Update in the understanding of new daily persistent headache.

Background Accumulating evidence suggests various specific triggers may lead to new daily persistent headache (NDPH)-like presentations, suggesting that new daily persistent headache is a heterogenous syndrome, and challenging the concept that new daily persistent headache is a primary headache disorder.Method We searched the PubMed database up to August 2022 for keywords including persistent daily headache with both primary and secondary etiologies. We summarized the literature and provided a narrative review of the clinical presentation, diagnostic work-ups, possible pathophysiology, treatment response, and clinical outcomes.Results and conclusion New daily persistent headache is a controversial but clinically important topic. New daily persistent headache is likely not a single entity but a syndrome with different etiologies. The issue with past studies of new daily persistent headache is that patients with different etiologies/subtypes were pooled together. Different studies may investigate distinct subsets of patients, which renders the inter-study comparison, both positive and negative results, difficult. The identification (and removal) of a specific trigger might provide the opportunity for clinical improvement in certain patients, even when the disease has lasted for months or years. Nonetheless, if there is a specific trigger, it remains unknown or unidentified for a great proportion of the patients. We need to continue to study this unique headache population to better understand underlying pathogenesis and, most importantly, to establish effective treatment strategies that hopefully resolve the continuous cycle of pain.

Prevalence and treatment of typical and atypical headaches in patients with Chiari I malformation: A meta-analysis and literature review.

OBJECTIVE: A meta-analysis was conducted to analyze the incidence of typical and atypical headaches and outcomes following various treatments in patients with Chiari I malformation. BACKGROUND: Headache is the most common symptom of Chiari malformation, which can be divided into typical and atypical subgroups to facilitate management. Much controversy surrounds the etiology, prevalence and optimal therapeutic approach for both types of headaches. METHOD: We identified relevant studies published before 30 July 2022, with an electronic search of numerous literature databases. The results of this study were reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement. RESULT: A total of 1913 Chiari malformation type I CIM patients were identified, 78% of whom presented with headache, within this group cephalgia was typical in 48% and atypical in 29% of patients, and migraine was the most common type of atypical headache. The ratio of typical/atypical headaches with international classification of headache disorders diagnosis was 1.53, and without international classification of headache disorders diagnosis was 1.56, respectively. The pooled improvement rates of typical headaches following conservative treatment, extradural decompression and intradural decompression were 69%, 88%, and 92%, respectively. The corresponding improvement rates for atypical headaches were 70%, 57.47%, and 69%, respectively. The complication rate in extradural decompression group was significantly lower than in intradural decompression group (RR, 0.31; 95% CI: 0.06-1.59, I2 = 50%, P = 0.14). Low reoperation rates were observed for refractory headaches in extradural decompression and intradural decompression groups (1%). CONCLUSION: The International Classification of Headache Disorders can assist in screening atypical headaches. extradural decompression is preferred for typical headaches, while conservative therapy is optimal for atypical headaches. A definite correlation exists between atypical headaches and Chiari Malformation Type I patients with higher prevalence than in the general population. Importantly, decompression is effective in relieving headaches in this particular patient population.

New daily persistent headache after SARS-CoV-2 infection in Latin America: a cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Persistent headache is a frequent symptom after coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and there is currently limited knowledge about its clinical spectrum and predisposing factors. A subset of patients may be experiencing new daily persistent headache (NDPH) after COVID-19, which is among the most treatment-refractory primary headache syndromes. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study in Latin America to characterize individuals with persistent headache after severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and to identify factors associated with NDPH. Participants over 18 years old who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 infection and reported persistent headache among their symptoms completed an online survey that included demographics, past medical history, persistent headache clinical characteristics, and COVID-19 vaccination status. Based on participants' responses, NDPH diagnostic criteria were used to group participants into NDPH and non-NDPH groups. Participant data was summarized by descriptive statistics. Student's t and Mann-Whitney U tests were used according to the distribution of quantitative variables. For categorical variables, Pearson's chi-square and Fisher's exact tests were used according to the size of expected frequencies. Binomial logistic regression using the backward stepwise selection method was performed to identify factors associated with NDPH. RESULTS: Four hundred and twenty-one participants from 11 Latin American countries met the inclusion criteria. One in four participants met the NDPH diagnostic criteria. The mean age was 40 years, with most participants being female (82%). Over 90% of the participants reported having had mild/moderate COVID-19. Most participants had a history of headache before developing COVID-19 (58%), mainly migraine type (32%). The most predominant clinical characteristics in the NDPH group were occipital location, severe/unbearable intensity, burning character, and radiating pain (p < 0.05). A higher proportion of anxiety symptoms, sleep problems, myalgia, mental fog, paresthesia, nausea, sweating of the face or forehead, and ageusia or hypogeusia as concomitant symptoms were reported in participants with NDPH (p < 0.05). Palpebral edema as a concomitant symptom during the acute phase of COVID-19, occipital location, and burning character of the headache were risk factors associated with NDPH. CONCLUSION: This is the first study in Latin America that explored the clinical spectrum of NDPH after SARS-CoV-2 infection and its associated factors. Clinical evaluation of COVID-19 patients presenting with persistent headache should take into consideration NDPH.

