ABSTRACT
Background: Migraine headache is a common neurologicalepisodic condition originating from the central nervous systemthat can significantly impair the lives of otherwise normallyfunctioning people. Pharmacologic options for migraineprophylaxis include beta blockers, calcium channel blockers,antidepressants and anticonvulsants; all of which have varyingdegrees of adverse effects that may significantly limit their usein this disease.Objectives: To observe whether low dose Topiramate is moreeffective compared to Propranolol in migraine prophylaxis.Methods: This clinical trial was carried out in the Out PatientDepartment (OPD) & Headache Clinic, Department ofNeurology, Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujib Medical University,Dhaka. A total of 120 patients around the age range of 18 to 50years diagnosed as migraine (with aura or without aura)according to ICHD-3 criteria, were recruited as the studypopulation. By simple random sampling procedure, using odd& even number, 60 patients were administered by Tab.Topiramate 50 mg/ day named as group-I and rest 60 patientswere administered by Tab. Propranolol 80 mg /day named asgroup-II. Out of them in total 96 patients had completed thestudy due to drop out of 13 patients in group-I & 11 patients ingroup-II in different steps of follow up. Finally 47 patientsremain in group-I and 49 patients in group-II. During trial, threefollow up visits were taken for both group, 1st follow up after 4weeks of baseline information (Before starting prophylacticmedication), 2nd follow up after 4 weeks of treatment, 3rdfollow up after 8 weeks of treatment. Efficacy of treatment wasmeasured by headache frequency, duration and Severity ofheadache as measured by the VAS.Results: The mean (SD) age of group-I (topiramate) andgroup-II (propranolol) group were found 29.72 (9.58) yearsand 30.96 (10.11) years respectively. Female sex was foundpredominant in both groups. At final follow up, there wasstatistically significant difference in mean (SD) value offrequency of migraine attack between topiramate andpropranolol group [4.72 (2.80) vs. 3.48 (2.20); p=0.024].Propranolol appeared statistically significant than topiramate[TPM 5.53 (2.98) vs. PRO 4.36 (1.55); p=0.047]. RegardingSeverity of headache, better results also were observed in thepropranolol group than topiramate (p < 0.05). Both drugsappeared significant in efficacy measurement (p < 0.001).Patient drop out was more in the topiramate group than thepropranolol group (21.68 % vs. 18.34%). Furthermore, in thetopiramate group, patients complained of more adverse effectsthan propranolol group (23.4% vs. 14.3%), which wasstatistically significant.Conclusion: The present study suggests that low doseTopiramate and Propranolol are effective for migraineprophylaxis in reduction of frequency, Severity and duration ofmigraine headache individually and propranolol appears moreeffective compared to that of topiramate.
ABSTRACT
Apesar da enxaqueca ter significativa prevalência, ter critérios diagnósticos bem definidos, levar a importante impacto na qualidade de vida, ela tem sido sub-reconhecida, subdiagnosticada e subtratada. Destaca-se a utilidade de acompanhamento com diário e a prescrição de tratamento embasado na fisiopatologia e resultantes de protocolos clínicos com boa classe de evidência. Apresenta-se propostas não farmacológicas, bem como propostas medicamentosas, para alívio da crise da enxaqueca e para a prevenção delas, enfatizando-se os mecanismos de ação do topiramato e as evidências do seu benefício e tolerabilidade no tratamento preventivo...
Subject(s)
Migraine without AuraABSTRACT
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the clinical characteristics and efficacy of prophylactic treatment of pediatric chronic daily headache (CDH). METHODS: A retrospective medical-record review of patients who underwent the prophylaxis after a diagnosis of CDH was performed. Response to treatment was assessed by the total number of headache days/month. More than 50% reduction of headache frequency was classified as responders. RESULTS: Eighty patients with the diagnosis of CDH were included in the study. CDH was more prevalent in girls than in boys. It was classified into chronic migraine (81.2%), chronic tension-type headache (15.0%), or new-onset persistent daily headache (3.7%). None of the patient fulfilled the diagnostic criteria of hemicrania continua. The mean age of the patients was 11.8+/-1.2 years. The mean number of monthly headache episodes before treatment was 25.5+/-4.4. After prophylactic treatment, headache episodes were reduced to 8.7+/-9.5 episodes per month. The responder rate of prophylactic treatment was 70.2% (55/80 patients) for either topiramate or flunarizine. CONCLUSION: In our study, the most common type of CDH was chronic migraine. All patients with CDH had frequent, long lasting migraine attacks. This study also suggests that prophylactic treatment is effective in the treatment of pediatric CDH.