Occipital nerve stimulation: A detailed description of a surgical approach and a discussion on implantation techniques

OBJECTIVE

Occipital Nerve Stimulation (ONS) is increasingly used to treat a range of chronic, refractory headache conditions, most notably chronic cluster headache (CCH). Despite this, there is still no consensus on the optimal implantation technique. Clinical reports and reviews in the field have reported remarkably high complication rates of which several can be directly related to the surgical approach. We here describe a comprehensive and detailed surgical approach used at Aarhus University Hospital, Denmark, aiming to improve paresthesia coverage and minimize complications.

METHODS

The implantation procedure described here is performed with a sleep-awake anesthetic regimen in a lateral position using anatomical landmarks and perioperative testing based on patient feedback. A single lead is subcutaneously implanted from behind the ear and across the back of the head, and the implantable pulse generator (IPG) is placed below the right clavicle.

RESULTS

From March 2018 to June 2024, 45 CCH patients were implanted using this approach and followed up for a total of 86.3 patient years. A total of 22 adverse events (AEs) occurred in 17 patients, with nine AEs requiring revision surgery. Notably, no instances of lead migration, lead breakage, or muscle/neck stiffness were observed. Temporary occipital dysesthesia was the most frequent non-surgical AE, resolving spontaneously within weeks. The rate of serious adverse events (SAEs) was one per 9.6 patient years. Six patients had the ONS system explanted due to lack of efficacy.

CONCLUSIONS

The surgical approach described here in detail offers several advantages, with a favorable complication profile, satisfactory paresthesia coverage, and good perioperative patient comfort. Advances in the surgical technique are vital to both patients and healthcare providers, and we believe this approach is a valuable contribution toward improved patient outcomes and procedural efficiency.

Occipital nerve stimulation for cluster headache: lessons to learn from the 'voltage tuners'

BACKGROUND

Cluster headache (CH) is a significant health concern due to its major socioeconomic consequences and most patients being refractory to conventional strategies. For treatment resistant CH, occipital nerve stimulation (ONS) is considered an effective treatment option. Whereas most patients do not adjust the amplitude of the ONS system, a subset changes the amplitude on a regular basis using their remote control, and are therefore referred to as 'voltage tuners'. Anxiety and self-control are thought to be central themes to this behavior. Research on this voltage tuning behavior could provide new insights in the use of ONS as acute attack treatment. To date, voltage tuning has not been assessed for CH. Hence this is a unique study aiming to investigate the occurrence and efficacy of voltage tuning in patients with CH and ONS.

METHODS

For this analysis, patients with CH who received ONS from 2020-2024, at our university medical center, were included. All patients underwent bilateral ONS implantation. Data on attack frequency, intensity and duration were collected retrospectively. Outcomes on the response, frequency, moment during the day, duration, rationale, sensation, average increase in amplitude, and efficacy of voltage tuning were collected with prospective interviews.

RESULTS

Thirty-three patients (M = 20) (42 ± 12.7 years) were included in the current analysis. At 1y follow-up, an overall response rate of 70% (23/33) was found for ONS. In total, 48% (18/33) of patients were defined as voltage tuners. Voltage tuning was performed with an average increase in amplitude of 92 (20-360)%, a frequency of 1-20 times/month and duration of 20 minutes-48 hours. Sensations of voltage tuning were described as "tingling" and/or "pinching". The rationale for voltage tuning in patients varied from prevention and ceasing to lowering the intensity and enhance control of CH attack.

CONCLUSIONS

Outcomes show that voltage tuning may cease and/or terminate CH attacks and therefore raise interests in the use of ONS as acute attack treatment for patients with resistant CH treated with ONS. Future research on the occurrence and potential of voltage tuning will provide valuable insights for achieving optimal efficacy of ONS and quality of life in patients with CH.

A prospective open label 2-8 year extension of the randomised controlled ICON trial on the long-term efficacy and safety of occipital nerve stimulation in medically intractable chronic cluster headache

BACKGROUND

We demonstrated in the randomised controlled ICON study that 48-week treatment of medically intractable chronic cluster headache (MICCH) with occipital nerve stimulation (ONS) is safe and effective. In L-ICON we prospectively evaluate its long-term effectiveness and safety.

METHODS

ICON participants were enrolled in L-ICON immediately after completing ICON. Therefore, earlier ICON participants could be followed longer than later ones. L-ICON inclusion was stopped after the last ICON participant was enrolled in L-ICON and followed for ≥2 years by completing six-monthly questionnaires on attack frequency, side effects, subjective improvement and whether they would recommend ONS to others. Primary outcome was the change in mean weekly attack frequency 2 years after completion of the ICON study compared to baseline. Missing values for log-transformed attack-frequency were imputed for up to 5 years of follow-up. Descriptive analyses are presented as (pooled) geometric or arithmetic means and 95% confidence intervals.

FINDINGS

Of 103 eligible participants, 88 (85%) gave informed consent and 73 (83%) were followed for ≥2 year, 61 (69%) ≥ 3 year, 33 (38%) ≥ 5 years and 3 (3%) ≥ 8.5 years. Mean (±SD) follow-up was 4.2 ± 2.2 years for a total of 370 person years (84% of potentially 442 years). The pooled geometric mean (95% CI) weekly attack frequency remained considerably lower after one (4.2; 2.8-6.3), two (5.1; 3.5-7.6) and five years (4.1; 3.0-5.5) compared to baseline (16.2; 14.4-18.3). Of the 49/88 (56%) ICON ≥50% responders, 35/49 (71%) retained this response and 15/39 (38%) ICON non-responders still became a ≥50% responder for at least half the follow-up period. Most participants (69/88; 78% [0.68-0.86]) reported a subjective improvement from baseline at last follow-up and 70/88 (81% [0.70-0.87]) would recommend ONS to others. Hardware-related surgery was required in 44/88 (50%) participants in 112/122 (92%) events (0.35 person-year-1 [0.28-0.41]). We didn't find predictive factors for effectiveness.

INTERPRETATION

ONS is a safe, well-tolerated and long-term effective treatment for MICCH.

FUNDING

The Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research, the Dutch Ministry of Health, the NutsOhra Foundation from the Dutch Health Insurance Companies, and Medtronic.

