[The role of the neuromodulators in the preventive treatment of migraine]. / Papel de los neuromoduladores en el tratamiento preventivo de la migraña.

INTRODUCTION: More than one quarter of patients who consult due to migraine need preventive treatment. At least half of these patients do not respond or cannot tolerate classical preventatives: beta-blockers, flunarizine or amitriptyline. AIM: To analyse the role of new antiepileptics (neuromodulators) in migraine prevention. DEVELOPMENT: Critical review of clinical trials carried out with antiepileptics for the treatment of migraine. Topiramate has demonstrated clear efficacy in the prevention of migraine with and without aura, including chronic migraine with and without analgesic overuse, although it is not tolerated by one fifth of patients. Valproic acid also has a demonstrated efficacy in the preventive treatment of migraine with and without aura, but its tolerability profile and the possibility of serious adverse events oblige us to prescribe this neuromodulator for refractory patients. Gabapentin shows a mild efficacy, clearly lower than that of topiramate and valproate. Lamotrigine is the treatment of choice in the prevention of migraine aura, but is not efficacious in the treatment of headache. Levetiracetam has shown some efficacy in open studies in migraine prevention, both in adults and children. Zonisamide has demonstrated good efficacy and tolerability in patients refractory to topiramate and shows a prolonged half life, which improves compliance. The remaining antipileptics have not shown efficacy. CONCLUSIONS: Topiramate and valproic acid have demonstrated efficacy in migraine prevention. Lamotrigine is efficacious for the treatment of migraine aura. Even though new studies are necessary, zonisamide could be a good option for the preventive treatment of migraine.

[Preventive treatment of chronic migraine with zonisamide: a study in patients who are refractory or intolerant to topiramate]. / Tratamiento preventivo de la migraña crónica con zonisamida: un estudio en pacientes refractarios o intolerantes a topiramato.

INTRODUCTION: About half of the patients with chronic migraine do not respond or do not tolerate the different migraine preventatives. AIM: To analyse the efficacy and tolerability of zonisamide in the treatment of migraine in patients who had not responded or tolerated topiramate, the current drug of choice for the treatment of this condition. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Those patients with no response or intolerance to topiramate received zonisamide. This drug was increased 25 mg per week up to a maximum of 200 mg/day. The efficacy of this drug was evaluated in terms of 'response' (reduction in attack frequency below 50%) at the third month of treatment. RESULTS: Our series comprises a total of 34 patients, most of them middle-aged women. All met chronic migraine criteria. Zonisamide showed efficacy (response) in 19 patients (56%), response being excellent in 6 (18%). Nine patients (26%) did not show response, whereas 6 (18%) did not tolerate the drug. CONCLUSIONS: The results, obtained in patients refractory to other preventatives and particularly to topiramate, suggest that zonisamide can be useful in the prevention of chronic migraine. Of course, controlled clinical trials are necessary to confirm these preliminary results.

[Determinants of prophylactic migraine therapy in Spain]. / Determinantes del uso de los fármacos con indicación para la profilaxis de la migrana en España.

INTRODUCTION: Migraine interferes with the quality of life of patients. Prophylactic medication is an option to be considered in cases showing inefficiency of symptomatic medication or an increase in the number of attacks. AIM: To evaluate the characteristics of patients that start on prophylactic treatment for migraine. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A multicenter epidemiologic survey was conducted in 110 neurological outpatient clinics and hospitals among adult patients of both sexes who required prophylactic treatment for migraine. Pain intensity was measured through a three-category scale: mild, moderate, or severe. Daily disability was measured by a disability questionnaire. RESULTS: A total of 735 patients with migraine who had started prophylactic treatment were considered valid for the analysis. The patients reported an average of 9.7 days with migraine in the previous month, 32% of the episodes lasting more than 24 hours. Half of the patients referred working or home disability due to migraine with a total average score of 15.1 on the disability scale (grade III). A 48% of the patients had previously received prophylactic treatment, the medications most commonly prescribed being flunarizine, propranolol and amitriptyline. At the study visit, the most commonly prescribed medications were topiramate, flunarizine, propranolol, and amitriptyline. CONCLUSIONS: Our study reveals that starting prophylactic treatment is in the majority of cases due to a high attack frequency. A clear evolution is being observed in prophylactic medication prescription, with a shift from flunarizine or propranolol to topiramate, which is prescribed more frequently nowadays.

[Abuse pattern of analgesics in chronic daily headache: a study in the general population]. / Patrón de abuso de analgésicos en la cefalea crónica diaria: un estudio en población general.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The abuse pattern of analgesics is not well known in persons with "chronic daily headache and analgesic abuse" (CHA) in the general population. The objective of this study was to know the type of analgesics used by pharmacological group and the active ingredient in subjects with CHA in a large sample of the general population. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A questionnaire was distributed that investigated the frequency of headache and analgesic consumption among persons over 14 years (9,984 inhabitants) of the semiurban population of Santoña (Cantabria). A total of 4,855 subjects filled out the questionnaire. Although the CHA criteria require headache > or = 15 days a month, those individuals (n = 332) that report subjective consumption of analgesics for headache > or = 10 days in this period filled out a headache diary for one month. A total of 72 individuals fulfilled CHA criteria (1.48% of the general population). The varieties of CHA were classified according to the Silberstein et al criteria. RESULTS: The greatest consumption corresponded to the simple analgesic group with 34.7% of all the subjects followed by those of combined analgesics and ergotaminics consumed by 27.8% and 22.2% respectively. A total of 12.5% took opioids alone or associated and triptans were in the fifth place. The latter were consumed by 2.8% of all the subjects. The active ingredients used most were: paracetamol (54%), caffeine (49%), ergotic derivatives (38%) and propyphenazone (35%). The subjects detected consumed a mean of 2.5 active ingredients simultaneously. The mean units consumed in their different presentation by the subjects with CHA was 50 units/month. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that CHA is a significant health care problem. In our setting, 85% of the persons with CHA of the population used analgesics and/or ergotics. These medications were given without prescription so that their obtention should be regulated in the pharmacy offices.