elderly adults poses unique challenges, including potential polypharmacy, medical comorbidities, and physiological changes associated with aging.

CONCLUSION

The purpose of this review is to provide a guide to and perspective on the challenges inherent in treating headaches in older adults. J Am Geriatr Soc 66:2408-2416, 2018.

Treating status migrainosus in the emergency setting: what is the best strategy?

INTRODUCTION

Migraine is a disabling primary headache disorder with unknown exact pathomechanism. Status migrainosus (SM) is a complication of migraine (with or without aura), representing an attack that lasts for more than 72 h. There is a paucity of data published with regard to its pathomechanism and therapeutic options.

AREAS COVERED

The authors review the literature on SM from PubMed published between 1999 and January 2018. The authors specifically look at the therapeutic possibilities of SM in the emergency department in patients that have or have not already been treated with serotonergic agents. Additional discussion is given to the rare complications of migraine.

EXPERT OPINION

SM is a devastating condition; therefore, the primary goal is to prevent its development with proper acute and prophylactic migraine medication. If this treatment fails, the patient should be treated in the emergency setting. Due to the severity of the condition, parenteral pharmacotherapy is recommended. However, high-quality randomized trials are lacking. The currently available data suggest the use of intravenous fluids, corticosteroids, magnesium sulfate, anticonvulsive drugs, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, antiemetics, and serotonergic agents for the treatment of SM. Still, there is a need for personalized and causal therapy for migraine sufferers.

Headache and Its Management in Patients With Multiple Sclerosis

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The purpose of this review was to discuss the prevalence, impact, pathophysiology, and treatment of headaches (H/As) in patients with multiple sclerosis (MS).

RECENT FINDINGS

Headaches and multiple sclerosis are more common in women than in men with the ratio of female to male being 3:1. It is not entirely clear if there is a correlation or an incidental comorbidity of two neurological conditions. A review of the literature shows a variable prevalence of H/As in MS patients. Using the International Classification of Headache Disorders (ICHD) criteria, the primary type of H/As, especially migraine, is the most common type seen in patients with MS. One of the theories of the pathophysiologic mechanisms of migraine in MS patients is inflammation leading to demyelinating lesions in the pain-producing centers in the midbrain. Secondary H/As due to MS medications such as interferons are also frequently present. H/As can be a cause for significant comorbidity in patients with MS. The treatment of H/As in patients with MS should be addressed in the same fashion as in the non-MS population, which is a combination of pharmacological and non-pharmacological methods. Preventive medicines for the H/As should be carefully selected because of their side effect profiles. Acute attacks of migraines can be treated with medications such as triptans. Patients with MS who have migraine H/As should be educated about the phenomenon of overuse H/As, keeping headache journals, avoiding stress, and monitoring sleeping habits. The presence of depression in patients with MS and migraine affects quality of life (QOL) and should also be addressed for better outcomes.

Effectiveness of the Concurrent Intravenous Injection of Dexamethasone and Metoclopramide for Pain Management in Patients with Primary Headaches Presenting to Emergency Department

Introduction:

Headache is a common reason for visiting emergency departments, and pain control is a major therapeutic goal in patients with headaches.

Objective:

The present study was conducted to examine the effectiveness of the concurrent intravenous administration of dexamethasone and metoclopramide in pain control in patients presenting to emergency departments with complaints of primary headache.

Methods:

This quasi-experimental study examined patients with moderate to severe headache attacks presenting to emergency departments. An 8-mg dose of dexamethasone and a 10-mg dose of metoclopramide were intravenously administered to the patients. The degree of headache was measured and recorded using the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) upon admission and one hour and two hours after the injection.

Results:

A total of 51 patients with a mean age of 38.3±10.5 years participated in the study. The patients’ mean pain score was 8.4±1.3 upon admission and reduced to 6.2±2.3 one hour after the administration of the medication and to 3.1±2.9 two hours after the administration, suggesting significant reductions on both occasions (P<0.05). The therapeutic success was 39.2% one hour after the administration of the medication and 84.3% two hours after the administration.

Conclusion:

Based on these findings, the concurrent administration of dexamethasone and metoclopramide appears to affect the control of headache intensity in patients with primary headaches presenting to emergency departments.

Single-dose intravenous sodium valproate (Depakine) versus dexamethasone for the treatment of acute migraine headache: a double-blind randomized clinical trial

Objective

Migraine headache is a chronic and disabling condition in adults. Some studies have investigated the efficacy of sodium valproate in the treatment of acute migraine, but the effectiveness and tolerability of intravenous valproate as abortive therapy remains unclear. This study aimed to evaluate the effects of sodium valproate and dexamethasone in the treatment of acute migraine.

Methods

We conducted a double-blind randomized clinical trial including 90 patients aged 18 to 65 years with acute migraine headache but no aura. Patients were randomized to receive intravenous dexamethasone (8 mg) or sodium valproate (400 mg) diluted into 4 mL of normal saline. The primary outcome measure was pain relief after 0.5, 1, 3, or 6 hours after administration. The secondary outcome criteria were the associated symptom recovery, rate of headache recurrence after 24 hours, and medication side effects. Pearson’s chi square and the t-test were employed in the data analysis.