Symptoms and pathophysiology of cluster headache. Approach to combined occipital and supraorbital neurostimulation

Cluster headache (CH) is included under section 3 - Trigeminal autonomic cephalalgias (TAC) of the International Headache Society (IHS) classification. It is one of the most frequent, painful and disabling primary headaches. Acute and preventive pharmacological treatments are often poorly tolerated and of limited effectiveness. Due to improved understanding of the pathophysiology of CH, neuromodulation devices are now considered safe and effective options for preventive and acute treatment of CH. In this paper, we review the information available to date, and present the case of a patient with disabling cluster headache highly resistant to medical treatment who underwent implantation of a peripheral nerve neurostimulation system to stimulate the supraorbital nerves (SON) and greater occipital nerve (GON) in our Pain Unit. We also review the diagnostic criteria for CH, the state of the knowledge on the pathophysiology of CH, and the role played by neuromodulation in treating this condition.

Intra- and interindividual attack frequency variability of chronic cluster headache

BACKGROUND

The lack of knowledge about the intra- and interindividual attack frequency variability in chronic cluster headache complicates power and sample size calculations for baseline periods of trials, and consensus on their most optimal duration.

METHODS

We analyzed the 12-week baseline of the ICON trial (occipital nerve stimulation in medically intractable chronic cluster headache) for: (i) weekly vs. instantaneous recording of attack frequency; (ii) intra-individual and seasonal variability of attack frequency; and (iii) the smallest number of weeks to obtain a reliable estimate of baseline attack frequency.

RESULTS

Weekly median (14.4 [8.2-24.0]) and instantaneous (14.2 [8.0-24.5]) attack frequency recordings were similar (p = 0.20; Bland-Altman plot). Median weekly attack frequency was 15.3 (range 4.2-140) and highest during spring (p = 0.001) compared to the other seasons. Relative attack frequency variability decreased with increasing attack frequency (p = 0.010). We tabulated the weekly attack frequency estimation accuracies compared to, and the associated deviations from, the 12-week gold standard for different lengths of the observation period.

CONCLUSION

Weekly retrospective attack frequency recording is as good as instantaneous recording and more convenient. Attack frequency is highest in spring. Participants with ≥3 daily attacks show less attack frequency variability than those with <3 daily attacks. An optimal balance between 90% accuracy and feasibility is achieved at a baseline period of seven weeks.The ICON trial is registered in ClinicalTrials.gov under number NCT01151631.

Safety and efficacy of occipital nerve stimulation for attack prevention in medically intractable chronic cluster headache (ICON): a randomised, double-blind, multicentre, phase 3, electrical dose-controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Occipital nerve stimulation (ONS) has shown promising results in small uncontrolled trials in patients with medically intractable chronic cluster headache (MICCH). We aimed to establish whether ONS could serve as an effective treatment for patients with MICCH.

METHODS

The ONS in MICCH (ICON) study is an investigator-initiated, international, multicentre, randomised, double-blind, phase 3, electrical dose-controlled clinical trial. The study took place at four hospitals in the Netherlands, one hospital in Belgium, one in Germany, and one in Hungary. After 12 weeks' baseline observation, patients with MICCH, at least four attacks per week, and history of being non-responsive to at least three standard preventive drugs, were randomly allocated (at a 1:1 ratio using a computer-generated permuted block) to 24 weeks of occipital nerve stimulation at either 100% or 30% of the individually determined range between paraesthesia threshold and near-discomfort (double-blind study phase). Because ONS causes paraesthesia, preventing masked comparison versus placebo, we compared high-intensity versus low-intensity ONS, which are hypothesised to cause similar paraesthesia, but with different efficacy. In weeks 25-48, participants received individually optimised open-label ONS. The primary outcome was the weekly mean attack frequency in weeks 21-24 compared with baseline across all patients and, if a decrease was shown, to show a group-wise difference. The trial is closed to recruitment (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01151631).

FINDINGS

Patients were enrolled between Oct 12, 2010, and Dec 3, 2017. We enrolled 150 patients and randomly assigned 131 (87%) to treatment; 65 (50%) patients to 100% ONS and 66 (50%) to 30% ONS. One of the 66 patients assigned to 30% ONS was not implanted and was therefore excluded from the intention-to-treat analysis. Because the weekly mean attack frequencies at baseline were skewed (median 15·75; IQR 9·44 to 24·75) we used log transformation to analyse the data and medians to present the results. Median weekly mean attack frequencies in the total population decreased from baseline to 7·38 (2·50 to 18·50; p<0·0001) in weeks 21-24, a median change of -5·21 (-11·18 to -0·19; p<0·0001) attacks per week. In the 100% ONS stimulation group, mean attack frequency decreased from 17·58 (9·83 to 29·33) at baseline to 9·50 (3·00 to 21·25) at 21-24 weeks (median change from baseline -4·08, -11·92 to -0·25), and for the 30% ONS stimulation group, mean attack frequency decreased from 15·00 (9·25 to 22·33) to 6·75 (1·50 to 16·50; -6·50, -10·83 to -0·08). The difference in median weekly mean attack frequency between groups at the end of the masked phase in weeks 21-24 was -2·42 (95% CI -5·17 to 3·33). In the masked study phase, 129 adverse events occurred with 100% ONS and 95 occurred with 30% ONS. None of the adverse events was unexpected but 17 with 100% ONS and eight with 30% ONS were labelled as serious, given they required brief hospital admission for minor hardware-related issues. The most common adverse events were local pain, impaired wound healing, neck stiffness, and hardware damage.

INTERPRETATION

In patients with MICCH, both 100% ONS intensity and 30% ONS intensity substantially reduced attack frequency and were safe and well tolerated. Future research should focus on optimising stimulation protocols and disentangling the underlying mechanism of action.

FUNDING

The Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research, the Dutch Ministry of Health, the NutsOhra Foundation from the Dutch Health Insurance Companies, and Medtronic.

Occipital Nerve Stimulation for Refractory Chronic Cluster Headache: A Cost-Effectiveness Study

INTRODUCTION

Occipital nerve stimulation (ONS) is proposed to treat refractory chronic cluster headache (rCCH), but its cost-effectiveness has not been evaluated, limiting its diffusion and reimbursement.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed a before-and-after economic study, from data collected prospectively in a nation-wide registry. We compared the cost-effectiveness of ONS associated with conventional treatment (intervention and postintervention period) to conventional treatment alone (preintervention period) in the same patients. The analysis was conducted on 76 rCCH patients from the French healthcare perspective at three months, then one year by extrapolation. Because of the impact of the disease on patient activity, indirect cost, such as sick leave and disability leave, was assessed second.

