A Randomized, Double-Blinded, Placebo-Controlled, Cross Over Study Evaluating the Efficacy and Safety of Timolol Ophthalmic Solution as an Acute Treatment of Migraine.

INTRODUCTION: Daily oral beta-adrenoreceptor antagonist has been shown to be effective in preventing migraine headaches. Timolol 0.5% ophthalmic solution is a non-selective beta-adrenoreceptor antagonist, where the primary use is for glaucoma. There have been case reports that timolol is effective in aborting or improving an acute migraine headache. The objective of this study was to assess the efficacy (decrease of ≥ 50% in pain scale at 120 minutes) of timolol 0.5% ophthalmic solution compared to placebo in acute treatment of migraine headache. METHODS: We performed a randomized, double-blind, crossover, placebo-controlled, study. Study entry criteria required subjects to have one to eight migraine episodes per month. The primary outcome was comparison of the change in a visual analog pain scale (VAS) at 120 minutes after taking the study medication. Study subjects were given a pain scale with a range of 1 (no pain) to 10 (most severe pain) to complete after onset of migraine but before administration of study drops and 120 minutes after administration of study drops. Improvement was defined as a ≥ 50% decrease in pain scale. RESULTS: Nineteen subjects completed the study and were used for analysis. The primary outcome changes in pain scale, 120 minutes after dose, showed a similar decrease for placebo and drug with a slightly wider 95% CI for placebo. Six subjects in each arm experienced a ≥ 50% decrease in pain scale. CONCLUSION: These results support that timolol 0.5% ophthalmic solution is not an efficacious treatment for acute migraine headache.

Intravenous anesthesia in treatment of nonconvulsive status epilepticus: Characteristics and outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: To determine factors associated with continuous anesthetic drug (IVAD) use in nonconvulsive status epilepticus (NCSE). METHODS: Retrospective cohort study of patients who met clinical and EEG criteria of NCSE from 2009 to 2014 at a tertiary academic medical center. Patients were categorized according to IVAD use. Outcome variables were response to treatment and in-hospital death. We used descriptive analyses for baseline characteristics and outcome variable differences among patients who did and did not receive IVAD. RESULTS: Forty-three patients had a total of 45 NCSE episodes. IVAD was used in 69% of the episodes. Patients treated with IVAD were younger (53.1 ± 14.1 vs 64.1 ± 13.3, p = 0.019). The episodes treated with IVAD occurred more frequently in patients with an acute neurologic pathology (58% vs 21%, p = 0.024) and those presenting in a coma (39% vs 7%, p = 0.030). NCSE resolved in 74% of the patients who received IVAD. Duration of NCSE did not differ significantly by treatment group. There were total 13 in-hospital deaths: ten in IVAD users vs three in the no-IVAD group (p > 0.05). Only one in-hospital death appeared to be a direct consequence of IVAD use. Mortality was more common among episodes that were not treated according to the published status epilepticus treatment guidelines compared to the episodes where guidelines were followed. CONCLUSION: Our findings showed that factors such as younger age, acute neurologic pathology and coma at presentation were associated with IVAD use in patients with NCSE. These factors should be controlled in the future outcome and effectiveness studies to determine the effect of IVAD use on outcome of NCSE.

A Case Report of Thunderclap Headache with Sub-arachnoid Hemorrhage and Negative Angiography: A Review of Call-Fleming Syndrome and the use of Transcranial Dopplers in Predicting Morbidity.

INTRODUCTION: We present a case report in a patient with severe, recurrent, thunderclap with computed tomography (CT) evidence of subarachnoid blood and negative work-up for aneurysm. This case is an example of Call-Fleming syndrome with subarachnoid hemorrhage in which transcranial Doppler (TCD) was used for monitoring of cerebral vasoconstriction when angiography did not evidence vasoconstriction. We will review Call-Fleming syndrome and the utility of transcranial doppler imaging to assess cerebral vasoconstriction. METHODS: A review of the current literature regarding diagnostics, treatment, and morbidity in Call-Fleming (reversible cerebral vasoconstriction syndrome) as well as a review of the data using transcranial color-coded sonography and transcranial doppler imaging to assess vasospasm in these cases. RESULTS: The patient underwent computed tomography angiography (CTA) and venography (CTV), catheter angiography, lumbar puncture, and vasculitis work-up which were all negative. His magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) showed T2 weighted and fluid attenuation inversion recovery (FLAIR) hyper-intensities in the posterior frontal lobes as well as subarachnoid blood along bilateral occipital convexities. TCDs were obtained which showed elevated mean velocities. CONCLUSION: The use of bedside transcranial doppler imaging is a non-invasive means of assessing vasospasm in Call-Fleming syndrome; even in cases where angiography is negative. Determining the degree of vasospasm based on the data in subarachnoid hemorrhage, we are able to predict a patient's risk of complications related to vasospasm including reversible posterior leukoencephalopathy and ischemic events.