Temblor ortostático secundario al uso recreativo de disolventes / Orthostatic tremor secondary to recreational use of solvents

No disponible

[Study of the diagnostic agreement on headaches between neurology and primary care]. / Estudio de concordancia diagnostica en cefalea entre neurologia y atencion primaria.

INTRODUCTION: Headache as a symptom is a very common disease and one of the main reasons for consultation in primary care. AIM: To analyze the characteristics of patients referred from primary care to general neurology whose chief complaint was headache and/or neuralgia and diagnostic agreement. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Cross-sectional study of all patients referred from primary care; demographic/clinical variables were collected and diagnostic hypothesis by primary care and general neurology were compared by determining their agreement. RESULTS: 2,514 were referred from primary care patients (588 of them on a preferential basis); in 378 cases the reason for consultation was headache and/or neuralgia (average 42.46 years; 77.8% female). In 139 patients it was established only a semiological diagnostic and other episodic migraine predominated (49.79%), chronic tension headache (18.41%) and trigeminal neuralgia (12.13%). Since general neurology, the most common diagnoses were, respectively, 33.86%, 24.05% and 18.67%. A compatible kappa coefficient of 0.543 (p < 0.05) with a moderate agreement when considering only those patients referred from primary care to a specific diagnosis was obtained. CONCLUSIONS: Headaches are a very common reason for consultation in primary care (15%). The diagnostic agreement is moderate in our health sector so it is necessary to design training programs to help outline the criteria for referral to specialists and improve care for our patients.

TITLE: Estudio de concordancia diagnostica en cefalea entre neurologia y atencion primaria.Introduccion. La cefalea como sintoma es una patologia frecuente y uno de los principales motivos de consulta por parte de atencion primaria. Objetivo. Analizar las caracteristicas de los pacientes derivados desde atencion primaria a la consulta de neurologia general con cefalea o neuralgia como motivo de consulta, y la concordancia diagnostica. Pacientes y metodos. Estudio descriptivo transversal de todos los pacientes remitidos desde atencion primaria; se recogieron variables demograficas/clinicas y se compararon las hipotesis diagnosticas de atencion primaria y neurologia, determinando su concordancia. Resultados. Se remitieron desde atencion primaria 2.514 pacientes (588 de ellos con caracter preferente); en 378 casos el motivo de la consulta fue cefalea o neuralgia (42,46 años de media; el 77,8%, mujeres). En 139 pacientes se establecio tan solo un diagnostico semiologico y en el resto predominaron la migraña episodica (49,79%), la cefalea tensional cronica (18,41%) y la neuralgia del trigemino (12,13%). Desde neurologia, los diagnosticos mas frecuentes fueron, respectivamente, 33,86%, 24,05% y 18,67%. Se obtuvo un coeficiente kappa de 0,543 (p < 0,05), compatible con una concordancia moderada al considerar solo los pacientes remitidos desde atencion primaria con un diagnostico concreto. Conclusiones. Las cefaleas constituyen un motivo de consulta desde atencion primaria muy frecuente (15%). La concordancia diagnostica es moderada en nuestro sector sanitario, por lo que es necesario diseñar programas de formacion que ayuden a perfilar los criterios de derivacion al especialista y mejorar la atencion a nuestros pacientes.

[Does medication abuse in patients with chronic migraine influence the effectiveness of preventive treatment with topiramate?]. / ¿El abuso de farmacos en pacientes con migraña cronica influye en la efectividad del tratamiento preventivo con topiramato?

INTRODUCTION: Patients with chronic migraine (CM) and medication abuse are difficult to treat, and have a greater tendency towards chronification and a poorer quality of life than those with other types of headache. AIM: To evaluate whether the presence of medication abuse lowers the effectiveness of topiramate. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A series of patients with CM were grouped according to whether they met abuse criteria or not. They were advised to stop taking the drug that they were abusing. Treatment was adjusted to match their crises and preventive treatment with topiramate was established from the beginning. The number of days with headache and intense migraine in the previous month and at four months of treatment was evaluated. RESULTS: In all, 262 patients with CM criteria were selected and 167 (63.7%) of them fulfilled abuse criteria. In both groups there was a significant reduction in the number of days with headache/month and number of migraine attacks/month at the fourth month of treatment with topiramate. The percentage of reduction in the number of days with headache/month in CM without abuse was 59.3 ± 36.1%, and with abuse, 48.7 ± 41.7% (p = 0.0574). The percentage of reduction in the number of days with intense migraine/month in CM without abuse was 61.2%, and with abuse, 50% (p = 0.0224). Response rate according to the number of days with headache/month in CM without abuse was 69%, and with abuse, 57%. Response rate according to the number of intense migraines/month in CM without abuse was 76.8%, and in CM with abuse, 61% (p = 0.0097). CONCLUSIONS: Topiramate was effective in patients with CM with and without medication abuse, although effectiveness is lower in the latter case.