RESULTS

The average total cost for three months was €7602 higher for the ONS strategy compared to conventional strategy with a gain of 0.07 quality-adjusted life-years (QALY), the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was then €109,676/QALY gained. The average extrapolated total cost for one year was €1344 lower for the ONS strategy (p = 0.5444) with a gain of 0.28 QALY (p < 0.0001), the ICER was then €-4846/QALY gained. The scatter plot of the probabilistic bootstrapping had 80% of the replications in the bottom right-hand quadrant, indicating that the ONS strategy is dominant. The average indirect cost for three months was €377 lower for the ONS strategy (p = 0.1261).

DISCUSSION

This ONS cost-effectiveness study highlighted the limitations of a short-time horizon in an economic study that may lead the healthcare authorities to reject an innovative strategy, which is actually cost-effective. One-year extrapolation was the proposed solution to obtain results on which healthcare authorities can base their decisions.

CONCLUSION

Considering the burden of rCCH and the efficacy and safety of ONS, the demonstration that ONS is dominant should help its diffusion, validation, and reimbursement by health authorities in this severely disabled population.

Long-Term Efficacy of Occipital Nerve Stimulation for Medically Intractable Cluster Headache

BACKGROUND

Occipital nerve stimulation (ONS) has been proposed to treat refractory chronic cluster headache (rCCH) but its efficacy has only been showed in small short-term series.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate ONS long-term efficacy in rCCH.

METHODS

We studied 105 patients with rCCH, treated by ONS within a multicenter ONS prospective registry. Efficacy was evaluated by frequency, intensity of pain attacks, quality of life (QoL) EuroQol 5 dimensions (EQ5D), functional (Headache Impact Test-6, Migraine Disability Assessment) and emotional (Hospital Anxiety Depression Scale [HAD]) impacts, and medication consumption.

RESULTS

At last follow-up (mean 43.8 mo), attack frequency was reduced >50% in 69% of the patients. Mean weekly attack frequency decreased from 22.5 at baseline to 9.9 (P < .001) after ONS. Preventive and abortive medications were significantly decreased. Functional impact, anxiety, and QoL significantly improved after ONS. In excellent responders (59% of the patients), attack frequency decreased by 80% and QoL (EQ5D visual analog scale) dramatically improved from 37.8/100 to 73.2/100. When comparing baseline and 1-yr and last follow-up outcomes, efficacy was sustained over time. In multivariable analysis, low preoperative HAD-depression score was correlated to a higher risk of ONS failure. During the follow-up, 67 patients experienced at least one complication, 29 requiring an additional surgery: infection (6%), lead migration (12%) or fracture (4.5%), hardware dysfunction (8.2%), and local pain (20%).

CONCLUSION

Our results showed that long-term efficacy of ONS in CCH was maintained over time. In responders, ONS induced a major reduction of functional and emotional headache-related impacts and a dramatic improvement of QoL. These results obtained in real-life conditions support its use and dissemination in rCCH patients.

Clinical Features of Cluster Headache: A Hospital-Based Study in Taiwan

Most previous studies on cluster headache (CH) focus on Western populations. This study aimed to investigate the clinical characteristics of CH in a neurology outpatient population in Taiwan. A cross-sectional survey was conducted from July 2015 to June 2019 in a medical college affiliated with a tertiary care hospital (Tri-Service General Hospital) in Taiwan. All consecutive patients reporting headache as their chief complaint were asked to participate in a face-to-face interview with a qualified headache specialist and to complete a detailed self-administered questionnaire. The diagnosis of CH was made according to the Third edition of the International Classification of Headache Disorders. The subjects comprised 80 consecutive new CH patients (13 women and 67 men; ratio, 1:5). The mean age at presentation was 36.0 ± 10.8 years (range, 16-64 years), mean age at onset was 27.2 ± 12.1 years (range, 5-65 years), and mean time lag before diagnosis was 9.3 ± 10.5 years (range, 0-46.4 years). Of the total CH patients, 25.3% reported feelings of restlessness during headache episodes. A seasonal predilection was reported by 18% of the CH patients. The use of tobacco was the most common (44/80 patients). Chronic CH was only observed in 5% of the patients and only one patient (1.3%) reported both a positive family history for CH and aura. Features of CH in Taiwanese patients differed from that of Caucasian patients; a lower prevalence of chronic CH, positive family history of CH, and occurrence of aura may be less common in the former than in the latter.

Pain localization in cluster headache patients: Onset, peak, and radiation

OBJECTIVE AND AIM

To describe differences in pain locations for onset, peak, and radiation aspects of cluster headache (CH) attacks.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Data were collected for 23 months using a cross-sectional online survey composed of 117 questions on pain location, demographics, and clinical features. 5260 datapoints on 44 pain locations from 631 respondents were analyzed.

RESULTS

During the onset and peak of attacks, pain is concentrated periorbitally. Pain locations outside the periorbital region were reported more frequently for radiation than for onset and peak of attacks. Dorsal (occipital, neck, shoulder) pain was reported more frequently in connection with onset and radiation than during peak: onset (13%) versus peak (6%), p < 0.001, and radiation (22%) versus peak (6%), p < 0.001. There was no significant difference in dorsal pain frequencies for onset (13%) vs. radiation (22%), p = 0.552. Furthermore, the frequency with which individual pain locations were reported differed significantly for onset, peak, and radiation in CH.

CONCLUSIONS

Analysis of the pain location data shows specific frequencies and distributions of pain location for three aspects of CH attacks. The frequency with which individual pain points were reported differed significantly for onset, peak, and radiation. In general, dorsal pain points were reported more frequently for onset and radiation than for peak pain. Pain locations beyond the eye (extraorbital points) were more frequently reported in connection with radiating pain. Our findings could serve as a basis for future research, correlating CH pain patterns with the outcome of treatment approaches.

Effect of Occipital Nerve Stimulation (ONS) on the Orbicularis Oculi Reflex Triggered by a Standardized Air Flow in Patients with Chronic Migraine-A Prospective, Randomized, Interventional Study

Introduction

Occipital nerve stimulation (ONS) is a specific form of peripheral neuromodulation used in the treatment of chronic pain disorders. A particular field of application is in the therapy of treatment-refractory headaches, especially of chronic migraine. The precise mode of action is unknown. It is presumed that central and peripheral sensitization are reduced in patients with chronic headache. The aim of this study was to examine the effect of ONS on pain-modulatory mechanisms in the trigeminocervical area in patients with chronic migraine.

Methods

In a balanced repeated measurements design in eight patients with chronic migraine with and without active ONS, we analyzed which effects ONS had on the orbicularis oculi reflex dynamically elicited by corneal air flow.

Results

The orbicularis oculi reflex in active ONS (7.38 ± 20.14 eyelid closures/minute) compared to inactive ONS (18.73 ± 14.30 eyelid closures/minute) is significantly reduced (p = 0.021).

Conclusions

The results show that under active ONS compared to inactive ONS in patients with chronic migraine, the orbicularis oculi reflex, dynamically triggered by a standardized air flow, is significantly reduced. This suggests that ONS is able to directly counteract the trigeminally mediated central sensitization in chronic migraine and protectively reduce the effects of aversive peripheral stimulation.

Occipital Nerve Stimulation for Pain Modulation in Drug-Resistant Chronic Cluster Headache

Occipital nerve stimulation (ONS) is a surgical treatment proposed for drug-resistant chronic cluster headache (drCCH). Long-term series assessing its efficacy are scarce. We designed a retrospective observational study with consecutive sampling, evaluating the follow-up of 17 drCCH patients who underwent ONS. Our main endpoint was the reduction the rate of attacks per week. We also evaluated the pain intensity through the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), patient overall perceived improvement and decrease in oral medication intake. After a median follow-up of 6.0 years (4.5–9.0), patients decreased from a median of 30 weekly attacks to 22.5 (5.6–37.5, p = 0.012), 7.5 at 1 year (p = 0.006) and 15.0 at the end of follow-up (p = 0.041). The VAS decreased from a median of 10.0 to 8.0 (p = 0.011) at three months, to 7.0 (p = 0.008) at twelve months and 7.0 (p = 0.003) at the end of the follow-up. A total of 23.5% had an overall perceived improvement of ≥70% at 3 months, 41.2% at 1 year and 27.8% at the end of follow-up. Reducing prophylactic oral medication was possible in 76.5% and it was stopped in 17.7%. Triptan use decreased in all the responder patients and 17.7% stopped its intake. A total of 41.2% presented mild adverse events. In conclusion, our long-term experience suggests that ONS could be an interesting option for drCCH-selected patients, as it is a beneficial and minimally invasive procedure with no serious adverse events.

Non-Pharmacological Approaches to Headaches: Non-Invasive Neuromodulation, Nutraceuticals, and Behavioral Approaches

Significant side effects or drug interactions can make pharmacological management of headache disorders very difficult. Non-conventional and non-pharmacological treatments are becoming increasingly used to overcome these issues. In particular, non-invasive neuromodulation, nutraceuticals, and behavioral approaches are well tolerated and indicated for specific patient categories such as adolescents and pregnant women. This paper aims to present the main approaches reported in the literature in the management of headache disorders. We therefore reviewed the available literature published between 2010 and 2020 and performed a narrative presentation for each of the three categories (non-invasive neuromodulation, nutraceuticals, and behavioral therapies). Regarding non-invasive neuromodulation, we selected transcranial magnetic stimulation, supraorbital nerve stimulation, transcranial direct current stimulation, non-invasive vagal nerve stimulation, and caloric vestibular stimulation. For nutraceuticals, we selected Feverfew, Butterbur, Riboflavin, Magnesium, and Coenzyme Q10. Finally, for behavioral approaches, we selected biofeedback, cognitive behavioral therapy, relaxation techniques, mindfulness-based therapy, and acceptance and commitment therapy. These approaches are increasingly seen as a valid treatment option in headache management, especially for patients with medication overuse or contraindications to drug treatment. However, further investigations are needed to consider the effectiveness of these approaches also with respect to the long-term effects.

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.

Outcomes of Occipital Nerve Stimulation for Craniofacial Pain Syndromes

OBJECTIVES

Occipital nerve regional stimulation (ONS) is reported to improve pain in several studies. We examined long-term pain and functional outcomes of ONS in an open-label prospective study.

METHODS

Patients with medically refractory and disabling craniofacial pain were prospectively selected for ONS. Primary outcome was a change in mean daily pain intensity on the numeric pain rating scale (NPRS) at 6 months. Secondary outcomes included changes in NPRS, Headache Impact Test-6 (HIT-6), Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS), Pain Disability Index (PDI), Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale - Revised (CESD-R), and Short Form-36 version 2 (SF36) at last follow-up.

RESULTS

Thirteen patients (mean age 49.7 ± 8.4) diagnosed with occipital neuralgia (6), hemicrania continua (2), persistent idiopathic facial pain (2), post-traumatic facial pain (1), cluster headache (1), and chronic migraine (1) were enrolled. Mean NPRS improved by 2.1 ± 2.1 at 6 months and 2.1 ± 1.9 at last follow-up (23.5 ± 18.1 months). HIT-6 decreased by 8.7 ± 8.8, MIDAS decreased by 61.3 ± 71.6, and PDI decreased by 17.9 ± 18. SF36 physical functioning, bodily pain, and social functioning improved by 16.4 ± 19.6, 18.0 ± 31.6, and 26.1 ± 37.3, respectively. Moderate to severe headache days (defined as ≥50% of baseline mean NPRS) were reduced by 8.9 ± 10.2 days per month with ONS.

CONCLUSION

ONS reduced the long-term NPRS and moderate-severe monthly headache days by 30% and improved functional outcomes and quality of life. A prospective registry for ONS would be helpful in accumulating a larger cohort with longer follow-up in order to improve the use of ONS.

Chronic Cluster Headache Update and East-West Comparisons: Focusing on Clinical Features, Pathophysiology, and Management

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review provides an update on chronic cluster headache (CH) focusing on clinical features, pathophysiology, and management as well as comparisons between Eastern and Western populations.

RECENT FINDINGS

Chronic CH in Eastern populations was relatively rare, compared to that in Western populations. Lacrimation and/or conjunctival injection is the most frequently reported cranial autonomic symptom, and visual aura is predominant in chronic CH patients. Neuroimaging evidence in both ethnic groups suggests that CH pathophysiology involves the hypothalamus and pain-modulatory areas, with dynamic alternations between CH episodes. Recent evidence indicates that midbrain dopaminergic systems may participate in CH chronicity. Noteworthy advances have emerged in neuromodulatory therapies for chronic CH, but treatment with calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) monoclonal antibodies has been unsuccessful. Recent evidence shows divergence of chronic CH between Eastern and Western populations. Neuromodulatory therapies but not CGRP inhibition is effective in this intractable patient group.