Solitary Sphenoid Sinus Lesion Presenting as Chronic Headache.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Headache is a common symptom with etiologies that are difficult to distinguish, 1 of which is sinusitis. A solitary sphenoid lesion, which is rare, can also cause acute or chronic headaches. The authors investigated whether endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS) for solitary sphenoid lesions could reduce headache symptoms. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: The authors reviewed the charts of patients who underwent ESS from 2012 to 2017, whose main symptom was a chronic headache for several years. There were no remarkable pathologic findings in the nasal cavity upon endoscopic examination. Medications for reducing headaches had transient effect. Brain magnetic resonance imaging or computed tomography scans showed a solitary sphenoid lesion and the patients underwent ESS by the same otolaryngologist. In total, 16 out of 547 ESS cases that met the above conditions were included in this study. The authors evaluated the duration, character, and degree of the headaches pre- and post-operatively. The authors also determined if there was a correlation between headaches, sphenoidal lesions, and pathologic outcomes. RESULTS: There were significant improvements in headaches after surgery. The pre- and post-operative mean visual analog scale score for headaches was 7.27 ±â€Š1.67 and 3.80 ±â€Š1.82, respectively. The pathologic outcomes revealed chronic inflammation in 11 patients, nasal polyp in 1 patient, inverted papilloma in 1 patient, and fungal infections in 3 patients, but there was no clinical correlation between the headache, lesion site, and pathology. CONCLUSIONS: A solitary sphenoid lesion can be the cause of acute or chronic headaches. Headaches from a solitary sphenoid sinus lesion, which were not controlled by medical treatments, could be improved by surgical procedures.

SUNCT/SUNA: Case series presenting in an orofacial pain clinic.

AIM: Little is known about short-lasting unilateral neuralgiform headache attacks with conjunctival injection and tearing (SUNCT) and short-lasting unilateral neuralgiform headache attacks with cranial autonomic symptoms (SUNA). We present our experience with SUNCT/SUNA patients to aid identification and management of these disorders. METHODS: A retrospective review of patient records of one orofacial pain clinic was performed. Inclusion criteria was a diagnosis of SUNCT/SUNA confirmed with at least one follow-up visit. RESULTS: Six of the 2464 new patients seen between 2015-2018 met the selection criteria (SUNCT n = 2, SUNA n = 4). Gender distribution was one male to one female and average age of diagnosis was 52 years (range 26-62). Attacks were located in the V1/V2 trigeminal distributions, and five patients reported associated intraoral pain. Pain quality was sharp, shooting, and burning with two patients reporting "numbness". Pain was moderate-severe in intensity, with daily episodes that typically lasted for seconds. Common autonomic features were lacrimation, conjunctival injection, rhinorrhea, and flushing. Frequent triggers were touching the nose or a specific intraoral area. Lamotrigine and gabapentin were commonly used as initial therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Differentiating between SUNCT/SUNA does not appear to be clinically relevant. Presenting symptoms were consistent with those published, except 5/6 patients describing intraoral pain and two patients describing paresthesia.

Body site distribution of pediatric-onset morphea and association with extracutaneous manifestations.