Results

Of the 90 patients, 80 were investigated. The percentage of headache improvement at 0.5 hours after treatment was 55% and 67.5% in the sodium valproate and dexamethasone groups, respectively. Before-treatment and 0.5 hour after treatment pain severity visual analog scale scores were 9.05±0.90 and 3.8±3.09 in the sodium valproate group and 8.92±0.79 and 3.10±2.73 in the dexamethasone group, respectively. There were no significant intergroup differences.

Conclusion

This randomized clinical trial showed that the intravenous injection of sodium valproate 400 mg has similar effects to those of dexamethasone for improving acute migraine headache.

How to Apply the AHS Evidence Assessment of the Acute Treatment of Migraine in Adults to your Patient with Migraine

The "Acute Treatment of Migraine in Adults: The American Headache Society Evidence Assessment of Migraine Pharmacotherapies" provides levels of evidence for medication efficacy for acute treatment of migraine. The goal of this companion paper is to provide guidance on how to choose between evidence-based treatment options, and, based on the clinical characteristics of the patient and their migraine attacks, to provide guidance on designing an individualized strategy for managing migraine attacks. The acute pharmacological treatments described in the American Headache Society evidence assessment can be divided into those initially taken by the patient during the headache phase of the migraine attack, those taken by the patient later in the attack when initial treatments fail, and those administered intravenously or intramuscularly in urgent care settings. Medications taken initially by patients in the headache phase include nonspecific analgesics such as acetaminophen and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), triptans, and dihydroergotamine (DHE). A stratified approach to treatment is advised, with the choice of medication based on the patient's treatment needs, taking into consideration the attack severity, presence of associated symptoms such as nausea and vomiting, and the degree of migraine-related disability. Individuals with migraine may find reassurance in having a "back-up plan" in the event of an initial acute treatment failure. For those individuals who had a partial response to the initial acute treatment, a second dose might be indicated. When the initial treatment does not provide meaningful and sustained benefits, a treatment from a different medication class is typically chosen. Depending upon the initial treatment used, this might include NSAIDs, triptans, or DHE. Opioids or acetaminophen in combination with codeine or tramadol can be considered as part of the "back-up plan," provided they are used infrequently. When all patient administered treatments have failed and moderate to severe migraine symptoms remain, some individuals seek treatment in urgent care settings. The intravenous administration of antiemetics with or without an intravenous or intramuscular NSAID or DHE, or an intramuscular opioid can be considered. Patients with migraine should be encouraged to treat migraine pain early, and avoid overuse of medications.

Using standardized patients to evaluate medical students' evidence-based medicine skills

OBJECTIVES

To analyze the effectiveness of an Evidence Based Medicine Objective Structured Clinical Examination (EBM OSCE) with standardized patients for end of third year medical students at our institution.

METHODS

This was a single-center prospective cross-sectional investigation. As part of the eight-station OSCE exam, the authors developed and implemented a new 25-minute EBM OSCE station with the goal of evaluating evidence based medicine skills necessary for daily clinical encounters. The OSCE case involved a highly educated patient with a history of recurrent debilitating migraines who has brought eight specific questions regarding the use of steroids for migraine headaches. Students were provided computer stations equipped to record a log of the searches performed.

RESULTS

One hundred and four third-year medical students participated in this study. The average number of search tools used by the students was 4 (SD = 2). The 104 students performed a total of 896 searches. The two most commonly used websites were uptodate.com and google.com. Sixty-nine percent (95% CI, 60% to 78%) of students were able to find a meta-analysis regarding the use of dexamethasone for the prevention of rebound migraines. Fifty-two percent of students were able to explain that patients who took dexamethasone had a moderate RR (0.68 to 0.78) of having a recurrent migraine, and 71% of students were able to explain to the standardized patient that the NNT for dexamethasone was nine.

CONCLUSION

The EBM OSCE was successfully integrated into the existing eight-station OSCE and was able to assess student EBM skills.

Pharmacological Acute Migraine Treatment Strategies: Choosing the Right Drug for a Specific Patient

Background:

In our targeted review (Section 2), 12 acute medications received a strong recommendation for use in acute migraine therapy while four received a weak recommendation for use. Strong recommendations were made to avoid use of two other medications, except for exceptional circumstances. Two anti-emetics received strong recommendations for use as needed.

Objective:

To organize the available acute migraine medications into acute migraine treatment strategies in order to assist the practitioner in choosing a specific medication(s) for an individual patient.

Methods:

Acute migraine treatment strategies were developed based on the targeted literature review used for the development of this guideline (Section 2), and a general literature review. Expert consensus groups were used to refine and validate these strategies.

Results:

Based on evidence for drug efficacy, drug side effects, migraine severity, and coexistent medical disorders, our analysis resulted in the formulation of eight general acute migraine treatment strategies. These could be grouped into four categories: 1) two mild-moderate attack strategies, 2) two moderate-severe attack or NSAID failure strategies, 3) three refractory migraine strategies, and 4) a vasoconstrictor unresponsive-contraindicated strategy. In addition, strategies were developed for menstrual migraine, migraine during pregnancy, and migraine during lactation. The eight general treatment strategies were coordinated with a “combined acute medication approach” to therapy which used features of both the “stratified” and the “step care across attacks” approaches to acute migraine management.