Occipital Nerve Stimulation in Chronic Migraine: The Relationship Between Perceived Sensory Quality, Perceived Sensory Location, and Clinical Efficacy-A Prospective, Observational, Non-Interventional Study

Introduction

Occipital nerve stimulation (ONS) is used to treat therapy-resistant chronic migraine. Clinical use has resulted in a wide intraindividual and interindividual variation of clinical efficacy. The aim of this study was to analyze a potential relationship between sociodemographic variables, headache parameters, perceived sensory quality, perceived sensory location, as well as clinical efficacy.

Methods

Thirty-two subjects (21.9% male, mean age 45.77 years) suffering from chronic migraine refractory to other treatment and therefore treated with ONS were included in this study. We used a computer-based imaging method for mapping the ONS-induced perceived sensory location, the perceived spatial sensory field size, as well as the perceived sensory quality in a long-term course over 21 months in weekly time intervals. Additionally, the effect of ONS on the migraine headache was documented weekly by the participants using a verbal rating scale. Over the observation period, a total of 808 individual weekly data sets were recorded and a potential relationship between ONS-induced perceptions and headache parameters could be analyzed.

Results

We found that 48.9% of stimulation intervals were reported as effective by patients. Women displayed a significantly higher responder rate than men. The reported effectiveness did not differ depending on age, the average number of migraine days per month, the MIDAS score, or the duration of the migraine disorder prior to ONS treatment. Implantation with trial period led to significantly lower responder rates than without the trial period. The most frequently perceived sensory quality of “tingling” was found significantly more frequently in non-responders than in responders. Responders displayed significantly lower pleasantness scores for their reported perceptions than non-responders. Sensations that were spatially perceived above the line connecting the external acoustic meati with the external occipital protuberance (MOP line) led to patients reporting a positive clinical effect significantly more frequently than sensations spatially perceived below the MOP line. Spatially small fields of sensory perception were correlated with a higher responder rate than those covering broader areas.

Conclusions

The ONS-induced sensory location, the size of the spatial sensory field, as well as the sensory quality are significantly correlated with the reported clinical effectiveness. The results suggest that besides surgical technique, the individual and continuous programming of the stimulation parameters is clinically relevant in increasing the therapeutic effectiveness.

Galcanezumab for the prevention of cluster headache

INTRODUCTION

Cluster headache (CH) is among the worst painful conditions. The available therapies are scarce and not specific, leaving many patients unsatisfied because of poor efficacy and/or tolerability. Patients not responding to common treatments are offered semi-invasive and invasive procedures with uncertain results. Based on the current understanding of CH pathophysiology, new possible therapeutic approaches come from drugs interfering with Calcitonin Gene Related Peptide (CGRP).

AREAS COVERED

After summarizing the evidence for CGRP involvement in CH pathophysiology, we review the published literature (PubMed) and information (clinicaltrials.gov, EudraCT, EMA and FDA websites) regarding a novel anti-CGRP monoclonal antibody, Galcanezumab, its pharmacological properties, development, and evidence for the treatment of CH. Publications regarding other indications (migraine) are considered for completeness and safety/tolerability profile.

EXPERT OPINION

In one randomized clinical trial, Galcanezumab has proven to be effective and safe as a preventive treatment in episodic CH, with a favorable tolerability profile offering a potential new option in the therapeutic arsenal. Inefficacy of galcanezumab in chronic CH as well as the inefficacy of another monoclonal antibody against CGRP (fremanezumab) in both episodic and chronic CH question the scalability of the drug in CH management. Further, studies comparing galcanezumab to the current standard treatments are highly desirable.

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.

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.

Primary headache disorders: Five new things

Purpose of review

To review 5 new areas in primary headache disorders, especially migraine and cluster headache.

Recent findings

Calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) receptor antagonists (gepants-rimegepant and ubrogepant) and serotonin 5-HT_1F receptor agonists (ditans-lasmiditan) have completed phase 3 clinical trials and will soon offer novel, effective, well-tolerated nonvasoconstrictor options to treat acute migraine. CGRP preventive treatment is being revolutionized after the licensing of 3 monoclonal antibodies (MABs), erenumab, fremanezumab, and galcanezumab, with eptinezumab to follow, especially designed for migraine; they are effective and well tolerated. For patients seeking a nondrug therapy, neuromodulation approaches, single-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation, noninvasive vagus nerve stimulation (nVNS), and external trigeminal nerve stimulation, represent licensed, well-tolerated approaches to migraine treatment. For the acute treatment of episodic cluster headache, nVNS is effective, well tolerated, and licensed; nVNS is effective and well tolerated in preventive treatment of cluster headache. The CGRP MAB galcanezumab was effective and well tolerated in a placebo-controlled trial in the preventive treatment of episodic cluster headache. Sphenopalatine ganglion stimulation has been shown to be effective and well tolerated in 2 randomized sham-controlled studies on chronic cluster headache. Understanding the premonitory (prodromal) phase of migraine during which patients experience symptoms such as yawning, tiredness, cognitive dysfunction, and food cravings may help explain apparent migraine triggers in some patients, thus offering better self-management.

Summary

Headache medicine has made remarkable strides, particularly in understanding migraine and cluster headache in the past 5 years. For the most common reason to visit a neurologist, therapeutic advances offer patients reduced disability and neurologists a rewarding, key role in improving the lives of those with migraine and cluster headache.

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.

Noninvasive neuromodulation in migraine and cluster headache

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The purpose of this narrative review is to provide an overview of the currently available noninvasive neuromodulation devices for the treatment of migraine and cluster headache.

RECENT FINDINGS

Over the last decade, several noninvasive devices have undergone development and clinical trials to evaluate efficacy and safety. Based on this body of work, single-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation, transcutaneous supraorbital neurostimulation, and noninvasive vagal nerve stimulation devices have been cleared by the United States Food and Drug Administration and are available for clinical use for the treatment of primary headache disorders.

SUMMARY

Overall, these novel noninvasive devices appear to be safe, well tolerated, and have demonstrated promising results in clinical trials in both migraine and cluster headache. This narrative review will provide a summary and update of the proposed mechanisms of action, evidence, safety, and future directions of various currently available modalities of noninvasive neuromodulation for the treatment of migraine and cluster headache.

