Interventional treatments.

In migraine, when patients have failed medication management or are unable to be treated with systemic medications, minimally invasive interventions can be options used to provide pain relief. The type of intervention depends on the pain location, associated clinical features, clinical context, medical comorbidities, and response to prior injections. Interventions can vary from bedside peripheral nerve blocks to fluoroscopically guided interventions. Growing evidence is supporting the use of interventions in migraine, and judicious use can improve clinical outcomes.

Quantitative assessment of painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy after high-frequency spinal cord stimulation: a pilot study.

OBJECTIVE: Randomized trials have demonstrated efficacy of spinal cord stimulation (SCS) for treatment of painful diabetic neuropathy (PDN). Preliminary data suggested that treatment of PDN with high-frequency SCS resulted in improvements on neurological examination. The purpose of the present study was to explore whether patients with PDN treated with high-frequency SCS would have improvements in lower-extremity peripheral nerve function. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study in an outpatient clinical practice at a tertiary care center. METHODS: Patients with PDN were treated with high-frequency SCS and followed up for 12 months after SCS implantation with clinical outcomes assessments of pain intensity, neuropathic symptoms, and neurological function. Small-fiber sudomotor function was assessed with the quantitative sudomotor axon reflex test (QSART), and large-fiber function was assessed with nerve conduction studies (NCS). Lower-extremity perfusion was assessed with laser Doppler flowmetry. RESULTS: Nine patients completed 12-month follow-up visits and were observed to have improvements in lower-extremity pain, weakness, and positive sensory symptoms. Neuropathy impairment scores were improved, and 2 patients had recovery of sensory responses on NCS. A reduction in sweat volume on QSART was observed in the proximal leg but not at other sites. No significant differences were noted in lower-extremity perfusion or NCS as compared with baseline. CONCLUSIONS: The improvement in pain relief was concordant with improvement in neuropathy symptoms. The findings from this study provide encouraging preliminary data in support of the hypothesis of a positive effect of SCS on peripheral neuropathy, but the findings are based on small numbers and require further evaluation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov ID NCT03769675.

Clinical and imaging outcomes of 100 patients with cerebrospinal fluid-venous fistulas treated by transvenous embolization.

BACKGROUND: Cerebrospinal fluid-venous fistulas (CSFVF) are a common cause of spontaneous intracranial hypotension (SIH). Transvenous embolization has emerged as a reliable treatment option. We review the clinical presentation, imaging, and clinical outcomes of 100 consecutive CSFVF patients who underwent embolization over 2 years. METHODS: Baseline clinical characteristics, imaging findings (including Bern SIH score), technical outcomes, and long-term imaging and clinical outcomes were collected. All patients had at least 3 months of clinical follow-up and had baseline MRI. 99/100 patients underwent follow-up imaging at ≥3 months post-treatment. RESULTS: 100 patients were included. Mean imaging and clinical follow-up duration was 8.3±7.7 months and 15.0±6.8 months, respectively. The mean duration of symptoms before embolization was 40.9±52 months. Mean baseline Bern SIH score was 5.9±3.3. The most common baseline symptoms were headache (96 patients), tinnitus (55 patients), and cognitive dysfunction (44 patients). Technical success rate was 100%. Mean post-treatment Bern SIH score was 0.9±1.6 (P<0.0001). Following treatment, 95% of patients reported significant improvement or resolution in symptoms (58 patients reporting resolution and 37 reporting improvement). 5 patients reported no improvement. There were no major procedural or periprocedural complications. 10 patients had minor procedural complications that did not result in any change in management (Onyx emboli, venous perforation). 19 patients had rebound intracranial hypertension requiring acetazolamide therapy. 7 patients had recurrent fistula at the initially treated level. CONCLUSIONS: Transvenous embolization of CSFVF in SIH patients is safe and effective with a 95% treatment response, significant improvement in imaging outcomes, and a very low rate of complications.