BACKGROUND: The distribution of pediatric-onset morphea and site-based likelihood for extracutaneous complications has not been well characterized. OBJECTIVE: To characterize the lesional distribution of pediatric-onset morphea and to determine the sites with the highest association of extracutaneous manifestations. METHODS: A retrospective cross-sectional study was performed. Using clinical photographs, morphea lesions were mapped onto body diagrams using customized software. RESULTS: A total of 823 patients with 2522 lesions were included. Lesions were more frequent on the superior (vs inferior) anterior aspect of the head and extensor (vs flexor) extremities. Linear morphea lesions were more likely on the head and neck, whereas plaque and generalized morphea lesions were more likely on the trunk. Musculoskeletal complications were more likely with lesions on the extensor (vs flexor) extremity (odds ratio [OR], 2.0; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.2-3.4), whereas neurologic manifestations were more likely with lesions on the anterior (vs posterior) (OR, 2.8; 95% CI, 1.7-4.6) and superior (vs inferior) aspect of the head (OR, 2.3; 95% CI, 1.6-3.4). LIMITATIONS: Retrospective nature and the inclusion of only patients with clinical photographs. CONCLUSION: The distribution of pediatric-onset morphea is not random and varies with body site and within individual body sites. The risk stratification of extracutaneous manifestations by body site may inform decisions about screening for extracutaneous manifestations, although prospective studies are needed.

Chronic disabling postpartum headache after unintentional dural puncture during epidural anaesthesia: a prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Unintentional dural puncture with an epidural needle complicates approximately 1% of epidural anaesthetics and causes an acute headache in 60-80% of these patients. Several retrospective studies suggest an increased risk of chronic headache. We assessed the relationship between unintentional dural puncture and chronic disabling headache, defined as one or more functionally limiting headaches within a 2-week interval ending 2, 6, and 12 months postpartum. METHODS: In this prospective observational study, parturients who experienced unintentional dural puncture were matched 1:4 with control patients. Patients completed questionnaires regarding characteristics of headache and back pain pre-pregnancy, during pregnancy, immediately postpartum, and at 2, 6, and 12 months postpartum. The primary outcome was prevalence of disabling headache in the past 2 weeks, assessed at 2 months postpartum. Secondary outcomes included prevalence and characteristics of headache and back pain at these time points. RESULTS: We enrolled 99 patients. At 2 and 6 months postpartum, the prevalence of disabling headache was greater among patients with unintentional dural puncture than matched controls (2 months, 74% vs 38%, relative risk 1.9, 95% confidence interval 1.2-2.9, P=0.009; 6 months, 56% vs 25%, relative risk 2.1, 95% confidence interval 1.1-4.0, P=0.033). There was no difference in the prevalence of back pain at any time point. CONCLUSIONS: Our prospective trial confirms retrospective studies that chronic headache is more prevalent among women who experienced unintentional dural puncture compared with controls who received uncomplicated neuraxial anaesthesia. This finding has implications for the. patient consent process and recommendations for long-term follow-up of patients who experience unintentional dural puncture.

New daily persistent headache after SARS-CoV-2 infection: a report of two cases.

BACKGROUND: The 2019 Coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) is a novel respiratory virus which causes Coronavirus Disease19 (COVID-19). Although the predominant clinical picture of COVID-19 is represented by respiratory symptoms, neurological manifestations are being increasingly recognized. Headache, in particular migraine-like and tension types, has been largely reported in patients suffering from COVID-19 both in the acute and the healing phase of the infection. New daily persistent headache (NDPH) is a primary headache characterized by persistent and daily painful symptoms, with pain becoming continuous and non-remitting within 24 h, and lasting more than 3 months. Even though an increasing number of reports describe patients who develop a persistent headache, diagnosis of NPDH has been rarely explored in the context of COVID-19. METHODS: Two patients with persistent headache and Sars-CoV-2 infection were identified. Both underwent a full clinical and neuroradiological evaluation. Blood sample with inflammatory biomarkers search was also performed. RESULTS: According to International Classifications of Headache Disorders diagnosis of probable new daily persistent headache was made. The treatment with high doses of steroids was associated with relief of symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: Our report described two cases of probable NDPH due to SARS-CoV-2 infection. Clinical evaluation of COVID-19 patients presenting with persistent headache should take into consideration NDPH. Given the supposed major role for neuroinflammation in the genesis of Sars-CoV-2-driven NDPH, immunomodulatory therapy should be promptly started. In line with this hypothesis, we obtained a good therapeutic response to short-term high dose of corticosteroids.