Rationale for electrical parameter determination in external trigeminal nerve stimulation (eTNS) for migraine: A narrative review

Background

Migraine is a primary headache disorder involving dysregulation of central and peripheral pain pathways. Medical treatment is often limited by drug side effects, comorbidities and poor compliance. This makes neuromodulation an ideal option for migraine treatment. Cefaly® is a transcutaneous electrical neurostimulator designed specifically for migraine treatment. It results in external trigeminal nerve stimulation of the supraorbital and supratrochlear nerves. External trigeminal nerve stimulation is effective for acute and preventive migraine treatment and may result in normalization of dysregulated pain pathways.

Objective

Our objective was to provide a narrative review of the neuroanatomical and pathophysiological basis of external trigeminal nerve stimulation for migraine treatment and to provide the rationale behind the choice of the electrical parameters used for external trigeminal nerve stimulation.

Methods

We reviewed external trigeminal nerve stimulation clinical trial publications, basic science neurostimulation literature, publications describing pathophysiological mechanisms in migraine, and documentation used in the application for the Food and Drug Administration approval of external trigeminal nerve stimulation.

Results

The electrical parameters used for external trigeminal nerve stimulation were chosen to maximize safety and efficacy. Critical parameters include generator characteristics, pulse shape, pulse duration, pulse frequency and session duration and frequency. We explain the rationale behind determination of each parameter. There is evidence of dysregulated central and peripheral pathways in migraine and evidence that external trigeminal nerve stimulation may normalize function of these pathways.

Conclusion

External trigeminal nerve stimulation is a safe and effective Food and Drug Administration-approved option for the acute and preventive treatment of migraine. The electrical parameters were optimized specifically for external stimulation of the trigeminal nerve to maximum safety, comfort and efficacy.

New strategies for the treatment and prevention of primary headache disorders

The primary headache disorders, which include migraine, cluster headache and tension-type headache, are among the most common diseases and leading causes of disability worldwide. The available treatment options for primary headache disorders have unsatisfactory rates of efficacy, tolerability and patient adherence. In this Review, we discuss promising new approaches for the prevention of primary headache disorders, such as monoclonal antibodies targeting calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) or its receptor, and small-molecule CGRP receptor antagonists. Neuromodulation approaches employing noninvasive or implantable devices also show promise for treating primary headache disorders. Noninvasive treatments, such as transcranial magnetic stimulation and transcutaneous peripheral nerve stimulation, are delivered by devices that patients can self-administer. Implantable devices targeting the occipital nerves, sphenopalatine ganglion or high cervical spinal cord are placed using percutaneous and/or surgical procedures, and are powered either wirelessly or by surgically implanted batteries. These new and emerging treatments have the potential to address unmet patient needs and reduce headache-associated disability.

Cluster headache: new targets and options for treatment

Cluster headache is a severe headache disorder with considerable impact on quality of life. The pathophysiology of the disease remains poorly understood. With few specific targets for treatment, current guidelines mainly include off-label treatment with medication. However, new targets for possible treatment options are emerging. Calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP)-targeted medication could become the first (cluster) headache-specific treatment option. Other exciting new treatment options include invasive and non-invasive neuromodulation techniques. Here, we provide a short overview of new targets and treatment options that are being investigated for cluster headache.

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.

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.

A Short Review of the Non-invasive Transcutaneous Pericranial Electrical Stimulation Techniques and their Application in Headache

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

In this short review, the most common non-invasive neuromodulatory techniques will be described, along with their advantages and disadvantages and their application in headache. Available preventive treatments can be unhelpful or may have unpleasant side effects; moreover, the rate of response to preventive drugs does not exceed 50%, lower in chronic migraine; alternative options would be welcome. Though the concept of neuromodulation was originally developed with invasive methods, newer non-invasive techniques are appearing.

RECENT FINDINGS

The novel neuromodulatory techniques have been developed with encouraging results: compared with traditional pharmacotherapy, advantages of non-invasive neuromodulation include reduced incidence of adverse effects, improved adherence, and safety and ease of use. The results are encouraging for acute or preventive treatment of different kinds of headache. A variety of neuromodulatory approaches is expanding fastly and has opened new possibilities for treatment of patients suffering from many forms of headache, especially those who have failed traditional pharmacotherapy. The non-invasive treatments can be seen as supplementing traditional management in refractory patients. Current study results are encouraging but preliminary and larger and more rigorous trials are needed to clarify benefit and mode of action.

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.

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.

Invasive and Non-invasive Electrical Pericranial Nerve Stimulation for the Treatment of Chronic Primary Headaches

Chronic primary headaches are widespread disorders which cause significant quality of life and socioprofessional impairment. Available pharmacological treatments have often a limited efficacy and/or can generate unbearable side effects. Electrical nerve stimulation is a well-known non-destructive method of pain modulation which has been recently applied to headache management. In this review, we summarise recent advances in invasive and non-invasive neurostimulation techniques targeting pericranial structures for the treatment of chronic primary headaches, chiefly migraine and cluster headache: occipital nerve, supraorbital nerve, vagus nerve, and sphenopalatine ganglion stimulations. Invasive neurostimulation therapies have offered a new hope to drug-refractory headache sufferers but are not riskless and should be proposed only to chronic patients who failed to respond to most existing preventives. Non-invasive neurostimulation devices are user-friendly, safe and well tolerated and are thus taking an increasing place in the multidisciplinary therapeutical armamentarium of primary headaches.

Current Approaches to Neuromodulation in Primary Headaches: Focus on Vagal Nerve and Sphenopalatine Ganglion Stimulation

Neuromodulation is a promising, novel approach for the treatment of primary headache disorders. Neuromodulation offers a new dimension in the treatment that is both easily reversible and tends to be very well tolerated. The autonomic nervous system is a logical target given the neurobiology of common primary headache disorders, such as migraine and the trigeminal autonomic cephalalgias (TACs). This article will review new encouraging results of studies from the most recent literature on neuromodulation as acute and preventive treatment in primary headache disorders, and cover some possible underlying mechanisms. We will especially focus on vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) and sphenopalatine ganglion (SPG) since they have targeted autonomic pathways that are cranial and can modulate relevant pathophysiological mechanisms. The initial data suggests these approaches will find an important role in headache disorder management going forward.