TITLE: El abuso de farmacos en pacientes con migraña cronica influye en la efectividad del tratamiento preventivo con topiramato?Introduccion. Los pacientes con migraña cronica (MC) y abuso de medicacion son dificiles de tratar y tienen peor calidad de vida que otros pacientes con migrañas. Objetivo. Valorar si la presencia de abuso de farmacos disminuye la efectividad del topiramato. Pacientes y metodos. Una serie de pacientes con MC fueron agrupados segun presentasen criterios de abuso o no abuso de farmacos. Se les aconsejo la supresion del farmaco del cual abusaban. Se ajusto el tratamiento de sus crisis y se inicio tratamiento preventivo desde el principio con topiramato. Se valoro el numero dias con cefalea y migrañas intensas en el mes previo y al cuarto mes de tratamiento. Resultados. Fueron seleccionados 262 pacientes con criterios de MC, y de ellos 167 (63,7%) cumplieron criterios de abuso. En ambos grupos hubo una reduccion significativa del numero de dias con cefalea/mes y numero de crisis de migraña/mes al cuarto mes de tratamiento con topiramato. Porcentaje de reduccion de dias con cefalea/mes en MC sin abuso, 59,3 ± 36,1%; y con abuso, 48,7 ± 41,7% (p = 0,0574). Porcentaje de reduccion de migrañas intensas/mes en MC sin abuso, 61,2%; y con abuso, 50% (p = 0,0224). Tasa de respondedores segun numero de dias con cefalea/mes en MC sin abuso, 69%; y con abuso, 57%. Tasa de respondedores segun numero de migrañas intensas/mes en MC sin abuso, 76,8%; y en MC con abuso, 61% (p = 0,0097). Conclusiones. El topiramato fue efectivo en pacientes con MC sin y con abuso de farmacos, aunque con menor efectividad en estos ultimos.

[A study to compare independent groups of patients with episodic migraine who were treated preventively with flunarizine or nadolol]. / Estudio comparativo de grupos independientes de pacientes con migrana episodica tratados preventivamente con flunaricina o nadolol.

INTRODUCTION. Flunarizine, with level of evidence A, and nadolol, with evidence level C, would be indicated as preventive treatment of migraine. Yet, no previous studies have been conducted to compare the effectiveness of the two drugs. AIM. To compare the effectiveness parameters in independent groups of patients treated preventively with one of the pharmaceuticals from the study, the same protocol being applied in both cases. PATIENTS AND METHODS. The subjects selected for the study were patients with episodic migraine (according to 2004 International Headache Society criteria) who had undergone preventive treatment for the first time, with flunarizine (5 mg/day) or nadolol (20-40 mg/day). The main effectiveness variables (reduction in the number of seizures at four months of treatment and responder rates) were analysed. RESULTS. The study included 227 patients who intended to receive treatment: 155 with flunarizine (80.5% females; mean age: 38.3 ± 12.1 years) and 72 with nadolol (63.8% females; mean age: 37.1 ± 12.0 years). The mean number of seizures prior to treatment was 6.09 ± 2.6 in the flunarizine group and 5.1 ± 1.7 in the nadolol group (p = 0.0079); at four months of treatment it was 2.61 ± 2.4 in the flunarizine group and 2.77 ± 2.4 in the nadolol group (p = NS). Percentage of reduction of migraines: 55.2% with flunarizine and 50.4% with nadolol (p = NS). The responder rate was 69% with flunarizine and 67% with nadolol (p = NS). The excellent response rate (reduction in the number of seizures by 75% or more) was 52.2% with flunarizine and 36.1% with nadolol (p = 0.0077). Percentage of adverse side effects: 48.3% with flunarizine and 25% with nadolol (p = 0.0009). The satisfaction rate was similar in both groups, 68%. CONCLUSIONS. Both flunarizine and nadolol proved to be effective in the preventive treatment of episodic migraine. Flunarizine is used more often in our milieu and was less well tolerated.

