Practice parameter: evaluation of children and adolescents with recurrent headaches: report of the Quality Standards Subcommittee of the American Academy of Neurology and the Practice Committee of the Child Neurology Society.

OBJECTIVE: The Quality Standards Subcommittee of the American Academy of Neurology and the Practice Committee of the Child Neurology Society develop practice parameters as strategies for patient management based on analysis of evidence. For this parameter, the authors reviewed available evidence on the evaluation of the child with recurrent headaches and made recommendations based on this evidence. METHODS: Relevant literature was reviewed, abstracted, and classified. Recommendations were based on a four-tiered scheme of evidence classification. RESULTS: There is inadequate documentation in the literature to support any recommendation as to the appropriateness of routine laboratory studies or performance of lumbar puncture. EEG is not recommended in the routine evaluation, as it is unlikely to define or determine an etiology or distinguish migraine from other types of headaches. In those children undergoing evaluation for recurrent headache found to have a paroxysmal EEG, the risk for future seizures is negligible; therefore, further investigation for epilepsy or treatments aimed at preventing future seizures is not indicated. Obtaining a neuroimaging study on a routine basis is not indicated in children with recurrent headaches and a normal neurologic examination. Neuroimaging should be considered in children with an abnormal neurologic examination or other physical findings that suggest CNS disease. Variables that predicted the presence of a space-occupying lesion included 1) headache of less than 1-month duration; 2) absence of family history of migraine; 3) abnormal neurologic findings on examination; 4) gait abnormalities; and 5) occurrence of seizures. CONCLUSIONS: Recurrent headaches occur commonly in children and are diagnosed on a clinical basis rather than by any testing. The routine use of any diagnostic studies is not indicated when the clinical history has no associated risk factors and the child's examination is normal.

The utility of neuroimaging in the evaluation of children with migraine or chronic daily headache who have normal neurological examinations.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the utility of neuroimaging in the evaluation of children presenting with two of the most common forms of headache, migraine and chronic daily headache, and to determine the utility and pathological yield of neuroimaging in specific headache syndromes in children whose neurological examinations are normal. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of patients coded for headache (ICD 784) in the Pediatric Neurology Clinic at Children's Hospital of the King's Daughters between 1997 and 1999. The age range considered was between 6 and 18 years. The study focused on the two most common types of headache, uncomplicated migraine and chronic daily headache. Only patients with normal physical and neurological examinations were considered in this analysis. RESULTS: Three hundred two patients were coded for headache within the defined age group. One hundred seven (35.4%) patients fulfilled IHS-R criteria as having uncomplicated migraine with a normal examination, and 30 (9.9%) patients fulfilled criteria for chronic daily headache. Twenty-nine (9.6%) patients presented with migrainelike symptoms, and 6 (2.0%) presented with chronic daily symptoms, but had neurological abnormalities present on examination. The remainder of the patients with headache had the following etiologies: 50 (16.6%) with secondary headache, 22 (7.3%) with complicated migraine, 20 (6.6%) with posttraumatic headache, 13 (4.3%) with seizure-related headache, 11 (3.6%) with brain tumors, 10 (3.3%) with tension-type headache, and 4 (1.3%) with pseudotumor cerebri. Of the 107 patients with migraine, 42 (39.3%) received CT scans; 2 (4.8%) of which were considered "abnormal." One of the abnormalities was an arachnoid cyst and the other was a dilated Virchow-Robin space. Twelve (11.2%) patients with migraine received an MRI, 2 (16.7%) of which were considered abnormal. Both of the abnormal findings were Chiari type I malformations. Of the 30 patients with chronic daily headache, 17 (56.7%) received CT scans, 3 (17.6%) of which were considered abnormal. The abnormalities consisted of a maxillary opacification, a mucous retention cyst, and an occult vascular malformation. Eight (26.7%) of the patients with chronic daily headache had an MRI, 2 (25.0%) of which were abnormal. One of the abnormalities was a Chiari I malformation, and the other was an occult vascular malformation. CONCLUSION: The yield of neuroimaging in children with uncomplicated migraine and normal neurological examination was 3.7%. The yield in children with chronic daily headache and normal neurological examination was higher at 16.6%. The abnormalities discovered included arachnoid cysts, Chiari I malformations, sinus disease, occult vascular malformations and "dilated Virchow-Robin spaces." While none of the neuroimaging findings were apparent clinically, their discovery did not influence the diagnosis, management, or outcome of the patients. None of the abnormalities necessitated surgical intervention or were associated with the headache presentation. Therefore, neuroimaging is not warranted in children and adolescents with defined clinical headache syndrome diagnoses whose neurological examinations are normal.