Four Decades of Occipital Nerve Stimulation for Headache Disorders: A Systematic Review

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Chronic headaches are a significant source of disability worldwide. Despite the development of conventional strategies, a subset of patients remain refractory and/or experience side effects following these treatments. Hence, occipital nerve stimulation (ONS) should be considered as an alternative strategy for intractable chronic headaches. This review aims to provide a comprehensive overview of the effectiveness, safety, mechanisms and practical application of ONS for the treatment of headache disorders.

RECENT FINDINGS

Overall response rate of ONS is 35.7-100%, 17-100%, and 63-100% in patients with cluster headache, chronic migraine and occipital neuralgia respectively. Regarding the long-term effectivity in all groups, 41.6-88.0% of patients remain responders after ≥ 18.3 months. The most frequently reported adverse events include lead migration/fracture (13%) and local pain (7.3%). Based on our results, ONS can be considered a safe and effective treatment for chronic intractable headache disorders. To support more widespread application of ONS, additional research with larger sample sizes should be conducted.

Clinical outcomes and complications of peripheral nerve field stimulation in the management of refractory trigeminal pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Peripheral nerve field stimulation (PNFS) is a tool in the armamentarium of treatment options for trigeminal pain. The efficacy of this modality in mitigating trigeminal pain remains unclear. The aim of this study was to examine the existing literature on PNFS and elucidate pain score outcomes associated with its use in patients with trigeminal pain.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed in accordance with the PRISMA framework. The PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus databases were queried on June 10, 2020. Studies reporting pain outcomes in more than 5 adult patients treated with PNFS for facial pain were included. The primary outcome of the study was the mean difference in the visual analog scale (VAS) score from the last follow-up to baseline, and it was analyzed by an inverse-variance, random-effect model. The risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and a funnel plot.

RESULTS

Of the 4597 studies screened for inclusion, 46 relevant full-text articles were assessed for eligibility. Eleven observational cohort studies from the 46 articles were found to be eligible, and reported on a total of 109 patients. In 86% (94/109) of cases, trial stimulation was successful and followed by a permanent system implantation. VAS scores improved by 75% (mean difference 6.32/10 points, 95% CI 5.38-7.27 points) compared to baseline. Seventy-six percent (42/55) of patients became medication free or required lower doses of medications. The complication rate necessitating surgical revision was estimated at 32% per procedure.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings support the belief that PNFS provides effective, long-term pain control for trigeminal pain. Statistical heterogeneity was considerable across all studies. Future work should be aimed at conducting double-blind randomized controlled trials to determine the utility of PNFS for treating various forms of trigeminal pain for which limited therapeutic options exist.

Peripheral nerve stimulation registry for intractable migraine headache (RELIEF): a real-life perspective on the utility of occipital nerve stimulation for chronic migraine

BACKGROUND

Migraine is common and ranked as the first cause of disability in people under fifty. Despite significant advances in its pharmacological treatment, it often remains intractable. Neuromodulation is one option considered in the management of those patients.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the safety and efficacy of neuromodulation in the treatment of intractable chronic migraine using the Abbott occipital nerve stimulator.

METHODS

Recruitment took place in 18 centres in 6 countries. Patients over the age of 18 who had failed three or more preventative drugs, had at least moderate disability based on MIDAS or HIT-6 score and were implanted with an Abbott neurostimulator were included in the study. Patients were followed up for a maximum of 24 months. Data were collected on adverse events, headache relief, headache days, quality of life, migraine disability, satisfaction and quality of life.

RESULTS

One hundred twelve patients were included, 79 female and 33 male, with 45 patients reaching the maximum follow-up of 24 months. At 3 months, 33.7% were satisfied or very satisfied with the procedure with 43.0% reporting improved or greatly improved quality of life. 67.5% indicated that they would undergo the procedure again with satisfaction peaking at 9 months when 49.3% were satisfied or very satisfied with the procedure. At 24 months, 46.7% of available patients were satisfied or very satisfied with the procedure-18% of enrolled patients. The adverse events were however frequent with incidences of 37%, 47% and 31% respectively for hardware-, biological and stimulation-related side effects.

CONCLUSION

Neuromodulation can be beneficial for selected patients with intractable chronic migraine although frequent complications have been consistently reported across studies. Further research focusing on development of better hardware and technique optimisation and in particular reliable randomised trials with significantly longer follow-ups are warranted in this field.

Craniofacial Peripheral Nerve Stimulation: Analysis of a Single Institution Series

OBJECTIVE

Objective real-world experience with peripheral nerve stimulation (PNS) is limited. Furthermore, the lack of robust outcome metrics, long-term follow-up and data comparing responders and nonresponders limit the refinement of selection criteria to better identify patients likely to benefit from PNS.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed 22 patients with craniofacial pain treated with PNS, and responders were classified as having ≥50% postoperative improvement in the numeric rating scale (NRS). In a subset of patients (n = 11), detailed prospective outcomes metrics were obtained preoperatively and postoperatively, including NRS, Beck Depression Index (BDI), Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS), and McGill Pain Questionnaire (MPQ).