Consensus Practice Guidelines on Postdural Puncture Headache From a Multisociety, International Working Group: A Summary Report.

Importance: Postdural puncture headache (PDPH) can follow unintentional dural puncture during epidural techniques or intentional dural puncture during neuraxial procedures, such as a lumbar puncture or spinal anesthesia. Evidence-based guidance on the prevention, diagnosis, and management of this condition is, however, currently lacking. Objective: To fill the practice guidelines void and provide comprehensive information and patient-centric recommendations for preventing, diagnosing, and managing PDPH. Evidence Review: With input from committee members and stakeholders of 6 participating professional societies, 10 review questions that were deemed important for the prevention, diagnosis, and management of PDPH were developed. A literature search for each question was performed in MEDLINE on March 2, 2022. Additional relevant clinical trials, systematic reviews, and research studies published through March 2022 were also considered for practice guideline development and shared with collaborator groups. Each group submitted a structured narrative review along with recommendations that were rated according to the US Preventive Services Task Force grading of evidence. Collaborators were asked to vote anonymously on each recommendation using 2 rounds of a modified Delphi approach. Findings: After 2 rounds of electronic voting by a 21-member multidisciplinary collaborator team, 47 recommendations were generated to provide guidance on the risk factors for and the prevention, diagnosis, and management of PDPH, along with ratings for the strength and certainty of evidence. A 90% to 100% consensus was obtained for almost all recommendations. Several recommendations were rated as having moderate to low certainty. Opportunities for future research were identified. Conclusions and Relevance: Results of this consensus statement suggest that current approaches to the treatment and management of PDPH are not uniform due to the paucity of evidence. The practice guidelines, however, provide a framework for individual clinicians to assess PDPH risk, confirm the diagnosis, and adopt a systematic approach to its management.

Evidence-based clinical practice guidelines on postdural puncture headache: a consensus report from a multisociety international working group.

INTRODUCTION: Postdural puncture headache (PDPH) can follow unintentional dural puncture during epidural techniques or intentional dural puncture during neuraxial procedures such as a lumbar puncture or spinal anesthesia. Evidence-based guidance on the prevention, diagnosis or management of this condition is, however, currently lacking. This multisociety guidance aims to fill this void and provide practitioners with comprehensive information and patient-centric recommendations to prevent, diagnose and manage patients with PDPH. METHODS: Based on input from committee members and stakeholders, the committee cochairs developed 10 review questions deemed important for the prevention, diagnosis and management of PDPH. A literature search for each question was performed in MEDLINE (Ovid) on 2 March 2022. The results from each search were imported into separate Covidence projects for deduplication and screening, followed by data extraction. Additional relevant clinical trials, systematic reviews and research studies published through March 2022 were also considered for the development of guidelines and shared with contributors. Each group submitted a structured narrative review along with recommendations graded according to the US Preventative Services Task Force grading of evidence. The interim draft was shared electronically, with each collaborator requested to vote anonymously on each recommendation using two rounds of a modified Delphi approach. RESULTS: Based on contemporary evidence and consensus, the multidisciplinary panel generated 50 recommendations to provide guidance regarding risk factors, prevention, diagnosis and management of PDPH, along with their strength and certainty of evidence. After two rounds of voting, we achieved a high level of consensus for all statements and recommendations. Several recommendations had moderate-to-low certainty of evidence. CONCLUSIONS: These clinical practice guidelines for PDPH provide a framework to improve identification, evaluation and delivery of evidence-based care by physicians performing neuraxial procedures to improve the quality of care and align with patients' interests. Uncertainty remains regarding best practice for the majority of management approaches for PDPH due to the paucity of evidence. Additionally, opportunities for future research are identified.

Clinical and Imaging Outcomes of Surgically Repaired Cerebrospinal Fluid-Venous Fistulas Identified by Lateral Decubitus Digital Subtraction Myelography.