Occipital nerve stimulation improves the quality of life in medically-intractable chronic cluster headache: Results of an observational prospective study

Background Occipital nerve stimulation (ONS) has been proposed to treat chronic medically-intractable cluster headache (iCCH) in small series of cases without evaluation of its functional and emotional impacts. Methods We report the multidimensional outcome of a large observational study of iCCH patients, treated by ONS within a nationwide multidisciplinary network ( https://clinicaltrials.gov NCT01842763), with a one-year follow-up. Prospective evaluation was performed before surgery, then three and 12 months after. Results One year after ONS, the attack frequency per week was decreased >30% in 64% and >50% in 59% of the 44 patients. Mean (Standard Deviation) weekly attack frequency decreased from 21.5 (16.3) to 10.7 (13.8) ( p = 0.0002). About 70% of the patients responded to ONS, 47.8% being excellent responders. Prophylactic treatments could be decreased in 40% of patients. Functional (HIT-6 and MIDAS scales) and emotional (HAD scale) impacts were significantly improved, as well as the health-related quality of life (EQ-5D). The mean (SD) EQ-5D visual analogic scale score increased from 35.2 (23.6) to 51.9 (25.7) ( p = 0.0037). Surgical minor complications were observed in 33% of the patients. Conclusion ONS significantly reduced the attack frequency per week, as well as the functional and emotional headache impacts in iCCH patients, and dramatically improved the health-related quality of life of responders.

Invasive pericranial nerve interventions

Background

In many patients suffering from primary headaches, the available pharmacological and behavioural treatments are not satisfactory. This is a review of (minimally) invasive interventions targeting pericranial nerves that could be effective in refractory patients.

Methods

The interventions we will cover have in common pericranial nerves as targets, but are distinct according to their rationale, modality and invasiveness. They range from nerve blocks/infiltrations to the percutaneous implantation of neurostimulators and surgical decompression procedures. We have critically analysed the published data (PubMed) on their effectiveness and tolerability.

Results and conclusions

There is clear evidence for a preventative effect of suboccipital injections of local anaesthetics and/or steroids in cluster headache, while evidence for such an effect is weak in migraine. Percutaneous occipital nerve stimulation (ONS) provides significant long-term relief in more than half of drug-resistant chronic cluster headache patients, but no sham-controlled trial has tested this. The evidence that ONS has lasting beneficial effects in chronic migraine is at best equivocal. Suboccipital infiltrations are quasi-devoid of side effects, while ONS is endowed with numerous, though reversible, adverse events. Claims that surgical decompression of multiple pericranial nerves is effective in migraine are not substantiated by large, rigorous, randomized and sham-controlled trials.

Long-term occipital nerve stimulation for drug-resistant chronic cluster headache

Introduction

Chronic cluster headache is rare and some of these patients become drug-resistant. Occipital nerve stimulation has been successfully employed in open studies to treat chronic drug-resistant cluster headache. Data from large group of occipital nerve stimulation-treated chronic cluster headache patients with long duration follow-up are advantageous.

Patients and methods

Efficacy of occipital nerve stimulation has been evaluated in an experimental monocentric open-label study including 35 chronic drug-resistant cluster headache patients (mean age 42 years; 30 men; mean illness duration: 6.7 years). The primary end-point was a reduction in number of daily attacks.

Results

After a median follow-up of 6.1 years (range 1.6–10.7), 20 (66.7%) patients were responders (≥50% reduction in headache number per day): 12 (40%) responders showed a stable condition characterized by sporadic attacks, five responders had a 60–80% reduction in headache number per day and in the remaining three responders chronic cluster headache was transformed in episodic cluster headache. Ten (33.3%) patients were non-responders; half of these have been responders for a long period (mean 14.6 months; range 2–48 months). Battery depletion (21 patients 70%) and electrode migration (six patients – 20%) were the most frequent adverse events.

Conclusions

Occipital nerve stimulation efficacy is confirmed in chronic drug-resistant cluster headaches even after an exceptional long-term follow-up. Tolerance can occur years after improvement.

Invasive occipital nerve stimulation for refractory chronic cluster headache: what evolution at long-term? Strengths and weaknesses of the method

Background

Invasive Occipital Nerve Stimulation (iONS) is a costly technique which appears effective in drug-refractory chronic cluster headache (drCCH) management. Available data on long-term effectiveness and safety of iONS in this indication are scarce, though they could be useful to neurologists and patients in daily practice. The purpose of this short report is to discuss the very long-term outcome of a drCCH cohort, including adverse events.

Findings

Previously, favourable results were obtained with iONS in 15 drCCH patients: 80 % were significantly improved and 60 % were pain free. We report here the very long-term follow-up (up to nine years) of 10 patients belonging to this cohort. Meanwhile 5 patients had to be definitively explanted because of device infection (3) or paresthesia intolerance (2). Four patients (40 %) evolved to an episodic form of CH. Six remained chronic but their attack frequency was decreased by 70 % on average. Intake of preventive drugs is still necessary in 80 % of patients. All patients needed at least one battery replacement.

Conclusions

Up to nine years after implantation, iONS is still effective in most patients with drCCH. Concomitant preventive drugs remain often necessary. Forty percent of patients reverse to episodic CH, possibly by natural history. iONS is not a benign procedure but device-related complications appear similar to those reported with other invasive neurostimulators.

Implantable Neurostimulation for Headache Disorders: Effect on Healthcare Utilization and Expenditures

OBJECTIVES

Chronic daily headache is a considerable source of morbidity for patients and also carries an enormous economic burden. Patients who fail standard medication regimens lack well-defined therapies, and neurostimulation is an emerging option for these patients. The purpose of this study was to analyze the cost utility of implantable neurostimulation for treatment of headache.

METHODS

We utilized the Thompson Reuters Marketscan Data base to identify individuals diagnosed with headache disorders who underwent percutaneous neurostimulation. Healthcare expenditures for individuals who subsequently received permanent, surgically implanted neurostimulatory devices were compared to those who did not. Only individuals who sought implantable neurostimulation were included to account for headache severity. The cohorts were adjusted for comorbidity and prior headache-related expenses. Costs were modeled longitudinally using a generalized estimating equation.

RESULTS

A total of 579 patients who underwent percutaneous trial of neurostimulation were included, of which 324 (55.96%) converted to permanent neurostimulation within one year. Unadjusted expenditures were greater for patients who underwent conversion to the permanent neurostimulation device, as expected. Costs grew at a lower rate for patients who converted to permanent device implantation. Cost neutrality for patients receiving the permanent device was reached in less than five years after the enrollment date. The mean cost of conversion to a permanent implantation was $18,607.53 (SD $26,441.34).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study suggests that implantable neurostimulation reduces healthcare expenditures within a relatively short time period in patients with severe refractory headache.

