RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Stabbing headache (SH) is considered as a pure primary headache, but according to a few clinical observations it could also be secondary. Over the past decades, we have been observing the complaint of SH in patients with intracranial vascular and neoplastic lesions. OBJECTIVE: To describe a series of patients with intracranial lesions who experienced SH. METHODS: This is a cross-sectional, retrospective study of 34 patients with intracranial lesions associated with SH, admitted at Hospital das Clínicas, Federal University of Pernambuco, Brazil. RESULTS: In this series of 34 patients [29 women, 44 ± 12 years (mean ± SD)] with secondary SH, the causes were intracranial neoplasms (n = 31), cerebral aneurysms (n = 2), or arteriovenous malformation (n = 1). Pituitary tumor (n = 18), meningioma (n = 6), and vestibular schwannomas (n = 4) were the most prevalent types of intracranial neoplasms. All these lesions had intimate contact with the dura mater, including an oligodendroglioma, the only intra-axial tumor in the series. A characteristic in the secondary SH is the crescendo pattern (12/34, 35%), progressing from infrequent attacks to recurrent crises occurring several times a day. The SH lasted from 5 days to 60 months (15 ± 18 months, mean ± SD) until the correct diagnosis [16/34 (47%) of the patients ≤6 months]. The SH was triggered by the movement of the head (5/34, 15%) or Valsalva maneuver (1/34). After surgery, suppression of the SH was observed. In a few of the patients to whom dexamethasone was prescribed, the SH subsided within a few days. CONCLUSION: This study was able to identify clinical red flags associated with intracranial lesions and secondary SH, for example, recent onset of SH, exclusively unilateral (ipsilateral) at the same location, crescendo pattern, triggered by head movements, or Valsalva maneuver.
Assuntos
Fístula Arteriovenosa/complicações , Neoplasias Encefálicas/complicações , Transtornos da Cefaleia Secundários/etiologia , Transtornos da Cefaleia Secundários/fisiopatologia , Aneurisma Intracraniano/complicações , Malformações Arteriovenosas Intracranianas/complicações , Adulto , Fístula Arteriovenosa/diagnóstico por imagem , Fístula Arteriovenosa/patologia , Neoplasias Encefálicas/diagnóstico por imagem , Neoplasias Encefálicas/patologia , Estudos Transversais , Feminino , Humanos , Aneurisma Intracraniano/diagnóstico por imagem , Aneurisma Intracraniano/patologia , Malformações Arteriovenosas Intracranianas/diagnóstico por imagem , Malformações Arteriovenosas Intracranianas/patologia , Imageamento por Ressonância Magnética , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Estudos RetrospectivosRESUMO
BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Migraine is a chronic, disabling, and recurrent illness. Despite its burden, preventive medications are often underused, while acute strategies are frequently used injudiciously. Patients may benefit from comprehensive approaches with general informative orientation and formal medication strategies. In developing countries like Brazil, the access to comprehensive tertiary headache centers or updated specialists is somewhat limited, as are the resources available out of some private specialty care clinics. In addition, centers from the public system may not deliver effective care. The aim of this review is to perform a general description of the pharmacological treatments of migraine in tertiary headache centers of Brazil. METHODS: The data of 4 public and 6 private tertiary centers under the care of 16 neurologists involved with headache assistance in different cities of Brazil were gathered. Answers to questions directed to headache specialists, and analyzing data from previous care of patients was used to estimate a description of the general pharmacological approach used in Brazilian centers. The therapeutic options adopted by general practitioners were not considered as those from other medical specialties and holistic medicine, which also treat migraine on a common basis. RESULTS: Estimated data of nearly 4800 patients from 16 neurologists acting in headache clinics from 2005 to 2013 were collected. Headache approach by specialists in Brazil is basically divided into 2 groups. The public services, which assist nonpaying patients, deliver traditional and noncomprehensive approaches as well as prescribe mostly monotherapy. Roughly 30% of their patients do not receive preventive treatments that are generally tricyclic antidepressants or ß-blockers. Private centers, which are usually where paying people attend, as well as a few public centers of excellence, use multidisciplinary approaches and combination of drugs, despite the usual allegation of scarce evidence. Nearly 90% of the patients from these centers receive the prescription of preventive treatments, which are generally tricyclic antidepressants and/or neuromodulators and/or ß-blockers. COMMENTS: There is no consensus on whether patients turning to private tertiary centers are different from those seen in public nonpaying services. However, since it is directly related to economic status and public services may render free specific medications as well as official dispensation of work, it may be argued that patients have less headache impact, and suboptimal care is delivered in these instances. As for the studied private centers as well as for the few public excellence centers, care provided is usually varied, includes a combination of drugs, and prevention is commonly used.