Pacientes con cefalea y abuso de medicación. Indicadores de respuesta al tratamiento ambulatorio / Patients with headache and medication aubse. Indicators of response to ambulatory treatment

Introducción. Los pacientes con cefalea y abuso de medicación (CAM) son difíciles de tratar, presentan mayor tendenciaa la cronificación y peor calidad de vida que los que cursan con otras cefaleas. Objetivo. Valorar los indicadores de respuesta de estos pacientes al tratamiento ambulatorio. Pacientes y métodos. De una serie de pacientes con migraña, seleccionamos aquéllos con criterios de CAM según el apéndice de la International Classification of the Headache Disease (ICHD-2) de 2006 y que nunca habían llevado previamente tratamiento. Ambulatoriamente, se les aconsejó la supresión del fármaco del que abusaban. Se ajustó el tratamiento de sus crisis con los fármacos más eficaces y se inició tratamiento preventivo desde el principio, con topiramato o flunaricina. Se agrupó a los pacientes según persistieran con CAM o no. Se valoró el número días con cefalea en el mes previo y al cuarto mes de tratamiento y la persistencia de abuso. Resultados. Cumplieron criterios de CAM 178 pacientes (edad media: 40,9 años; 88,7% mujeres). El 68,5% (122 pacientes) respondió y dejó de cumplir criterios de CAM tras el tratamiento. En ambos grupos, los tratamientos de sus crisis (triptanes, antiinflamatorios no esteroideos, analgésicos) y preventivos utilizados (topiramato o flunaricina) fueron similares. La media de días con cefalea previa al tratamiento fue de 18,52 en el grupo que respondió y de 20,87 (p = 0,0263) en el grupo que no respondió al tratamiento. Un 7,3% abandonó el tratamiento preventivo en el grupo de respondedores frente al 35% (p = 0,0001) en los no respondedores. Conclusiones. El mayor número de días con cefalea en el mes previo al tratamiento y el abandono del tratamiento preventivo fueron indicadores de mala evolución (AU)

Introduction. Patients with headache and medication abuse (HMA) are difficult to treat, have a greater tendency owards chronification and a poorer quality of life than those with other types of headache. Aim. To evaluate the indicators showing that these patients are responding to ambulatory treatment. Patients and methods. From a series of patients with migraine, we selected those who satisfied HMA criteria according to the appendix of the 2006 International Classification of the Headache Disease (ICHD-2) and who had never previously undergone treatment. As outpatients, they were advised to stop taking the drug that they were abusing. The treatment of their seizures was adjusted with the most efficient drugs and preventive treatment was started from the outset with topiramate or flunarizine. Patients were grouped according to whether they continued with HMA or not. Comparisons were made between the number of days with headache during the previous month and after four months of treatment and the persistence of abuse. Results. HMA criteria were met by 178 patients (mean age 40.9; 88.7% females). Results showed that 68.5% (122 patients) responded and no longer met HMA criteria after treatment. The treatment used for their seizures (triptans, nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs, analgesics) and preventive treatment (topiramate or flunarizine) were similar in both groups. The average number of days with headache prior to treatment was 18.52 in the group that responded and 20.87 (p = 0.0263) in the group that did not respond to treatment. In the group of responders 7.3% dropped out of preventive treatment compared with 35% (p = 0.0001) in the group of non-responders. Conclusions. A higher number of days with headache during the previous month and withdrawing from preventive treatment were indicators of a bad progression (AU)

[Patients with headache and medication abuse. Indicators of response to ambulatory treatment]. / Pacientes con cefalea y abuso de medicación. Indicadores de respuesta al tratamiento ambulatorio.

INTRODUCTION: Patients with headache and medication abuse (HMA) are difficult to treat, have a greater tendency towards chronification and a poorer quality of life than those with other types of headache. AIM. To evaluate the indicators showing that these patients are responding to ambulatory treatment. PATIENTS AND METHODS: From a series of patients with migraine, we selected those who satisfied HMA criteria according to the appendix of the 2006 International Classification of the Headache Disease (ICHD-2) and who had never previously undergone treatment. As outpatients, they were advised to stop taking the drug that they were abusing. The treatment of their seizures was adjusted with the most efficient drugs and preventive treatment was started from the outset with topiramate or flunarizine. Patients were grouped according to whether they continued with HMA or not. Comparisons were made between the number of days with headache during the previous month and after four months of treatment and the persistence of abuse. RESULTS: HMA criteria were met by 178 patients (mean age 40.9; 88.7% females). Results showed that 68.5% (122 patients) responded and no longer met HMA criteria after treatment. The treatment used for their seizures (triptans, nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs, analgesics) and preventive treatment (topiramate or flunarizine) were similar in both groups. The average number of days with headache prior to treatment was 18.52 in the group that responded and 20.87 (p = 0.0263) in the group that did not respond to treatment. In the group of responders 7.3% dropped out of preventive treatment compared with 35% (p = 0.0001) in the group of non-responders. CONCLUSIONS: A higher number of days with headache during the previous month and withdrawing from preventive treatment were indicators of a bad progression.