Conclusions:

The available medications for acute migraine treatment can be organized into a series of strategies based on patient clinical features. These strategies may help practitioners make appropriate acute medication choices for patients with migraine.

What is the evidence for the use of corticosteroids in migraine?

Corticosteroids are widely prescribed for the management of migraine attacks. The earliest clinical studies examining the efficacy of corticosteroid monotherapy for managing migraine attacks date back to 1952. Since then, 26 heterogeneous clinical studies and four meta-analyses have been conducted to assess the efficacy of corticosteroids in either aborting acute migraine attacks, prolonged migraine attacks or recurrent headaches. Most of these (86 %) studies employed different comparator arms with corticosteroids monotherapy administration while some studies (14 %) evaluated adjunctive corticosteroid therapy. The majority of these clinical studies revealed the superior efficacy of corticosteroids as mono- or adjunctive-therapy both for recurrent and acute migraine attacks, while the remaining showed non-inferior efficacy. Different forms of oral and parenteral corticosteroids in either single-dose or short-tapering schedules are prescribed; there are clinical studies supporting the efficacy of both methods. Corticosteroids can be administered safely up to six times annually. Corticosteroids are also useful in managing patients who frequent emergency departments with "medication-seeking behavior." Migraine patients with refractory headaches, history of recurrent headaches, severe baseline disability, and status migrainosus were found to have the most beneficial response from corticosteroid therapy.

Part II--Management of pediatric post-traumatic headaches

BACKGROUND

Post-traumatic headache is one of the most common symptoms occurring after mild traumatic brain injury in children.

METHODS

This is an expert opinion-based two-part review on pediatric post-traumatic headaches. In part II, we focus on the medical management of post-traumatic headaches. There are no randomized controlled trials evaluating the efficacy of therapies specifically for pediatric post-traumatic headaches. Thus, the algorithm we propose has been extrapolated from the primary headache literature and small noncontrolled trials of post-traumatic headache.

RESULTS

Most post-traumatic headaches are migraine or tension type, and standard medications for these headache types are used. A multifaceted approach is needed to address all the possible causes of headache and any comorbid conditions that may delay recovery or alter treatment choices. For acute treatment, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatories can be used. If the headaches have migrainous features and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatories are not effective, triptans may be beneficial. Opioids are not indicated. Medication overuse should be avoided. For preventive treatments, some reports indicate that amitriptyline, gabapentin, or topiramate may be beneficial. Amitriptyline is a good choice because it can be used to treat both migraine and tension-type headaches. Nerve blocks, nutraceuticals (e.g. melatonin), and behavioral therapies may also be useful, and lifestyle factors, especially adequate sleep hygiene and strategies to cope with anxiety, should be emphasized.

CONCLUSIONS

Improved treatment of acute post-traumatic headache may reduce the likelihood of developing chronic headaches, which can be especially problematic to effectively manage and can be functionally debilitating.

The place of corticosteroids in migraine attack management: A 65-year systematic review with pooled analysis and critical appraisal

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Headaches recur in up to 87% of migraine patients visiting the emergency department (ED), making ED recidivism a management challenge. We aimed herein to determine the role of corticosteroids in the acute management of migraine in the ED and outpatient care.

METHODS

Advanced search strategies employing PubMed/MEDLINE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases inclusive of a relevant gray literature search was employed for Clinical Studies and Systematic Reviews by combining the terms "migraine" and "corticosteroids" spanning all previous years since the production of synthetic corticosteroids ca. 1950 until August 30, 2014. Methods were in accordance with MOOSE guidelines.

RESULTS

Twenty-five studies (n = 3989, median age 37.5 years, interquartile range or IQR 35-41 years; median male:female ratio 1:4.23, IQR 1:2.1-6.14; 52% ED-based, 56% randomized-controlled) and four systematic reviews were included. International Classification of Headache Disorders criteria were applied in 64%. Nineteen studies (76%) indicated observed outcome differences favoring benefits of corticosteroids, while six (24%) studies indicated non-inferior outcomes for corticosteroids. Median absolute risk reduction was 30% (range 6%-48.2%), and 11% (6%-48.6%) for 24-, and 72-hour headache recurrence, respectively. Parenteral dexamethasone was the most commonly (56%) administered steroid, at a median single dose of 10 mg (range 4-24 mg). All meta-analyses revealed efficacy of adjuvant corticosteroids to various abortive medications-indicating generalizability. Adverse effects were tolerable. Higher disability, status migrainosus, incomplete pain relief, and previous history of headache recurrence predicted outcome favorability.

CONCLUSIONS

Our literature review suggests that with corticosteroid treatment, recurrent headaches become milder than pretreated headaches and later respond to nonsteroidal therapy. Single-dose intravenous dexamethasone is a reasonable option for managing resistant, severe, or prolonged migraine attacks.