RESUMO
Primary intracranial pressure disorders include idiopathic intracranial hypertension and spontaneous intracranial hypotension. Remarkable advances have been made in the diagnosis and treatment of these 2entities in recent years. Therefore, the Spanish Society of Neurology's Headache Study Group (GECSEN) deemed it necessary to prepare this consensus statement, including diagnostic and therapeutic algorithms to facilitate and improve the management of these disorders in clinical practice. This document was created by a committee of experts belonging to GECSEN, and is based on a systematic review of the literature, incorporating the experience of the participants, and establishes practical recommendations with levels of evidence and grades of recommendation.
RESUMO
INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic has caused an unexpected boost to telemedicine. We analyse the impact of the pandemic on telemedicine applied in Spanish headache consultations, review the literature, and issue recommendations for the implementation of telemedicine in consultations. METHOD: The study comprised 3 phases: 1) review of the MEDLINE database since 1958 (first reported experience with telemedicine); 2) Google Forms survey sent to all members of the Spanish Society of Neurology's Headache Study Group (GECSEN); and 3) online consensus of GECSEN experts to issue recommendations for the implementation of telemedicine in Spain. RESULTS: COVID-19 has increased waiting times for face-to-face consultations, increasing the use of all telemedicine modalities: landline telephone (from 75% before April 2020 to 97% after), mobile telephone (from 9% to 27%), e-mail (from 30% to 36%), and video consultation (from 3% to 21%). Neurologists are aware of the need to expand the availability of video consultations, which are clearly growing, and other e-health and m-health tools. CONCLUSIONS: The GECSEN recommends and encourages all neurologists who assist patients with headaches to implement telemedicine resources, with the optimal objective of offering video consultation to patients under 60-65 years of age and telephone calls to older patients, although each case must be considered on an individual basis. Prior approval and advice must be sought from legal and IT services and the centre's management. Most patients with stable headache and/or neuralgia are eligible for telemedicine follow-up, after a first consultation that must always be held in person.
Assuntos
COVID-19 , Neurologia , Telemedicina , Humanos , Pandemias , Cefaleia/terapiaRESUMO
INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic has caused an unexpected boost to telemedicine. We analyse the impact of the pandemic on telemedicine applied in Spanish headache consultations, review the literature, and issue recommendations for the implementation of telemedicine in consultations. METHOD: The study comprised 3 phases: 1) review of the MEDLINE database since 1958 (first reported experience with telemedicine); 2) Google Forms survey sent to all members of the Spanish Society of Neurology's Headache Study Group (GECSEN); and 3) online consensus of GECSEN experts to issue recommendations for the implementation of telemedicine in Spain. RESULTS: COVID-19 has increased waiting times for face-to-face consultations, increasing the use of all telemedicine modalities: landline telephone (from 75% before April 2020 to 97% after), mobile telephone (from 9% to 27%), e-mail (from 30% to 36%), and video consultation (from 3% to 21%). Neurologists are aware of the need to expand the availability of video consultations, which are clearly growing, and other e-health and m-health tools. CONCLUSIONS: The GECSEN recommends and encourages all neurologists who assist patients with headaches to implement telemedicine resources, with the optimal objective of offering video consultation to patients under 60-65 years of age and telephone calls to older patients, although each case must be considered on an individual basis. Prior approval and advice must be sought from legal and IT services and the centre's management. Most patients with stable headache and/or neuralgia are eligible for telemedicine follow-up, after a first consultation that must always be held in person.
RESUMO
INTRODUCTION: In recent months, doubts have arisen among patients, general practitioners, and neurologists as to whether some drugs commonly used in patients with headaches and neuralgia may favour or complicate the disease caused by SARS-CoV-2. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We collected information on the opinions of scientific societies and medicines agencies (American, European, and Spanish) to clarify doubts regarding the use of drugs such as lisinopril, candesartan, ibuprofen, corticosteroids, carbamazepine, and monoclonal antibodies targeting the calcitonin gene-related peptide in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. RESULTS: We make recommendations about the use of standard headache treatments in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, based on the current scientific evidence. CONCLUSIONS: At present, there is no robust scientific argument to formally contraindicate any of the standard treatments employed for headaches and neuralgias.