RESULTS

About 59.1% (13 of 22) of subjects were classified as responders at a mean follow-up of 37.5 ± 5.27 months. Diagnoses included migraine (n = 6), occipital neuralgia (n = 9), trigeminal neuropathic pain (TNP; n = 6), and central poststroke pain (n = 1). Within the TNP subgroup, responders were more likely to have undergone two or more trigeminal neuralgia procedures prior to PNS (p < 0.05). In the 11 patients with comprehensive preoperative and postoperative outcome data, we noted significant improvement in NRS (p = 0.0005), BDI (p = 0.04), PCS (p = 0.01), as well as components of PCS (helplessness and magnification, p = 0.02) and MPQ (affective, p = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

The present study adds to the PNS literature by providing long-term data and multiple outcome metrics in a subset of patients. We suggest that BDI, PCS, and MPQ may provide more insight into meaningful response over time. Evaluating functional and quality of life outcomes in patients with craniofacial pain may be more informative than assessing benefit solely based on pain intensity and responder rates.

Burst Occipital Nerve Stimulation for Chronic Migraine and Chronic Cluster Headache

BACKGROUND

Occipital nerve stimulation (ONS) is widely used for headache syndromes including chronic migraine (CM) and chronic cluster headache (CCH). The paraesthesia associated with tonic stimulation can be bothersome and can limit therapy. It is now clear in spinal cord stimulation that paraesthesia-free waveforms can produce effective analgesia, but this has not been reported in ONS for CM or CCH.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Seventeen patients (12 CM and 5 CCH) were treated with bilateral burst pattern ONS, including 4 who had previously had tonic ONS. Results were assessed in terms of the frequency of headaches (number of headache days per month for CM, and number of attacks per day for CCH) and their intensity on the numeric pain rating scale.

RESULTS

Burst ONS produced a statistically significant mean reduction of 10.2 headache days per month in CM. In CCH, there were significant mean reductions in headache frequency (92%) and intensity (42%).

CONCLUSION

Paraesthesia is not necessary for good quality analgesia in ONS. Larger studies will be required to determine whether the efficacies of the two stimulation modes differ. Burst ONS is imperceptible and therefore potentially amenable to robustly blinded clinical trials.

Occipital nerve stimulation for chronic migraine--a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Chronic migraine is a debilitating headache disorder that has significant impact on quality of life. Stimulation of peripheral nerves is increasingly being used to treat chronic refractory pain including headache disorders. This systematic review examines the effectiveness and adverse effects of occipital nerve stimulation (ONS) for chronic migraine.

METHODS

Databases, including the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and clinical trial registers were searched to September 2014. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs), other controlled and uncontrolled observational studies and case series (n≥ 10) were eligible. RCTs were assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Meta-analysis was carried out using a random-effects model. Findings are presented in summary tables and forest plots.

RESULTS

Five RCTs (total n=402) and seven case series (total n=115) met the inclusion criteria. Pooled results from three multicenter RCTs show that ONS was associated with a mean reduction of 2.59 days (95% CI 0.91 to 4.27, I2=0%) of prolonged, moderate to severe headache per month at 3 months compared with a sham control. Results for other outcomes generally favour ONS over sham controls but quantitative analysis was hampered by incomplete publication and reporting of trial data. Lead migration and infections are common and often require revision surgery. Open-label follow-up of RCTs and case series suggest long-term effectiveness can be maintained in some patients but evidence is limited.

CONCLUSIONS

While the effectiveness of ONS compared to sham control has been shown in multiple RCTs, the average effect size is modest and may be exaggerated by bias as achieving effective blinding remains a methodological challenge. Further measures to reduce the risk of adverse events and revision surgery are needed.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

this systematic review is an update and expanded work of part of a broader review registered with PROSPERO. Registration No. CRD42012002633.

Occipital nerve stimulation

Occipital nerve stimulation (ONS) is a form of neuromodulation therapy aimed at treating intractable headache and craniofacial pain. The therapy utilizes neurostimulating electrodes placed subcutaneously in the occipital region and connected to a permanently implanted programmable pulse generator identical to those used for dorsal column/spinal cord stimulation. The presumed mechanisms of action involve modulation of the trigeminocervical complex, as well as closure of the physiologic pain gate. ONS is a reversible, nondestructive therapy, which can be tailored to a patient's individual needs. Typically, candidates for successful ONS include those patients with migraines, Chiari malformation, or occipital neuralgia. However, recent MRSA infections, unrealistic expectations, and psychiatric comorbidities are generally contraindications. As with any invasive procedure, complications may occur including lead migration, infection, wound erosion, device failure, muscle spasms, and pain. The success of this therapy is dependent on careful patient selection, a preimplantation trial, meticulous implantation technique, programming strategies, and complication avoidance.