Prevention of Perioperative Abdominal Migraine in a Patient Undergoing Spinal Fusion: A Case Report.

Abdominal migraine is a variant of migraine headaches characterized by episodic attacks of severe abdominal pain with migrainous features, including anorexia, nausea, vomiting, and pallor. It is more commonly diagnosed in children rather than adults. We describe a 74-year-old patient with progressively worsening back pain, severe neurogenic claudication, and a history of opioid-triggered abdominal migraine. As a precautionary measure, a perioperative opioid-sparing treatment plan was devised to prevent abdominal migraine while the patient underwent elective lumbar fusion surgery. Opioid-sparing treatment plans may enable similar patients to undergo surgery without experiencing perioperative abdominal migraines.

Acupuncture and Its Role in the Treatment of Migraine Headaches.

Acupuncture is a form of traditional Chinese medicine that is performed by placing needles or pressure in specific locations on a patient's skin to achieve a therapeutic effect. Although used to treat a variety of disorders, one of the most common applications of acupuncture is to treat chronic pain, especially headache and migraine pain. Migraines are difficult to treat, and pharmacotherapies are often the first line of treatment, although these options have many unwanted side effects, such as exacerbation of headache pain in those with chronic migraine. Many complimentary and integrative therapies are available to treat migraine (including nutraceuticals, yoga, tai chi, and biofeedback), among which acupuncture as a treatment is gaining increasing attention. In this review, we provide an overview of the current understanding of both acupuncture and migraine and of current research investigating the effectiveness of acupuncture in treating migraine and chronic migraine.

Naldemedine for the Use of Management of Opioid Induced Constipation.

Purpose of Review: Opioid medications are a pillar of acute and chronic analgesia, though their use is often accompanied by side-effects, such as opioid-induced constipation. Unfortunately, tolerance rarely develops to this untoward side effect. This review presents the background, evidence, and indications for the use of Naldemedine (Brand name Symproic 0.2 mg tablets) to treat opioid-induced constipation. Recent Findings: Opioids are often used for the treatment of acute and chronic analgesia. Outside of the central effect they exert, they also interact with peripheral receptors, resulting in opioid-induced constipation, the commonest of side effects of chronic opioid usage. Complications include colonic distention, ileus, perforation, and can progress to other serious bowel complications, which can result in hospitalization and fatal events.For the most part, laxatives and other anti-constipation therapies are often inefficient and require intervention directed at the root cause, such as peripheral mu receptor agonists, including methylnaltrexone, naloxegol, and naldemedine. Naldemedine is the most recent to gain FDA approval of the group.An antagonist of Mu, Kappa, and Delta peripheral receptors, Naldemedine, is the only drug to counteract all three receptor classes. It was shown to be both safe and effective when compared with placebo. No data exists to compare its efficacy to that of other members of the group. Summary: Opioids are frequently used in the management of acute and chronic pain. The most common of the side effects is opioid-induced constipation, secondary to the peripheral activity of opioids. Naldemedine is an FDA-approved, once-daily oral tablet that counteracts this side effect by antagonizing mu, kappa, and delta-opioid receptors and has been shown to be safe and effective. Further investigation including head-to-head clinical trials are required to evaluate the relative efficacy of naldemedine compare with other peripheral opiate receptor antagonists.

Effects of implantation of a deep brain stimulation device on patient weight in Parkinson's disease and essential tremor.

OBJECTIVE: Deep brain stimulation (DBS) is a well-established therapy for treating neurological movement disorders. Some patients who have received DBS therapy have noticed significant weight gain. Further investigation into correlations between patient characteristics and weight gain following DBS device implantation, which the authors here have done, will provide physicians with useful clinical information. METHODS: The authors performed a retrospective study of patients with Parkinson's disease (PD) and essential tremor (ET) who had received DBS therapy in the period from 2012 to 2017. Patient weights had been recorded preoperatively and at 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively. These data were used to compare patient characteristics, including diagnosis, body mass index (BMI), sex, levodopa equivalent dose (LED), and change in Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) score. For PD patients, a quantile multivariate regression analysis was used to examine whether significant correlations existed between several of these patient characteristics, as well as age and weight gain following implantation. RESULTS: PD patients had gained a significant amount of weight at 3 months (mean [SE] 2.66 [0.428] kg, p < 0.001), 6 months (3.64 [0.492] kg, p < 0.001), and 12 months (4.18 [0.540] kg, p < 0.001) after DBS placement. Patients who had undergone subthalamic nucleus (STN) DBS device placement gained, on average, more weight than the patients with globus pallidus internus (GPi) placement at both 6 months (mean 2.558 [1.020] kg, p = 0.01) and 12 months (2.358 [1.130] kg, p = 0.04). BMI in the STN cohort was greater than that in the GPi cohort at 6 months (mean difference [SE] 2.60 [1.127] kg/m2, p = 0.02) and at 12 months (2.36 [1.112] kg/m2, p = 0.04). A reduction in LED was negatively correlated with weight change at 6 months (r = -0.33, p < 0.001) and 12 months (r = -0.41, p < 0.001). There was no weight gain correlated with DBS therapy for ET. CONCLUSIONS: PD patients experienced a significant change in weight over time after DBS therapy, whereas ET patients did not. PD patients with an STN target site experienced greater weight gain, on average, than those with a GPi target site. Furthermore, there was a significant increase in BMI at 6 and 12 months in patients with an STN target compared to that in patients with a GPi target. PD patients whose LED was reduced after DBS gained more weight at 6 and 12 months after surgery than the patients whose LED was kept at the same level or increased.