Assuntos
Tratamento Farmacológico , Transtornos de Enxaqueca/tratamento farmacológico , Brasil/epidemiologia , HumanosRESUMO
BACKGROUND: The notion of migraine attacks triggered by food and beverages has been posited for centuries. Red wine in particular has been acknowledged as a migraine trigger since antiquity when Celsus (25 B.C.-50 A.D.) described head pain after drinking wine. Since then, references to the relationship between alcohol ingestion and headache attacks are numerous. The most common initiator of these attacks among alcoholic beverages is clearly wine. The aim of this review is to present and discuss the available literature on wine and headache. METHODS: A Medline search with the terms headache, migraine, and wine was performed. Data available on books and written material about wine and medicine as well as abstracts on alcohol, wine, and headache available in the proceedings of major headache meetings in the last 30 years were reviewed. In addition, available technical literature and websites about wine, grapes, and wine making were also evaluated. RESULTS: Full papers specifically on headache and wine are scarce. General literature related to medicine and wine is available, but scientific rigor is typically lacking. The few studies on wine and headache were mostly presented as abstracts despite the common knowledge and patients' complaints about wine ingestion and headache attacks. These studies suggest that red wine, but not white and sparkling wines, do trigger headache and migraine attacks independently of dosage in less than 30% of the subjects. DISCUSSION: Wine, and specifically red wine, is a migraine trigger. Non-migraineurs may have headache attacks with wine ingestion as well. The reasons for that triggering potential are uncertain, but the presence of phenolic flavonoid radicals and the potential for interfering with the central serotonin metabolism are probably the underlying mechanisms of the relationship between wine and headache. Further controlled studies are necessary to enlighten this traditional belief.
Assuntos
Transtornos de Enxaqueca/etiologia , Vinho/efeitos adversos , HumanosRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Chronic daily headaches (CDHs) are often associated with temporomandibular disorders (TMDs). However, large studies assessing the relationship were conducted in general, and not clinical, populations. Thus, clinical exams were not completed. Clinic-based studies with expert diagnosis are, in turn, often small and may not be representative. OBJECTIVE: To contrast the demographic and clinical symptoms of CDH and TMD in participants within the general population relative to patients seen in a headache clinic. METHODS: All inhabitants 10 years and older of a small city in Brazil were interviewed. Those with more than 15 days of headache per month were examined by a team consisting of a neurologist, a dentist, and a physical therapist. Headaches were classified as per the Second Edition of the International Classification of Headache Disorders and TMD as per the Research Diagnostic Criteria. The procedure was repeated (by the same team) with CDH sufferers consecutively seen in a headache center. RESULTS: Of 1605 inhabitants interviewed, 57 (3.6%) had CDH, and 43 completed all physical assessments. For specialty care group, of 289 patients, 92 had CDH, and 85 completed all assessments. No significant differences were seen for gender and age, but education level was significantly higher among those recruited at specialty care. Muscular TMD happened in 30.2% of CDH patients from the community vs 55.3% in the headache center (difference of -25.1%, 95% confidence interval of difference=-40.8% to -9.4%). No TMD happened in 41.9% of those recruited from the population relative to 20% of those in the headache center (21.9%, 95% confidence interval=6.7-37.1%). CONCLUSION: Individuals with CDH recruited from the general population are significantly less likely to have CDH relative to those selected from the headache center. Issues of generalizability are of concern when conducting clinic-based studies on the topic.
Assuntos
Instituições de Assistência Ambulatorial , Transtornos da Cefaleia/epidemiologia , Características de Residência , Transtornos da Articulação Temporomandibular/epidemiologia , Adolescente , Adulto , Idoso , Brasil/epidemiologia , Feminino , Transtornos da Cefaleia/diagnóstico , Transtornos da Cefaleia/terapia , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Inquéritos e Questionários , Transtornos da Articulação Temporomandibular/diagnóstico , Transtornos da Articulação Temporomandibular/terapia , Adulto JovemRESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To compare the adherence between monotherapy and politherapy in prophylactic migraine treatment. METHOD: Five hundred consecutive patients with migraine from a tertiary center were retrospectively studied as to the number of preventive medications prescribed during the first visit. Adherence, defined as returning for the next consultation after 4 to 6 weeks and following the prescribed regimens, were also evaluated and compared between patients. RESULTS: 71.8% were women, and 6% of the patients did not receive any preventive medication, 11.4% received one drug, 22.2% two drugs, 41.4% three drugs, and 19% four drugs for the prevention of migraine. The overall adherence was 79.6%. Respectively, 73.7, 71.8, 82.6 and 86.3% of those who received the prescription of one, two, three and four drugs returned, complying with the treatment. CONCLUSION: There is no difference in adherence to monotherapy or politherapy (one to four drugs) for the prophylaxis of migraine.