[Topiramate in chronic daily headache due to migraine]. / Topiramato en cefalea crónica diaria por migraña.

INTRODUCTION: Chronic daily headache (CDH) includes primary headaches that last more than four hours with a frequency equal or superior to 15 days a month over the last three months. It has a prevalence of 4-5% in the general population and is a frequent reason for visiting the physician in headache units. AIM: To evaluate the effectiveness of topiramate, as the primary drug, in CDH due to probable chronic migraine with or without medication abuse. PATIENTS AND METHODS: From the 447 patients with migraine in our database, we selected those: a) satisfying Silberstein criteria for CDH; b) that had not followed prior prophylactic treatment; and c) who were treated with topiramate as the primary drug. The mean number of days with headache and bouts of severe migraine in the fourth month of treatment using topiramate as compared to the month preceding treatment, as well as the percentage of responses and the rate of respondents in the fourth month were all analysed. RESULTS: Eighty-three patients (88% females) with a mean age of 38.0 +/- 14.13 years were selected. Medication abuse was reported in 44% of cases. At the fourth month of treatment, the mean number of days with headache dropped significantly from 20.8 to 7.9 (p < 0.0001) and the mean number of bouts of severe migraine diminished from 4.4 to 1.7 (p < 0.0001). The rate of respondents was 72%. Medication abuse continued in 14% of cases. Side effects were produced in 58% of patients and the dropout rate was 24%. CONCLUSIONS: Topiramate proved to be effective in the treatment of CDH due to probable chronic migraine and with probable medication abuse in de novo migraine patients.

Topiramato en cefalea crónica diaria por migraña / Topiramate in chronic daily headache due to migraine

La cefalea crónica diaria (CCD) incluye aquellas cefaleas primarias de más de cuatro horas de duracióny frecuencia igual o superior a 15 días al mes en los últimos tres meses. Presenta una prevalencia del 4-5% entre la población general y es un motivo frecuente de consulta en las unidades de cefaleas. Objetivo. Valorar la efectividad de topiramato, como primer fármaco, en la CCD por probable migraña crónica con o sin abuso de fármacos. Pacientes y métodos. De nuestra base de datos de 447 pacientes con migraña se seleccionaron aquellos: a) con criterios de Silberstein de CCD, b) queno habían llevado un tratamiento profiláctico previo, y c) tratados con topiramato como primer fármaco. Se analizaron la media de días con cefalea y crisis de migraña intensa en el cuarto mes de tratamiento con topiramato en relación con el mes previoal tratamiento, los porcentajes de respuesta y la tasa de respondedores en el cuarto mes. Resultados. Se seleccionaron 83 pacientes (88% de mujeres) con una edad media de 38,0 ± 14,13 años. El 44% abusaba de fármacos. Al cuarto mes de tratamiento, la media de días con cefalea disminuyó significativamente de 20,8 a 7,9 (p < 0,0001) y la medía de crisis de migrañaintensa, de 4,4 a 1,7 (p < 0,0001). La tasa de respondedores fue del 72%. Un 14% continuó abusando de los fármacos. Se produjeron efectos adversos en el 58% de pacientes y hubo un 24% de abandonos. Conclusión. El topiramato se mostró efectivo en el tratamiento de la CCD por probable migraña crónica y con probable abuso de fármacos en pacientes migrañosos de novo

Chronic daily headache (CDH) includes primary headaches that last more than four hours with afrequency equal or superior to 15 days a month over the last three months. It has a prevalence of 4-5% in the general population and is a frequent reason for visiting the physician in headache units. Aim. To evaluate the effectiveness of topiramate, as theprimary drug, in CDH due to probable chronic migraine with or without medication abuse. Patients and methods. From the 447 patients with migraine in our database, we selected those: a) satisfying Silberstein criteria for CDH; b) that had not followed prior prophylactic treatment; and c) who were treated with topiramate as the primary drug. The mean number of days with headache and bouts of severe migraine in the fourth month of treatment using topiramate as compared to the monthpreceding treatment, as well as the percentage of responses and the rate of respondents in the fourth month were all analysed.Results. Eighty-three patients (88% females) with a mean age of 38.0 ± 14.13 years were selected. Medication abuse was reported in 44% of cases. At the fourth month of treatment, the mean number of days with headache dropped significantly from20.8 to 7.9 (p < 0.0001) and the mean number of bouts of severe migraine diminished from 4.4 to 1.7 (p < 0.0001). The rate of respondents was 72%. Medication abuse continued in 14% of cases. Side effects were produced in 58% of patients and thedropout rate was 24%. Conclusions. Topiramate proved to be effective in the treatment of CDH due to probable chronic migraine and with probable medication abuse in de novo migraine patients

[Treatment of neuropathic pain with gabapentin ++]. / Tratamiento del dolor neuropático con gabapentina.