Assuntos
Analgésicos/efeitos adversos , Infecções por Coronavirus/complicações , Cefaleia/tratamento farmacológico , Neuralgia/tratamento farmacológico , Pneumonia Viral/complicações , Corticosteroides/efeitos adversos , Corticosteroides/uso terapêutico , Analgésicos/farmacologia , Analgésicos/uso terapêutico , Enzima de Conversão de Angiotensina 2 , Anticorpos Monoclonais/efeitos adversos , Anticorpos Monoclonais/uso terapêutico , Anticonvulsivantes/efeitos adversos , Anticonvulsivantes/uso terapêutico , Anti-Hipertensivos/efeitos adversos , Anti-Hipertensivos/uso terapêutico , Antivirais/farmacologia , Benzimidazóis/efeitos adversos , Benzimidazóis/uso terapêutico , Betacoronavirus , Compostos de Bifenilo , COVID-19 , Antagonistas do Receptor do Peptídeo Relacionado ao Gene de Calcitonina/efeitos adversos , Antagonistas do Receptor do Peptídeo Relacionado ao Gene de Calcitonina/uso terapêutico , Carbamazepina/efeitos adversos , Carbamazepina/uso terapêutico , Infecções por Coronavirus/tratamento farmacológico , Suscetibilidade a Doenças/induzido quimicamente , Interações Medicamentosas , Indução Enzimática/efeitos dos fármacos , Cefaleia/complicações , Cefaleia/prevenção & controle , Humanos , Ibuprofeno/efeitos adversos , Ibuprofeno/farmacologia , Ibuprofeno/uso terapêutico , Lisinopril/efeitos adversos , Lisinopril/uso terapêutico , Neuralgia/complicações , Pandemias , Peptidil Dipeptidase A/biossíntese , Peptidil Dipeptidase A/genética , Receptores Virais/biossíntese , Receptores Virais/genética , Fatores de Risco , SARS-CoV-2 , Tetrazóis/efeitos adversos , Tetrazóis/uso terapêutico , Tratamento Farmacológico da COVID-19RESUMO
Introduction: In recent months, doubts have arisen among patients, general practitioners, and neurologists as to whether some drugs commonly used in patients with headaches and neuralgia may favour or complicate the disease caused by SARS-CoV-2. Material and methods: We collected information on the opinions of scientific societies and medicines agencies (American, European, and Spanish) to clarify doubts regarding the use of drugs such as lisinopril, candesartan, ibuprofen, corticosteroids, carbamazepine, and monoclonal antibodies targeting the calcitonin gene-related peptide in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. Results: We make recommendations about the use of standard headache treatments in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, based on the current scientific evidence. Conclusions: At present, there is no robust scientific argument to formally contraindicate any of the standard treatments employed for headaches and neuralgias.
RESUMO
INTRODUCTION: The classic form of trigeminal neuralgia is usually sporadic (no familial clustering). However, around 2% of all cases of trigeminal neuralgia may be familial. Describing this entity may be useful for diagnosing this process and may also be key to determining the underlying causes of sporadic classical trigeminal neuralgia. We report on cases in a series of 5 families with at least 2 members with classic trigeminal neuralgia, amounting to a total of 11 cases. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We recorded cases of familial classical trigeminal neuralgia between March 2014 and March 2015 by systematically interviewing all patients with a diagnosis of trigeminal neuralgia who visited the neurology department on an outpatient basis. RESULTS: In our sample, most patients with familial classic trigeminal neuralgia were women. Mean age at onset was 62.9±13.93 years, decreasing in subsequent generations. V2 was the most frequently affected branch. Most of our patients responded well to medical treatment, and surgery was not effective in all cases. CONCLUSIONS: These family clusters support the hypothesis that classic trigeminal neuralgia may have a genetic origin. Several causes have been suggested, including inherited anatomical changes affecting the base of the skull which would promote compression of the trigeminal nerve by vascular structures, familial AHT (resulting in tortuous vessels that would compress the trigeminal nerve), and mutations in the gene coding for calcium channels leading to hyperexcitability. Classic trigeminal neuralgia may be an autosomal dominant disorder displaying genetic anticipation.