Assuntos
Adesão à Medicação/estatística & dados numéricos , Transtornos de Enxaqueca/tratamento farmacológico , Medicamentos sob Prescrição/uso terapêutico , Adolescente , Antagonistas de Receptores Adrenérgicos beta 1/uso terapêutico , Adulto , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Antidepressivos/uso terapêutico , Brasil , Criança , Pré-Escolar , Quimioterapia Combinada/métodos , Feminino , Flunarizina/uso terapêutico , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Relaxantes Musculares Centrais/uso terapêutico , Estudos Retrospectivos , Fatores de Tempo , Resultado do Tratamento , Adulto JovemRESUMO
Assuntos
Adolescente , Adulto , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Criança , Pré-Escolar , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Adulto Jovem , Adesão à Medicação/estatística & dados numéricos , Transtornos de Enxaqueca/tratamento farmacológico , Medicamentos sob Prescrição/uso terapêutico , Antagonistas de Receptores Adrenérgicos beta 1/uso terapêutico , Antidepressivos/uso terapêutico , Brasil , Quimioterapia Combinada/métodos , Flunarizina/uso terapêutico , Relaxantes Musculares Centrais/uso terapêutico , Estudos Retrospectivos , Fatores de Tempo , Resultado do TratamentoRESUMO
JUSTIFICATIVA E OBJETIVOS: Os anti-inflamatórios não esteroides (AINES) apresentam atividade farmacológica de inibição das isoenzimas ciclo-oxigenase-1 (COX-1) e ciclo-oxigenase-2 (COX-2) em graus diversos, cujos perfis de segurança variam individualmente.A eficácia é semelhante, porém os possíveis eventos adversos são relevantes nas decisões do tratamento prescrito. O diclofenaco está disponível internacionalmente há mais de 40 anos, tendo seu perfil farmacológico e de segurança documentados em diversos estudos básicos e clínicos. O objetivo desta revisão da literatura foi de apresentar aspectos da dor e do uso de diclofenaco na prática clínica, incluindo as indicações as questões de segurança e a eficácia do medicamento. CONTEÚDO: Esta revisão da literatura apresentará a farmacologia básica do diclofenaco, bem como evidências terapêuticas com o uso deste fármaco em diversas condições dolorosas e suas implicações na prática clínica. CONCLUSÃO: O diclofenaco tem demonstrado eficácia clínica no tratamento de diversas condições dolorosas, entre estas lombalgias, artrites, dores pós-traumáticas e pós-cirúrgicas, dismenorreias,bem como cólica renal e biliar. Vale ressaltar que, na avaliação de um paciente apresentando dor e ao decidir um plano de tratamento e na prescrição de qualquer medicamento, cabe ao médico avaliar cuidadosamente o paciente para determinar o melhor curso de ação no individuo, levando-se em consideração o histórico médico do paciente, comorbidades e uso de medicamentos concomitantes, a fim de proporcionar a melhor alternativa terapêutica, com redução máxima da dor e inflamação e a restauração da funcionalidade de forma mais segura.
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The nonsteroidal antiinflammatory-drugs (NSAIDs) exhibit pharmacological activity inhibiting the isoenzymes cyclooxygenase-1 (COX-1) and cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) in varying degrees, and their safety profiles vary individually. Their efficacy is similar, but the possible adverse effects are relevant in deciding treatment prescriptions. Diclofenac has been available internationally for over 40 years, and its pharmacological and safety profile has been documented in numerous preclinical and clinical studies. The objective of this literature review was to present aspects of pain and the use of diclofenac in clinical practice, including indications, safety issues, and efficacy of the drug. CONTENTS: This literature review will present the basic pharmacology of diclofenac, as well as evidence for the therapeutic use of this drug in several painful conditions and the implications for clinical practice. CONCLUSION: Diclofenac has shown clinical efficacy in the treatment of a variety of painful conditions, including lumbagos,arthritis, post-traumatic and post-surgical pain, dysmenorrhea,as well as renal and biliary colic. It is important to note that in the evaluation of a patient presenting pain and when deciding a treatment plan and the prescription of any medication, it is upto the physician to carefully assess the patient to determine the best course of action in that individual, taking into account thepatients' medical history, co-morbidities, and use of concomitant medications, in order to provide the best therapeutic alternative,with a maximum reduction of pain and inflammation and restoration of functionality in the safest possible way.