Facemask headache: a new nosographic entity among healthcare providers in COVID-19 era.

BACKGROUND: SARS-CoV-2 is a novel infectious agent causing coronavirus disease 2019, which has been declared as pandemic in March 2020. Personal protective equipment has been mandatory for healthcare workers in order to contain the outbreak of pandemic disease. Mild neurological disturbances such as headache have been related to the extensive utilization of facemask. This study aims to examine headache variations related to the intensive utilization of facemask among a cohort of healthcare professionals in a setting of low-medium risk of exposure to SARS-CoV-2. METHODS: This is a cross-sectional study among healthcare providers from different hospital and clinics in Italy. Each participant completed a specifically designed self-administered questionnaire. Headache features and outcome measures' change from baseline were evaluated over a 4-month period, in which wearing facemask has become mandatory for Italian healthcare workers. RESULTS: A total of 400 healthcare providers completed the questionnaire, 383 of them met the inclusion criteria. The majority were doctors, with a mean age of 33.4 ± 9.2 years old. Among 166/383 subjects, who were headache free at baseline, 44 (26.5%) developed de novo headache. Furthermore, 217/383 reported a previous diagnosis of primary headache disorder: 137 were affected by migraine and 80 had tension-type headache. A proportion (31.3%) of these primary headache sufferers experienced worsening of their pre-existing headache disorder, mainly for migraine frequency and attack mean duration. CONCLUSIONS: Our data showed the appearance of de novo associated facemask headache in previous headache-free subjects and an exacerbation of pre-existing primary headache disorders, mostly experienced by people with migraine disease.

Diagnosis and Management of Headache: A Review.

IMPORTANCE: Approximately 90% of people in the US experience headache during their lifetime. Migraine is the second leading cause of years lived with disability worldwide. OBSERVATIONS: Primary headache disorders are defined as headaches that are unrelated to an underlying medical condition and are categorized into 4 groups: migraine, tension-type headache, trigeminal autonomic cephalalgias, and other primary headache disorders. Studies evaluating prevalence in more than 100 000 people reported that tension-type headache affected 38% of the population, while migraine affected 12% and was the most disabling. Secondary headache disorders are defined as headaches due to an underlying medical condition and are classified according to whether they are due to vascular, neoplastic, infectious, or intracranial pressure/volume causes. Patients presenting with headache should be evaluated to determine whether their headache is most likely a primary or a secondary headache disorder. They should be evaluated for symptoms or signs that suggest an urgent medical problem such as an abrupt onset, neurologic signs, age 50 years and older, presence of cancer or immunosuppression, and provocation by physical activities or postural changes. Acute migraine treatment includes acetaminophen, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and combination products that include caffeine. Patients not responsive to these treatments may require migraine-specific treatments including triptans (5-HT1B/D agonists), which eliminate pain in 20% to 30% of patients by 2 hours, but are accompanied by adverse effects such as transient flushing, tightness, or tingling in the upper body in 25% of patients. Patients with or at high risk for cardiovascular disease should avoid triptans because of vasoconstrictive properties. Acute treatments with gepants, antagonists to receptors for the inflammatory neuropeptide calcitonin gene-related peptide, such as rimegepant or ubrogepant, can eliminate headache symptoms for 2 hours in 20% of patients but have adverse effects of nausea and dry mouth in 1% to 4% of patients. A 5-HT1F agonist, lasmiditan, is also available for acute migraine treatment and appears safe in patients with cardiovascular risk factors. Preventive treatments include antihypertensives, antiepileptics, antidepressants, calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibodies, and onabotulinumtoxinA, which reduce migraine by 1 to 3 days per month relative to placebo. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Headache disorders affect approximately 90% of people during their lifetime. Among primary headache disorders, migraine is most debilitating and can be treated acutely with analgesics, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, triptans, gepants, and lasmiditan.

Chronic orofacial pain.

While pain chronicity in general has been defined as pain lasting for more than 3 months, this definition is not useful in orofacial pain (OFP) and headache (HA). Instead, chronicity in OFP and HA is defined as pain occurring on more than 15 days per month and lasting for more than 4 h daily for at least the last 3 months. This definition excludes the periodic shortlasting pains that often recur in the face and head, but are not essentially chronic. Although the headache field has adopted this definition, chronic orofacial pain is still poorly defined. In this article, we discuss current thinking of chronicity in pain and examine the term 'chronic orofacial pain' (COFP). We discuss the entities that make up COFP and analyze the term's usefulness in clinical practice and epidemiology.

Co-occurrence of pain syndromes.

Many pain conditions in patients tend to co-occur, influencing the clinical expressions of each other in various ways. This paper summarizes the main concurrent pain conditions by analyzing the major interactions observed. In particular, co-occurrence will be examined in: visceral pain (especially ischemic heart disease, irritable bowel syndrome, dysmenorrhea/endometriosis and urinary pain), fibromyalgia, musculoskeletal pain and headache. Two concurrent visceral pains from internal organs sharing at least part of their central sensory projection can give rise to viscero-visceral hyperalgesia, i.e., enhancement of typical pain symptoms from both districts. Visceral pain, headache and musculoskeletal pains (myofascial pain from trigger points, joint pain) can enhance pain and hyperalgesia from fibromyalgia. Myofascial pain from trigger points can perpetuate pain symptoms from visceral pain conditions and trigger migraine attacks when located in the referred pain area from an internal organ or in cervico-facial areas, respectively. The pathophysiology of these pain associations is complex and probably multifactorial; among the possible processes underlying the mutual influence of symptoms recorded in the associations is modulation of central sensitization phenomena by nociceptive inputs from one or the other condition. A strong message in these pain syndrome co-occurrence is that effective treatment of one of the conditions can also improve symptoms from the other, thus suggesting a systematic and thorough evaluation of the pain patient for a global effective management of his/her suffering.

Triggers of Primary Headaches: Issues and Pathways Forward.

The triggers of primary headaches have considerable significance for our understanding and management of headache and migraine. Triggers explain the variance in headaches - why they occur when they do. Trigger management is generally viewed as an important component of a comprehensive treatment approach for headaches. Historically, however, triggers have not had a prominent place in the headache literature. This situation began to change 20 to 30 years ago, and the pace of change has increased exponentially in recent times. Nevertheless, the field is beset with issues that have held it back from achieving more. This review will focus on elaborating those issues with the goal of suggesting ways forward. The first issue considered will be the definition of a trigger, and how specific triggers are labeled. Consideration will then be given to a classification system for triggers. The review will discuss next the evidence relating to whether self-reported triggers can, indeed, precipitate headaches, and how the capacity to elicit headaches may be acquired or extinguished. Attention will be given to the very important clinical issue of trigger management. Finally, the pathways forward will be proposed. Perhaps the most useful thing to accomplish at this point in time would be agreement on a definition of headache triggers, a list of triggers, and a classification system for triggers. This would greatly assist in comparing research on triggers from different research groups as well as eliminating some of the issues identified in this review. An authoritative body such as the American Headache Society or the International Headache Society, could establish a multidisciplinary committee that would complete these tasks. Consideration should also be given to incorporating triggers into the International Classification of Headache Disorders as an axis or via the use of codes, as this would raise the profile of triggers in assessment and management.

The Day My Life Changed: A Qualitative Study of the Experiences of Patients With New Daily Persistent Headache.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to explore the views and experiences of a group of Spanish patients suffering from new daily persistent headache (NDPH). METHODS: A qualitative descriptive study was conducted with patients diagnosed with NDPH. Purposeful sampling was performed among patients attending a specialized Headache Unit at 2 university hospitals between February 2017 and December 2018. In total, 18 patients (11 women, 7 men; mean age 45.3, standard deviation 10.6) with a median duration of illness of 70 months (interquartile range, 24-219) were recruited to this study. Data were collected through in-depth interviews, researchers' field notes and patients' drawings. Thematic analysis was used to identify emerging themes. RESULTS: Three main themes were identified: (1) the origin of the illness and seeking answers; (2) characteristics of the pain; and (3) the impact of pain on patients' lives. The patients precisely recalled the time of onset and the trigger of the pain. Pain was constantly present, although it varied in form. At the onset, pain was perceived as a sign of alarm while, over time, it became an invisible illness. The headache commonly had a major impact on everyday life and could cause lifestyle changes. In addition, pain could be emotionally disruptive and could also lead to family estrangement and a search for solitude. CONCLUSIONS: Our results provide insight into how NDPH is experienced, which may be helpful in managing NDPH patients. In our cohort, patients identified precipitating events but sought answers regarding the origin of their illness and their pain. Pain was a continuous sensation that had a major impact on patients' daily lives and emotions.

ACEP Guidelines on Acute Nontraumatic Headache Diagnosis and Management in the Emergency Department, Commentary on Behalf of the Refractory, Inpatient, Emergency Care Section of the American Headache Society.

The American College of Emergency Physicians (ACEP) published guidelines in July 2019 on the diagnosis and management of acute nontraumatic headaches in the emergency department, focusing predominantly on the diagnosis of subarachnoid hemorrhage and the role of imaging and lumbar puncture in diagnosis. The ACEP Clinical Policies document is intended to aide Emergency Physicians in their approach to patients presenting with acute headache and to improve the accuracy of diagnosis, while promoting safe patient care practices. The Clinical Policies document also highlights the need for future research into best practices to distinguish primary from secondary headaches and the efficacy and safety of current treatment options for acute headaches. The following commentary on these guidelines is intended to support and expand on these guidelines from the Headache specialists' perspective, written on behalf of the Refractory, Inpatient, Emergency Care section of the American Headache Society (AHS). The commentary have been reviewed and approved by Board of Directors of the AHS.

Headache as the Presenting Symptom in 2 Patients With COVID-19 and a History of Migraine: 2 Case Reports.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has now affected more than 5 million people globally. Typical symptoms include fever, cough, and shortness of breath. Patients with underlying medical comorbidities such as cardiovascular disease and diabetes are more likely to become severely ill. To date there is limited information on how COVID-19 affects patients with a history migraine. Here, we present the cases of 2 women with a history of migraine whose first symptom of COVID-19 was a severe persistent headache.

Headache Outcomes After Treatment of Unruptured Intracranial Aneurysm: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Background and Purpose- While unruptured intracranial aneurysms may be discovered incidentally in the workup of chronic headache, it remains unclear whether their treatment ultimately impacts headache severity. We aim to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis assessing headache severity after treatment of unruptured intracranial aneurysm. Methods- MEDLINE and EMBASE were systematically reviewed. Results- Data from 7 studies met inclusion criteria (309 nonduplicated patients). The standard mean difference in pre- and post-intervention headache severity was estimated at -0.448 (95% CI, -0.566 to -0.329) under a random effects model. No significant heterogeneity was noted nor was any significant publication bias demonstrated. Conclusions- This is the first systematic review assessing postoperative headache severity following treatment of unruptured intracranial aneurysm. While a significant reduction in headache severity was observed, further investigation into this phenomenon is recommended before it influences clinical practice. Future study should stratify headache outcomes by aneurysm size, location, and treatment modality.

Tracking patients with chronic occipital headache after occipital nerve decompression surgery: A case series.

BACKGROUND: The therapeutic benefit of nerve decompression surgeries for chronic headache/migraine are controversial. AIM: To provide clinical characteristics of headache type and treatment outcome of occipital nerve decompression surgery. METHODS: A retrospective review of clinical records. Inclusion criteria were evidence of chronic occipital headache with and without migrainous features and tenderness of neck muscles, occipital allodynia, and inadequate response to prophylactic drugs. RESULTS: Surgical decompression of the greater and lesser occipital nerves provided complete and extended (3-6 years) relief of new daily persistent headache in case 3 (46 year old female), and of chronic post-traumatic headache in cases 4 and 6 (35 and 30 year old females, respectively), partial relief of chronic headache/migraine in cases 1 and 2 (41 year old female and 36 year old male), and no relief of episodic (cases 3 and 4) or chronic migraine (case 5, 52 year old male), or chronic tension-type headache (case 7, 31 year old male). CONCLUSIONS: As a case series, this study cannot test a hypothesis or determine cause and effect. However, the complete elimination of new daily persistent headache and post-traumatic headache, and the partial elimination of chronic headache/migraine in two patients - all refractory to other treatment approaches - supports and justifies the effort to continue to generate data that can help determine whether decompression nerve surgeries are beneficial in the treatment of certain types of chronic headache.