OBJECTIVE: To describe clinical and radiographic outcomes of surgical repair of cerebrospinal fluid-venous fistula (CVF), an increasingly recognized cause of spontaneous intracranial hypotension that is poorly responsive to epidural blood patch (EBP). METHODS: Retrospective review identified adult patients who had lateral decubitus digital subtraction myelography indicative of cerebrospinal fluid leak at Mayo Clinic between November 2018 and February 2020, with clearly localized CVF, followed by surgical treatment. Patients without available imaging before or after surgery were excluded. History of EBP and clinical response to EBP were evaluated along with surgical outcomes. RESULTS: Of 25 patients with CVF who met protocol criteria and were included in the data analysis, 22 (88%) received EBP, but clinical benefit lasting ≥4 weeks occurred in only 2 of 22 (9%). Headache was the most prominent preoperative feature among patients (24/25; 96%). Following surgery, 18 of 24 (75%) patients had complete headache improvement, 4 (17%) had partial improvement, and 2 (8%) had no improvement. Ten of 25 (40%) patients reported cognitive disturbance at baseline; at follow-up, 5 of 10 (50%) had complete improvement, 3 (30%) had partial improvement, and 2 (20%) had no improvement. On postoperative brain magnetic resonance imaging, 6 of 25 (24%) patients had complete resolution of findings by Bern score criteria, 18 (72%) showed partial improvement, and 1 (4%) patient showed no improvement. Adverse events were minor and included surgical site pain and paresthesias. CONCLUSIONS: Surgical repair of CVF resulted in improvements in headache and other symptoms, with few side effects.

Incremental diagnostic yield and clinical outcomes of lateral decubitus CT myelogram immediately following negative lateral decubitus digital subtraction myelogram.

INTRODUCTION: Spontaneous intracranial hypotension (SIH) caused by a spinal cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) leak classically presents with orthostatic headache. Digital subtraction myelography (DSM) has a well-established diagnostic yield in the absence of extradural spinal collection. At our institution, DSM is followed by lateral decubitus CT myelogram (LDCTM) in the same decubitus position to increase diagnostic yield of the combined study. We evaluated the incremental diagnostic yield of LDCTM following negative DSM and reviewed patient outcomes. METHODS: Retrospective review of consecutive DSMs with subsequent LDCTM from April 2019 to March 2021 was performed. Combined reports were reviewed, and studies with positive DSMs were excluded. Of the exams with negative DSM, only studies with LDCTM reports identifying potential leak site were included. Interventions and follow-up clinical notes were reviewed to assess symptoms improvement following treatment. RESULTS: Of the 83 patients with negative DSMs, 11 (13.2%) had positive leak findings on LDCTMs, and 21 (25.3%) were equivocal. Of 11 positive LDCTMs, 6 leaks were nerve sheath tears (NSTs) and 5 were CSF-venous fistulas (CVFs). 10/11 (90.9%) had intervention and follow-up, with 9/10 (90%) having positive clinical outcome. Of the 21 equivocal LDCTM patients (19 CVFs and 2 NSTs), 15 (71.4%) had interventions and follow-up, with 3/15 (20.0%) with positive clinical outcomes. CONCLUSION: LDCTM following negative DSM has an incremental diagnostic yield up to 38.6%, with up to 14.5% of positive patient outcomes following treatment. LDCTM should be considered after DSM to maximize diagnostic yield of the combined exam.

Long term outcomes of occipital nerve stimulation.

Background: Occipital nerve stimulation (ONS) has been investigated as a potential treatment for disabling headaches and has shown promise for disorders such as chronic migraine and cluster headache. Long term outcomes stratified by headache subtype have had limited exploration, and literature on outcomes of this neuromodulatory intervention spanning 2 or more years is scarce. Measures: We performed a narrative review on long term outcomes with ONS for treatment of headache disorders. We surveyed the available literature for studies that have outcomes for 24 months or greater to see if there is a habituation in response over time. Review of the literature revealed evidence in treatment of occipital neuralgia, chronic migraine, cluster headache, cervicogenic headache, short lasting unilateral neuralgiform headache attacks (SUNHA) and paroxysmal hemicrania. While the term "response" varied per individual study, a total of 17 studies showed outcomes in ONS with long term sustained responses (as defined per this review) in the majority of patients with specific headache types 177/311 (56%). Only 7 studies in total (3 cluster, 1 occipital neuralgia, 1 cervicogenic headache, 1 SUNHA, 1 paroxysmal hemicrania) provided both short-term and long-term responses up to 24 months to ONS. In cluster headache, the majority of patients (64%) were long term responders (as defined per this review) and only a minority of patients 12/62 (19%) had loss of efficacy (e.g., habituation). There was a high number 313/439 (71%) of adverse events per total number of patients in the studies including lead migration, requirements of revision surgery, allergy to surgical materials, infection and intolerable paresthesias. Conclusions: With the evidence available, the response to ONS was sustained in the majority of patients with cluster headache with low rates of loss of efficacy in this patient population. There was a high percent of adverse events per number of patients in long term follow-up and likely related to the off-label use of leads typically used for spinal cord stimulation. Further longitudinal assessments of outcomes in occipital nerve stimulation with devices labelled for use in peripheral nerve stimulation are needed to evaluate the extent of habituation to treatment in headache.

Narrative review of peripheral nerve blocks for the management of headache.

OBJECTIVE: To provide an overview of the current available literature on peripheral nerve blocks for the management of migraine and other headache disorders in adults. BACKGROUND: Peripheral nerve blocks have been commonly performed in the headache practice for migraine, cluster headache, occipital neuralgia, and other headache disorders, despite a paucity of evidence supporting their use historically. In the past decade, there has been an effort to explore the efficacy and safety of peripheral nerve blocks for the management of headache, with the greatest interest centered around greater occipital blocks. DESIGN: We performed a search in PubMed using key words including "occipital nerve blocks," "peripheral nerve blocks," "occipital nerve," "migraine," "cluster headache," and "neuralgia." We reviewed the randomized controlled trials (RCTs), observational studies, and case series, and summarized the anatomy, techniques, and the evidence for the use of peripheral nerve blocks in different headache disorders, with particular focus on available RCTs. Case reports were included for a detail review of adverse events. RESULTS: Of 12 RCTs examining the use of greater occipital nerve blocks for migraine, all but one demonstrate efficacy with reduction in headache frequency, intensity, and/or duration compared to placebo. Studies have not demonstrated a difference in clinical outcomes with the use of corticosteroids for nerve blocks compared to blocks with local anesthetic in the treatment of migraine. There are two RCTs supporting the use of greater occipital blockade for cluster headache, both showing benefit of suboccipitally injected corticosteroid. One RCT suggests benefit of greater occipital nerve blocks for cervicogenic headache. Observational studies and case series/reports show that greater occipital nerve block may be effective in prolonged migraine aura, status migrainosus, post-dural puncture headache, and occipital neuralgia. Overall, peripheral nerve blocks are well tolerated. Serious side effects are rare but have been reported, including acute cerebellar syndrome and infection. CONCLUSIONS: Peripheral nerve blocks, especially occipital nerve blocks, are a viable treatment option for migraine and may be helpful in cluster headache as a transitional therapy or rescue therapy. Additional prospective studies are needed to investigate the efficacy and safety of occipital nerve blocks for long-term migraine prevention, as well as for other headache disorders, such as occipital neuralgia.

Comparative Effectiveness of Landmark-guided Greater Occipital Nerve (GON) Block at the Superior Nuchal Line Versus Ultrasound-guided GON Block at the Level of C2: A Randomized Clinical Trial (RCT).

