Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
1.
Pain Med ; 23(1): 164-188, 2022 Jan 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1455341

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To systematically evaluate the efficacy and effectiveness of percutaneous interventional treatments for prevention of migraine through a qualitative and (when possible) quantitative analysis. METHODS: An expert panel was asked to develop recommendations for the multidisciplinary preventive treatment of migraine, including interventional strategies. The committee conducted a systematic review and (when evidence was sufficient) a meta-analytic review by using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) criteria and the modified Cochrane Risk of Bias analysis available in the Covidence data management program. Clinical questions addressed adults with migraine who should be offered prevention. Examined outcomes included headache days, acute medication use, and functional impairment. Acute management of migraine was outside the scope of this guideline. RESULTS: The committee screened 1,195 studies and assessed 352 by full text, yielding 16 randomized controlled trials that met the inclusion criteria. RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS: As informed by evidence related to the preselected outcomes, adverse event profile, cost, and values and preferences of patients, onabotulinumtoxinA received a strong recommendation for its use for chronic migraine prevention and a weak recommendation against its use for episodic migraine prevention. Greater occipital nerve blocks received a weak recommendation for their use for chronic migraine prevention. For greater occipital nerve block, steroid received a weak recommendation against its use vs the use of local anesthetic alone. Occipital nerve with supraorbital nerve blocks, sphenopalatine ganglion blocks, cervical spine percutaneous interventions, and implantable stimulation all received weak recommendations for their use for chronic migraine prevention. The committee found insufficient evidence to assess trigger point injections in migraine prevention and highly discouraged the use of intrathecal medication.


Subject(s)
Migraine Disorders , Adult , Anesthetics, Local , Cervical Vertebrae , Headache/therapy , Humans , Injections , Migraine Disorders/prevention & control
2.
Headache ; 60(8): 1558-1568, 2020 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-638748

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To summarize the current literature on non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug and corticosteroid use during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, recognizing that these are commonly used treatments in the field of headache medicine. BACKGROUND: The use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and corticosteroids in patients during the COVID-19 pandemic has been a controversial topic within the medical community and international and national health organizations. Lay press and social media outlets have circulated opinions on this topic despite the fact that the evidence for or against the use of these medications is sparse. In the field of headache medicine, these medications are used commonly and both patients and clinicians may have questions or hesitations pertaining to their use during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: A detailed search of the scientific and popular literature was performed. RESULTS: There is limited literature pertaining to the safety of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and corticosteroids during the COVID-19 pandemic. To date, there are no clear scientific data that preclude the use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in the general population who may acquire COVID-19 or in those acutely infected with the virus. Several health organizations have concluded that treatment with corticosteroids during active infection should be avoided due to concerns of prolonged viral shedding in the respiratory tract and the lack of survival benefit based on the data from past coronaviruses and influenza virus; specific exceptions exist including treatment for underlying asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, septic shock, and acute respiratory distress syndrome. CONCLUSION: Scientific information regarding the COVID-19 pandemic is constantly evolving, and limited or contradictory information can lead to confusion for both patients and clinicians. It is recommended that prior to prescribing non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and steroids for the treatment of headache, clinicians have open discussions with their patients about the potential risks and benefits of using these medications during the COVID-19 pandemic. This manuscript summarizes the currently available evidence and understanding about these risks and benefits to help clinicians navigate such discussions.


Subject(s)
Adrenal Cortex Hormones/adverse effects , Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal/adverse effects , COVID-19/epidemiology , Headache/drug therapy , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2/drug effects , Adrenal Cortex Hormones/therapeutic use , Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme 2/biosynthesis , Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme 2/genetics , Animals , Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal/pharmacology , Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal/therapeutic use , COVID-19/etiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Contraindications, Drug , Disease Susceptibility/chemically induced , Dogs , Humans , Hypernatremia/chemically induced , Immunosuppressive Agents/adverse effects , Immunosuppressive Agents/therapeutic use , Mass Media , Models, Animal , Neutrophils/drug effects , Practice Guidelines as Topic , Pulmonary Edema/chemically induced , Rats , Receptors, Virus/biosynthesis , Receptors, Virus/genetics , Risk Assessment , SARS-CoV-2/growth & development , SARS-CoV-2/physiology , Up-Regulation/drug effects , Virus Shedding/drug effects
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL