Clinical predictors of therapeutic failure of occipital nerve stimulation in refractory chronic cluster headache.

BACKGROUND: Occipital nerve stimulation (ONS) is a treatment with evidence in refractory chronic cluster headache (CCH). However, the variable response rate and cost make it necessary to investigate predictors of response. METHODS: This is a cross-sectional study conducted through the review of medical records of CCH patients from six hospitals in Madrid. Epidemiological and clinical variables were compared between patients with ONS failure and the rest. ONS failure was defined as the need for device withdrawal or switch off because of lack of response or adverse events. RESULTS: From a series of 88 CCH, 26 (29.6%) underwent ONS surgery, of whom 13/26 (50.0%) failed because lack of response. ONS failure group had an earlier headache onset (mean ± SD) of 27.7 ± 6.9 vs. 36.7 ± 11.8 years, p = 0.026) and a higher smoking rate (100% vs. 42.9%, p = 0.006). Stational fluctuations (58.3% vs. 7.7%, p = 0.007) and nocturnal exacerbations (91.7% vs. 53.9%, p = 0.035) were more frequent in the ONS failure group as well. There was no difference between groups in diagnostic delay, years of evolution prior to surgery, mental illness, comorbidity with other headache disorders or chronic pain conditions or prior response to occipital nerves anesthetic blocks. CONCLUSIONS: Some clinical features such as an early debut, smoking and seasonal or circadian fluctuations could be related to failure of ONS in refractory CCH.

Postdural puncture headache: impact of needle type, a randomized trial.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: The most common adverse event after a lumbar puncture (LP) is a headache: In anaesthesiology, well studied is the protective effect of atraumatic spinal needles, and they are routinely used. However, this is less well known in diagnostic LP, and neurologists use atraumatic needles in less than 2% of times. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to define the impact of needle type, atraumatic (Sprotte [S]) versus traumatic (Quincke [Q]) on postdural puncture headache (PDPH) incidence. STUDY DESIGN: The study is based on a prospective, randomized, and simple-blinded clinical trial. PATIENT SAMPLE: Patients older than 14 years were scheduled for a diagnostic or therapeutic LP. OUTCOME MEASURES: The outcome measure included the development of PDPH according to the International Headache Association criteria. METHODS: Patients fulfilling eligibility criteria were randomly allocated to one of two kinds of spinal needle: atraumatic or S-type or traumatic or Q-type. They were interviewed on days 2 and 7 about the development of PDPH. RESULTS: The incidence of PDPH was 22.43% with Q-type needle and 8.51% with S-type needle, p=.04. The duration of PDPH in patients in the S-type was 1 day or less, compared with a median of 4.14 days in the Q-type (p=.00). In the logistic regression model, the S-type needle together with the age of the patient were the only two statistically significant factors in the development of postlumbar puncture headache (PLPH), both of them being protective. CONCLUSIONS: We found a lower incidence of PDPH with atraumatic needles, and it was statistically significant compared with the traumatic needles. Our study confirms the effectiveness of the atraumatic needles to prevent PDPH.

Mielopatía cervical espondilótica aguda como causa de síndrome del ‘hombre en el barril / Cervical spine mielopathy as a cause of man-in-the-barrel syndrome

No disponible

No disponible

Estimulación dopaminérgica en los trastornos no motores de la enfermedad de Parkinson / Dopaminergic stimulation in the non-motor symptoms of Parkinson’s disease

Introducción y desarrollo. Los síntomas no motores de la enfermedad de Parkinson tienen un gran impacto en términos de calidad de vida. Frecuentemente se infradiagnostican y la experiencia clínica indica que la terapia dopaminérgica no sólo es ineficaz sino que en muchos casos es responsable de la aparición de algunos de estos síntomas. Diferentes estudios han llamado la atención sobre la implicación de las vías dopaminérgicas en la patogénesis de algunos síntomas no motores. Se ha observado que pueden experimentar fluctuaciones en relación a la estimulación dopaminérgica, generalmente en estados de wearing off, demostrándose una correlación significativa con las fluctuaciones motoras y una respuesta clínica con terapia dopaminérgica continua.Conclusión. Aunque revisiones recientes demuestran una evidencia insuficiente para el tratamiento de los síntomas no motores con la terapia dopaminérgica, la implicación de las vías dopaminérgicas en la etiopatogenia de algunos de estos trastornos y la observación clínica de que dichos síntomas experimentan fluctuaciones en relación a la estimulación dopaminérgica pulsátil, nos puede hacer replantear el posible papel de la terapia dopaminérgica en el tratamiento de estos síntomas (AU)

Introduction and development. The non-motor symptoms of Parkinson’s disease have a great impact in terms of quality of life. They are frequently underdiagnosed and clinical experience suggests that not only is dopamine therapy ineffective but that in many cases it is also responsible for the appearance of some of these symptoms. Different studies have drawn attention to the involvement of the dopaminergic pathways in the pathogenesis of some non-motor symptoms. It has been observed that they can undergo fluctuations in relation to dopaminergic stimulation, generally in wearing off states, while displaying a significant correlation with motor fluctuations and a clinical response with continuous dopaminergic therapy. Conclusions. Although recent reviews offer insufficient evidence for treatment of non-motor symptoms with dopaminergic therapy, involvement of the dopaminergic pathways in the aetiopathogenesis of some of these disorders and the clinical observation that such symptoms undergo fluctuations in relation to pulsatile dopaminergic stimulation may lead us to reconsider the possible role of dopaminergic therapy in the treatment of these symptoms (AU)