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this single center, prospective randomized controlled trial was to compare clinical outcomes between an ultrasound-guided greater occipital nerve block (GONB) at the C2 vertebral level versus landmark-based GONB at the superior nuchal line. METHODS: Patients with occipital neuralgia or cervicogenic headache were randomized to receive either a landmark-based GONB with sham ultrasound at the superior nuchal line or ultrasound-guided GONB at the C2 vertebral level with blinding of patients and data analysis investigators. Clinical outcomes were assessed at 30 minutes, 2 weeks, and 4 weeks postinjection. RESULTS: Thirty-two patients were recruited with 16 participants in each group. Despite randomization, the ultrasound-guided GONB group reported higher numeric rating scale (NRS) scores at baseline. Those in the ultrasound-guided GONB group had a significant decrease in NRS from baseline compared with the landmark-based GONB group at 30 minutes (change of NRS of 4.0 vs. 2.0) and 4-week time points (change of NRS of 2.5 vs. -0.5). Both groups were found to have significant decreases in Headache Impact Test-6. The ultrasound-guided GONB had significant improvements in NRS, severe headache days, and analgesic use at 4 weeks when compared with baseline. No serious adverse events occurred in either group. CONCLUSIONS: Ultrasound-guided GONBs may provide superior pain reduction at 4 weeks when compared with landmark-based GONBs for patients with occipital neuralgia or cervicogenic headache.

Clinical and imaging outcomes of cerebrospinal fluid-venous fistula embolization.

BACKGROUND: We report outcomes of spontaneous intracranial hypotension (SIH) patients who underwent transvenous embolization of cerebrospinal fluid-venous fistulas (CSFVFs) confirmed on digital subtraction myelography (DSM) performed at our institution. METHODS: This is a retrospective evaluation of a prospectively collected database of SIH patients who underwent transvenous embolization of CSFVFs. Only patients who had fistulas confirmed on DSM performed at our institution were included. All patients had a baseline MRI and an MRI performed at least 90 days post-embolization, as well as clinical evaluation using the six item Headache Impact Test (HIT-6) and the Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) scales. Paired t-test was used to report changes in Bern MRI scores and HIT-6 scores at follow-up. RESULTS: 40 patients were included (29 female, 11 male). Mean age was 57.4±10.3 years. Mean Bern score improved from 5.7±3.0 at baseline to 1.3±2.0 at follow-up (p<0.0001). Mean HIT-6 score at baseline was 67.2±11.1 and at follow-up was 41.5±10.1 (p<0.0001). Median PGIC was 1, with 36 patients (90.0%) reporting at least minimal improvement and 32 patients (82.5%) reporting much or very much improvement. Complications included persistent local site pain in 12 patients (30%), suspected rebound intracranial hypertension requiring medical intervention in 7 patients (17.5%), and asymptomatic tiny Onyx emboli to the lungs in 3 patients (7.5%). CONCLUSIONS: Transvenous embolization of CSFVFs using Onyx is safe and effective, resulting in significant improvement in headache and overall clinical outcomes in nearly 90% of patients, and substantial improvements in brain MRI abnormalities.

Percutaneous Interventional Strategies for Migraine Prevention: A Systematic Review and Practice Guideline.

OBJECTIVE: To systematically evaluate the efficacy and effectiveness of percutaneous interventional treatments for prevention of migraine through a qualitative and (when possible) quantitative analysis. METHODS: An expert panel was asked to develop recommendations for the multidisciplinary preventive treatment of migraine, including interventional strategies. The committee conducted a systematic review and (when evidence was sufficient) a meta-analytic review by using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) criteria and the modified Cochrane Risk of Bias analysis available in the Covidence data management program. Clinical questions addressed adults with migraine who should be offered prevention. Examined outcomes included headache days, acute medication use, and functional impairment. Acute management of migraine was outside the scope of this guideline. RESULTS: The committee screened 1,195 studies and assessed 352 by full text, yielding 16 randomized controlled trials that met the inclusion criteria. RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS: As informed by evidence related to the preselected outcomes, adverse event profile, cost, and values and preferences of patients, onabotulinumtoxinA received a strong recommendation for its use for chronic migraine prevention and a weak recommendation against its use for episodic migraine prevention. Greater occipital nerve blocks received a weak recommendation for their use for chronic migraine prevention. For greater occipital nerve block, steroid received a weak recommendation against its use vs the use of local anesthetic alone. Occipital nerve with supraorbital nerve blocks, sphenopalatine ganglion blocks, cervical spine percutaneous interventions, and implantable stimulation all received weak recommendations for their use for chronic migraine prevention. The committee found insufficient evidence to assess trigger point injections in migraine prevention and highly discouraged the use of intrathecal medication.

Consensus practice guidelines on interventions for cervical spine (facet) joint pain from a multispecialty international working group.

BACKGROUND: The past two decades have witnessed a surge in the use of cervical spine joint procedures including joint injections, nerve blocks and radiofrequency ablation to treat chronic neck pain, yet many aspects of the procedures remain controversial. METHODS: In August 2020, the American Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine and the American Academy of Pain Medicine approved and charged the Cervical Joint Working Group to develop neck pain guidelines. Eighteen stakeholder societies were identified, and formal request-for-participation and member nomination letters were sent to those organizations. Participating entities selected panel members and an ad hoc steering committee selected preliminary questions, which were then revised by the full committee. Each question was assigned to a module composed of 4-5 members, who worked with the Subcommittee Lead and the Committee Chairs on preliminary versions, which were sent to the full committee after revisions. We used a modified Delphi method whereby the questions were sent to the committee en bloc and comments were returned in a non-blinded fashion to the Chairs, who incorporated the comments and sent out revised versions until consensus was reached. Before commencing, it was agreed that a recommendation would be noted with >50% agreement among committee members, but a consensus recommendation would require ≥75% agreement. RESULTS: Twenty questions were selected, with 100% consensus achieved in committee on 17 topics. Among participating organizations, 14 of 15 that voted approved or supported the guidelines en bloc, with 14 questions being approved with no dissensions or abstentions. Specific questions addressed included the value of clinical presentation and imaging in selecting patients for procedures, whether conservative treatment should be used before injections, whether imaging is necessary for blocks, diagnostic and prognostic value of medial branch blocks and intra-articular joint injections, the effects of sedation and injectate volume on validity, whether facet blocks have therapeutic value, what the ideal cut-off value is for designating a block as positive, how many blocks should be performed before radiofrequency ablation, the orientation of electrodes, whether larger lesions translate into higher success rates, whether stimulation should be used before radiofrequency ablation, how best to mitigate complication risks, if different standards should be applied to clinical practice and trials, and the indications for repeating radiofrequency ablation. CONCLUSIONS: Cervical medial branch radiofrequency ablation may provide benefit to well-selected individuals, with medial branch blocks being more predictive than intra-articular injections. More stringent selection criteria are likely to improve denervation outcomes, but at the expense of false-negatives (ie, lower overall success rate). Clinical trials should be tailored based on objectives, and selection criteria for some may be more stringent than what is ideal in clinical practice.

Approach to Radiculopathy.

Low back pain and neck pain, often with associated radiculopathy, are two of the most common reasons for referral to the outpatient neurology clinic. A thorough clinical evaluation remains paramount in establishing an accurate diagnosis and subsequently an appropriate treatment plan. In this article, we review anatomic considerations for spondylotic radiculopathy; outline the clinical approach for the evaluation of these patients, including discussion of electrodiagnostic and imaging modalities; and address treatment options based on a stratified treatment approach.

Consensus practice guidelines on interventions for cervical spine (facet) joint pain from a multispecialty international working group.