Assuntos
Humanos , Anti-Inflamatórios não Esteroides , Diclofenaco/farmacologia , Diclofenaco/uso terapêutico , EficáciaRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Neuromodulators such as topiramate (TPM) and divalproex sodium (DVS) are effective in the preventive treatment of migraine. Nonetheless, patients often discontinue their use due to side effects. OBJECTIVES: The study aims to determine whether the combination of lower doses of TPM and DVS may be useful for patients responsive to higher doses of the individual drugs but experiencing intolerable side effects. METHODS: This clinic-based study was conducted to evaluate a series of patients who experienced at least a 50% reduction in headache frequency after 6 weeks of treatment with either TPM 100 mg/day or DVS 750 mg/day, but suffered intolerable drug-related side effects. At that point, patients were switched to TPM (50 mg in the morning and 25 mg at night) plus DVS 500 mg/day (single dose) and reevaluated after 6 further weeks. RESULTS: Thirty-eight patients were evaluated. Mean age was 37 years, and 84% were female. Of the 38, 17 (77.3%) initially were using TPM only, and 10 (62.5%) initially were using DVS only. After 6 weeks on combination therapy, 27 (62.9%) reported improved tolerability without any decrease in efficacy. Five patients who initially were using TPM only and six using DVS only failed to return for follow-up or were noncompliant with treatment due to persistent or worsening side effects. CONCLUSIONS: This small, open-label study suggests that the combination of TPM and DVS in doses lower than those typically used for migraine prophylaxis may be an effective option for patients who benefited from higher doses of these same medications used as monotherapy but were unable to tolerate such treatment due to side effects.
Assuntos
Inibidores Enzimáticos/uso terapêutico , Frutose/análogos & derivados , Transtornos de Enxaqueca/tratamento farmacológico , Fármacos Neuroprotetores/uso terapêutico , Ácido Valproico/uso terapêutico , Adulto , Alanina Transaminase/análise , Aspartato Aminotransferases/análise , Relação Dose-Resposta a Droga , Esquema de Medicação , Quimioterapia Combinada , Feminino , Seguimentos , Frutose/uso terapêutico , Humanos , L-Lactato Desidrogenase/análise , Masculino , Estudos Retrospectivos , Topiramato , Resultado do Tratamento , gama-Glutamiltransferase/análiseRESUMO
A sizeable proportion of migraineurs in need of preventive therapy do not significantly benefit from monotherapy. The objective of the study is to conduct a randomized controlled trial testing whether combination therapy of topiramate and nortriptyline is useful in patients who had less than 50% decrease in headache frequency with the use of the single agents. Patients with episodic migraine were enrolled if they had less than 50% reduction in headache frequency after 8 weeks of using topiramate (TPM) (100 mg/day) or nortriptyline (NTP) (30 mg/day). They were randomized (blinded fashion) to have placebo added to their regimen, or to receive the second medication (combination therapy). Primary endpoint was decrease in number of headache days at 6 weeks, relative to baseline, comparing both groups. Secondary endpoint was proportion of patients with at least 50% reduction in headache frequency at 6 weeks relative to baseline. A total of 38 patients were randomized to receive combination therapy, while 30 continued on monotherapy (with placebo) (six drop outs in the combination group and three for each single drug group). For the primary endpoint, mean and standard deviation (SD) of reduction in headache frequency were 4.6 (1.9) for those in polytherapy, relative to 3.5 (2.3) for those in monotherapy. Differences were significant (p < 0.05]. Similarly, 78.3% of patients randomized to receive polytherapy had at least 50% headache reduction, as compared to 37% in monotherapy (p < 0.04). Finally we conclude that combination therapy (of TPM and NTP) is effective in patients with incomplete benefit using these agents in monotherapy.
Assuntos
Analgésicos/administração & dosagem , Frutose/análogos & derivados , Transtornos de Enxaqueca/prevenção & controle , Nortriptilina/administração & dosagem , Adulto , Analgésicos/efeitos adversos , Método Duplo-Cego , Quimioterapia Combinada , Feminino , Frutose/administração & dosagem , Frutose/efeitos adversos , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Nortriptilina/efeitos adversos , Topiramato , Adulto JovemRESUMO
Headache is one of the most common types of recurrent pain in medical practice. Although nearly everyone has occasional headaches, there are well-defined headache disorders that vary in incidence and prevalence. Among the unusual headache syndromes, headache due to external compression is a poorly studied headache considered to arise as a result of continued stimulation of cutaneous nerves by the application of pressure over the scalp or forehead. The wearing of bands around the head, specifically goggles (such as those worn for swimming), tight hats, or even professional helmets have been described as causative factors. The pain is often constant and more severe at the location where the object is pressing the head. In predisposed patients (ie, those with migraine), external compression may lead to a more severe migrainous headache if the stimulus is prolonged. The mechanism responsible is the compression of trigeminal or occipital nerves branches. The headache resolves after pressure is relieved, or is prevented by avoiding the precipitating cause. Drugs are rarely used.