INTRODUCTION: The antiepileptic drug gabapentin has begun to be used successfully in some cases of neuropathic pain. Its mechanism of action is still unknown, but seems to be related to a positive effect on the synthesis and liberation of the neurotransmitter GABA. CLINICAL CASES: Based on the observations of other authors, we used this drug in dosage varying between 900 and 1,200 mg/day, in three patients with neuropathic pain, of both central and peripheral origin, and in whom the usual treatments had been unsatisfactory or could not be tolerated because of side-effects. The patients had been diagnosed as having trigeminal neuralgia, post-herpetic neuralgia in the area of the first branch of the trigeminal nerve and a thalamic infarct which gave rise to a contralateral Déjerine-Roussy syndrome, respectively. In all three cases, administration of gabapentin was followed by such a striking improvement of the pain that co-adjuvant treatment could be reduced or stopped, with excellent tolerance and a minimal incidence of side-effects. CONCLUSIONS: Gabapentin should be borne in mind in the treatment of this type of pain, particularly when the usual treatment cannot be given or is insufficient to control pain, especially in elderly patients in whom there is often reduced tolerance of drugs.

[Myoclonic encephalopathy induced by diclofenac treatment]. / Encefalopatía mioclónica originada por el tratamiento con diclofenac.

Some non-steroid anti-inflammatory drugs, and especially diclofenac, may, in some susceptible patients bring about the appearance of segmentary myoclonic symptoms, which in some cases where there is kidney failure may cause real myoclonic encephalopathy. We present the case of a patient admitted into the nephrology service suffering from prerenal kidney failure as a result of dehydration. Once her kidney problems had been overcome and analytical parameters normalized, during treatment with diclofenac for inflammation of the lower left extremity arthritic in origin, she showed generalized myoclonic symptoms of action and attitude especially in the upper extremities. Neurologic examination showed no abnormalities other than certain drowsiness. General analysis and kidney function were normal, as was brain CT scan, EEG showed only a general tendency towards slowing down. Myoclonic symptoms completely disappeared in the next 24 hours after giving diclofenac up, the patient remaining neurologically asymptomatic and not showing a similar clinical picture in any subsequent check-up.

[Silent myocardial ischemia in patients with transient ischemic attacks]. / Isquemia miocárdica silente en pacientes diagnosticados de accidente isquémico transitorio.

Given evidence that ischemic heart disease is the most frequent cause of death in patients with cerebrovascular disease, we used ergometrics to screen 80 patients with TIA for silent myocardial ischemia (SMI) at the neurological unit of Hospital Clínico Universitario in Zaragoza, Spain. The patients were compared with a control group of 80 with no signs of heart disease. Neither the patients nor the controls had ever shown clinical signs of coronary ischemia and their baseline electrocardiograms were normal. Stress test results were positive in 25 (31%) of the TIA patients, and in 4 (5%) (p < 0.001) of the controls, showing that the prevalence of SMI is significantly higher in TIA patients than in the general population. Hiperlipidemia (75% testing positive versus 43% negative, p < 0.01) and diabetes (31% testing positive versus 13% negative, p < 0.01) were the risk factors statistically related with a positive stress test.

[Giant aneurysms of the basilar artery. Six cases]. / Aneurismas gigantes del tronco basilar. A propósito de 6 casos.

The authors describe 6 cases of giant aneurysm of the basilar artery diagnosed in the Neurology Department of the Hospital Clínico Universitario of Zaragoza over the last 8 years by cerebral CT, arteriography and NMR with the clinical, diagnostic, and evolutive features of the same being reported. In 2 cases the clinical manifestations initiated as subarachnoid hemorrhage, in another two as AIT, in the fifth case as cerebral infarction and in the sixth case with pseudotumoral clinical manifestations with a necropsy study being available in the latter case. Three of the 6 patients died and of the remaining three only one was, successfully operated on. Anatomopathologic, clinical, therapeutic and diagnostic aspects of giant aneurysms of the basilar trunk are also reviewed with NMR being recommended as the technique of choice in diagnosis.