BACKGROUND: The past two decades have witnessed a surge in the use of cervical spine joint procedures including joint injections, nerve blocks and radiofrequency ablation to treat chronic neck pain, yet many aspects of the procedures remain controversial. METHODS: In August 2020, the American Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine and the American Academy of Pain Medicine approved and charged the Cervical Joint Working Group to develop neck pain guidelines. Eighteen stakeholder societies were identified, and formal request-for-participation and member nomination letters were sent to those organizations. Participating entities selected panel members and an ad hoc steering committee selected preliminary questions, which were then revised by the full committee. Each question was assigned to a module composed of 4-5 members, who worked with the Subcommittee Lead and the Committee Chairs on preliminary versions, which were sent to the full committee after revisions. We used a modified Delphi method whereby the questions were sent to the committee en bloc and comments were returned in a non-blinded fashion to the Chairs, who incorporated the comments and sent out revised versions until consensus was reached. Before commencing, it was agreed that a recommendation would be noted with >50% agreement among committee members, but a consensus recommendation would require ≥75% agreement. RESULTS: Twenty questions were selected, with 100% consensus achieved in committee on 17 topics. Among participating organizations, 14 of 15 that voted approved or supported the guidelines en bloc, with 14 questions being approved with no dissensions or abstentions. Specific questions addressed included the value of clinical presentation and imaging in selecting patients for procedures, whether conservative treatment should be used before injections, whether imaging is necessary for blocks, diagnostic and prognostic value of medial branch blocks and intra-articular joint injections, the effects of sedation and injectate volume on validity, whether facet blocks have therapeutic value, what the ideal cut-off value is for designating a block as positive, how many blocks should be performed before radiofrequency ablation, the orientation of electrodes, whether larger lesions translate into higher success rates, whether stimulation should be used before radiofrequency ablation, how best to mitigate complication risks, if different standards should be applied to clinical practice and trials, and the indications for repeating radiofrequency ablation. CONCLUSIONS: Cervical medial branch radiofrequency ablation may provide benefit to well-selected individuals, with medial branch blocks being more predictive than intra-articular injections. More stringent selection criteria are likely to improve denervation outcomes, but at the expense of false-negatives (ie, lower overall success rate). Clinical trials should be tailored based on objectives, and selection criteria for some may be more stringent than what is ideal in clinical practice.

COVID-19 and Headache Medicine: A Narrative Review of Non-Steroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drug (NSAID) and Corticosteroid Use.

OBJECTIVE: To summarize the current literature on non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug and corticosteroid use during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, recognizing that these are commonly used treatments in the field of headache medicine. BACKGROUND: The use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and corticosteroids in patients during the COVID-19 pandemic has been a controversial topic within the medical community and international and national health organizations. Lay press and social media outlets have circulated opinions on this topic despite the fact that the evidence for or against the use of these medications is sparse. In the field of headache medicine, these medications are used commonly and both patients and clinicians may have questions or hesitations pertaining to their use during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: A detailed search of the scientific and popular literature was performed. RESULTS: There is limited literature pertaining to the safety of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and corticosteroids during the COVID-19 pandemic. To date, there are no clear scientific data that preclude the use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in the general population who may acquire COVID-19 or in those acutely infected with the virus. Several health organizations have concluded that treatment with corticosteroids during active infection should be avoided due to concerns of prolonged viral shedding in the respiratory tract and the lack of survival benefit based on the data from past coronaviruses and influenza virus; specific exceptions exist including treatment for underlying asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, septic shock, and acute respiratory distress syndrome. CONCLUSION: Scientific information regarding the COVID-19 pandemic is constantly evolving, and limited or contradictory information can lead to confusion for both patients and clinicians. It is recommended that prior to prescribing non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and steroids for the treatment of headache, clinicians have open discussions with their patients about the potential risks and benefits of using these medications during the COVID-19 pandemic. This manuscript summarizes the currently available evidence and understanding about these risks and benefits to help clinicians navigate such discussions.