Percutaneous nerve field stimulation (PENS) of the occipital region as a possible predictor for occipital nerve stimulation (ONS) responsiveness in refractory headache disorders? A feasibility study

Background

Occipital nerve stimulation (ONS) has been reported to diminish pain levels in intractable chronic headache syndromes of different origin. No reliable objective markers exist to predict ONS responsiveness. This study investigated the predictive value of occipital percutaneous nerve field stimulation (PENS) prior to ONS.

Methods

This trial included 12 patients (CCH, CM, PTH, CH) with chronic refractory headache syndromes eligible for ONS. Repetitive PENS (3 × /10 days) was performed and the headache severity/frequency monitored over four weeks before ONS implantation. Further assessment of PENS/ONS outcomes were stimulation-related complications, perception/tolerance stimulation threshold, the Migraine Disability Scale (MIDAS) and the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI).

Results

All PENS responders benefited from ONS. Of the seven PENS-nonresponders with VAS 6.1(±1.1), six experienced significant pain relief from ONS after three months and one patient failed the PENS/ONS trial (VAS 3.7 (±1.6)); (95% CI 3.6 to 5.7, p < 0.001). The VAS baseline was 8.4 (±0.5) and decreased significantly (50% reduction in severity/frequency) in five patients after PENS, while seven failed to improve (VAS 4.9 (±1.1); (95% CI 2.5 to 4.5, p < 0.001). BDI baseline (from 22.6 (±4.2) to 10.6 (±5.9) (95% CI 7.4 to 16.6, p < 0.001)) and MIDAS baseline (from 143.9 (±14.5) to 72.8 (±28.7) (95% CI 1.17 to 2.3, p < 0.001)) significantly declined after ONS. No PENS/ONS-related complications occurred.

Conclusions

Presurgical applied occipital PENS failed to identify ONS responders sufficiently according to our study protocol, thus requiring further specific investigations to determine its predictive usefulness.

Neurostimulation for Treatment of Migraine and Cluster Headache

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this narrative review is to summarize the current state of neurostimulation therapies for the treatment of migraine and/or cluster.

METHODS

For this narrative review, publications were identified by searching PubMed using the search terms "migraine" or "cluster" combined with "vagal nerve stimulation," "transcranial magnetic stimulation," "supraorbital nerve stimulation," "sphenopalatine ganglion stimulation," "occipital nerve stimulation," "deep brain stimulation," "neurostimulation," or "neuromodulation." Publications were chosen based on the quality of data that were provided and their relevance to the chosen topics of interest for this review. Reference lists of chosen articles and the authors' own files were used to identify additional publications. Current clinical trials were identified by searching clinicaltrials.org.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

Neurostimulation of the vagal nerve, supraorbital nerve, occipital nerve and sphenopalatine ganglion, transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS), and deep brain stimulation have been investigated for the treatment of migraine and/or cluster. Whereas invasive methods of neurostimulation would be reserved for patients with very severe and treatment refractory migraine or cluster, noninvasive methods of stimulation might serve as useful adjuncts to more conventional therapies. Currently, transcutaneous supraorbital nerve stimulation is FDA approved and commercially available for migraine prevention and TMS is FDA approved for the treatment of migraine with aura. The potential utility of each type of neurostimulation has yet to be completely defined.

Surgery for treatment of refractory chronic cluster headache: toward standard procedures

The degree of disability due to chronic cluster headache refractory to conservative treatments justifies surgical procedures as second-line treatments. Many studies and reports nowadays confirm the efficacy of the two mostly used surgical techniques in such cases. Both deep brain stimulation and occipital nerve stimulation are in fact currently utilized for this purpose but the surgical technique has not yet been standardized. We describe the surgical steps of both procedures.

Peripheral neuromodulation: a review

Peripheral nerve stimulation (PNS) is likely the most diverse and rapidly expanding area of neuromodulation. Its expansion has become possible due to both technological and clinical advances in pain medicine. The first implantable systems were surgically placed. However, it is currently commonplace to use percutaneous leads, as this approach has become instrumental in its expansion. The first percutaneous peripheral nerve stimulators were reported in 1999. Cylindrical leads were implanted to stimulate the greater occipital nerve to manage intractable headache. It has been expanded into other individual nerves or nerve plexuses to treat neuropathic, visceral, cardiac, abdominal, low back and facial pain. The use of PNS in modulating organ function in treatment of syndromes such as epilepsy, incontinence and obesity with vagal, tibial and gastric stimulation is under extensive investigation. New technologies that allow easier and safer electrode placement are expected to further expand the uses of PNS. A noninvasive stimulation will open this treatment modality to more clinicians of varying backgrounds.

Imaging sensory effects of occipital nerve stimulation: a new computer-based method in neuromodulation

BACKGROUND

Within the last years, occipital nerve stimulation (ONS) has proven to be an important method in the treatment of severe therapy-resistant neurological pain disorders. The correspondence between lead placement as well as possible stimulation parameters and the resulting stimulation effects remains unclear.

OBJECTIVE

The method aims to directly relate the neuromodulatory mechanisms with the clinical treatment results, to achieve insight in the mode of action of neuromodulation, to identify the most effective stimulation sets and to optimize individual treatment effects.

METHODS

We describe a new computer-based imaging method for mapping the spatial, cognitive and affective sensory effects of ONS. The procedure allows a quantitative and qualitative analysis of the relationship between lead positioning, the stimulation settings as well as the sensory and clinical stimulation effects.

CONCLUSION

A regular mapping of stimulation and sensory parameters allows a coordinated monitoring. The stimulation results can be reviewed and compared with regards to clinical effectiveness.

Peripheral nerve/field stimulation for chronic pain

Peripheral nerve stimulation and peripheral nerve field stimulation involve the delivery of electrical stimulation using implanted electrodes either over a target nerve or over the painful area with the goal of modulating neuropathic pain. The selection of appropriate candidates for this therapy hinges on skillful application of inclusion and exclusion criteria, psychological screening, and an invasive screening trial. Patients with significant improvement in pain severity and pain-related disability during the trial are considered candidates for implantation of a permanent system. As with other implanted devices for neuromodulation, risks of mechanical failures, infection, and neurologic complications exist.