LASH syndrome: New cases with a broadening clinical phenotype.

OBJECTIVE: To describe three new cases of the headache syndrome of long-lasting autonomic symptoms with hemicrania (LASH), and to establish a clinical phenotype utilizing all LASH cases noted in the medical literature. METHODS: A case series of patients was evaluated in an academic headache clinic over a two-year time period. LASH syndrome was defined by episodic headache attacks with associated cranial autonomic symptoms that start before headache onset, last the entire duration of the headache and continue on for a period of time after the headache ceases. RESULTS: Three patients were noted to have LASH syndrome in a two-year time period (2017-2018). One patient was diagnosed with primary LASH, while two others had probable secondary LASH from a secretory pituitary tumor. The primary LASH patient was female. She had on average one headache per week lasting 1-3 days in duration. She experienced migrainous associated symptoms along with their cranial autonomic symptoms. She also developed a fixed Horner's syndrome along with a typical headache attack, which was present for 6 months at the time of consultation. She had complete headache relief with indomethacin and her miosis and ptosis also resolved with treatment. Secondary LASH was diagnosed in two patients (one male, one female) both with prolactin secreting pituitary microadenomas. One of the patients had his headaches abolish with dopamine agonist therapy while the other patient did not respond to hormonal modulation but became pain free on indomethacin. Secondary LASH patients had less frequent headache episodes and lacked any migrainous associated features, but exhibited agitation with headache. CONCLUSION: LASH syndrome may be rare, but more reported cases are entering the headache literature. The temporal profile of onset and offset of cranial autonomic symptoms is key to making the diagnosis. Primary and secondary LASH may present differently based on gender predominance, the presence of migrainous associated features, and attack frequency. Secondary LASH appears to be indomethacin responsive, suggesting that medication effectiveness should not obviate the need to do testing for secondary etiologies.

Relating Photophobia, Visual Aura, and Visual Triggers of Headache and Migraine.

OBJECTIVE: This study investigated a potential association between visual factors and symptoms related to migraine. It was predicted that photophobia and visual aura would be positively associated with interictal light sensitivity and visual headache triggers (flicker, glare, and eyestrain), and that these 2 visual symptoms would also be associated. BACKGROUND: Previous studies have found independent neurophysiological associations between several visual factors and symptoms related to headache disorders. Many of these connections appear to be associated with increased cortical hypersensitivity, a phenomenon that might be in part due to repeated avoidance and reduced tolerance to triggers. If true, and if associations between visual factors and symptoms can be established, this may have implications for an exposure-based treatment for migraine symptoms. METHODS: Four hundred and ninety-one participants (411 female, 80 male) were recruited through Griffith University (AUS), Headache Australia, Pain Australia, and through social media. Participants were grouped based on the presence of headache disorder symptoms and the presence or absence of photophobia and/or visual aura. A cross-sectional online survey design was utilized to gather information pertaining to interictal light sensitivity, visual triggers, and visual symptoms. RESULTS: With respect to interictal light sensitivity and photophobia, a significant difference (P < .001, eta squared [η2 ] = 0.084) was found between the 3 groups, where headache disorder participants with photophobia (group A1; mean [M] = 2.5, standard deviation [SD] = 0.97) reported significantly greater light sensitivity than participants with headache disorder and no photophobia (A2; M = 1.68, SD = 0.62) and control group participants (A3; M = 1.82, SD = 0.85). This pattern was repeated for participants reporting flicker as a headache trigger (P < .001, η2 = 0.061), with group A1 (M = 2.45, SD = 1.24) significantly higher than groups A2 (M = 1.68, SD = 0.83) and A3 (M = 1.68, SD = 0.89), and was also seen for glare as a headache trigger (P < .001, η2 = 0.092), with group A1 (M = 2.92, SD = 0.96) significantly higher than A2 (M = 2.31, SD = 0.89) and A3 (M = 2.09, SD = 0.93). This pattern of results was not replicated for headache disorder participants with and without visual aura. A significant association (P < .001) was found between photophobia and visual aura in headache disorder participants based on a chi-square test of independence, with 86/136 participants reporting either both or neither visual symptom. CONCLUSIONS: This study supports a link between certain visual phenomena in headache disorder populations, and supports future research into exposure-based treatments for migraine symptoms.