Impacto de la pandemia COVID-19 en la atención al paciente con cefalea en España : análisis de situación con una mirada al futuro

La infección por SARS-CoV-2 ha tenido un enorme impacto en los sistemas sanitarios. España, donde la cefalea constituye el motivo principal de consulta ambulatoria en Neurología, es uno de los países con más casos notificados. Conocer el impacto de la pandemia COVID-19 en las Unidades de Cefaleas en España y evaluar cómo imaginan el futuro de estas estructuras los neurólogos responsables. Estudio transversal mediante encuesta online distribuida a los responsables de las Unidades, realizada durante la sexta semana del estado de alarma. La tasa de respuesta fue del 74%, con participación de centros de diferentes características y de todas las Comunidades Autónomas. El 95,8% describió limitaciones en la actividad presencial, un 60,4% mantuvo la consulta presencial preferente y el 45,8% los procedimientos urgentes. En el 91,7% de los centros la actividad presencial cancelada se sustituyó por consulta telefónica. El 95,8% de los encuestados afirmó que empleará material de protección personal en el futuro y el 86% pretende incorporar en mayor medida la telemedicina. La mayoría prevé un incremento en las listas de espera (93,8% en primeras visitas, 89,6% en revisiones y 89,4% en procedimientos) y una peor situación clínica de los pacientes, pero solo un 15% cree que su estructura asistencial se verá debilitada. Como consecuencia de la pandemia, la actividad asistencial e investigadora en cefaleas se ha reducido de manera notable. Esto pone de manifiesto la necesidad de un incremento de la oferta de telemedicina en nuestros centros en un futuro cercano

Cutaneous Allodynia in Migraine : A Narrative Review

In the present work, we conduct a narrative review of the most relevant literature on cutaneous allodynia (CA) in migraine. CA is regarded as the perception of pain in response to non-noxious skin stimulation. The number of research studies relating to CA and migraine has increased strikingly over the last few decades. Therefore, the clinician treating migraine patients must recognize this common symptom and have up-to-date knowledge of its importance from the pathophysiological, diagnostic, prognostic and therapeutic point of view. We performed a comprehensive narrative review to analyze existing literature regarding CA in migraine, with a special focus on epidemiology, pathophysiology, assessment methods, risk for chronification, diagnosis and management. PubMed and the Cochrane databases were used for the literature search. The prevalence of CA in patients with migraine is approximately 60%. The mechanisms underlying CA in migraine are not completely clarified but include a sensitization phenomenon at different levels of the trigemino-talamo-cortical nociceptive pathway and dysfunction of brainstem and cortical areas that modulate thalamocortical inputs. The gold standard for the assessment of CA is quantitative sensory testing (QST), but the validated Allodynia 12-item questionnaire is preferred in clinical setting. The presence of CA is associated with an increased risk of migraine chronification and has therapeutic implications. CA is a marker of central sensitization in patients with migraine that has been associated with an increased risk of chronification and may influence therapeutic decisions

MAB-MIG: registry of the spanish neurological society of erenumab for migraine prevention

Background: Erenumab was approved in Europe for migraine prevention in patients with ≥ 4 monthly migraine days (MMDs). In Spain, Novartis started a personalized managed access program, which allowed free access to erenumab before official reimbursement. The Spanish Neurological Society started a prospective registry to evaluate real-world effectiveness and tolerability, and all Spanish headache experts were invited to participate. We present their first results. Methods: Patients fulfilled the ICHD-3 criteria for migraine and had ≥ 4 MMDs. Sociodemographic and clinical data were registered as well as MMDs, monthly headache days, MHDs, prior and concomitant preventive treatment, medication overuse headache (MOH), migraine evolution, adverse events, and patient-reported outcomes (PROs): headache impact test (HIT-6), migraine disability assessment questionnaire (MIDAS), and patient global improvement change (PGIC). A > 50% reduction of MMDs after 12 weeks was considered as a response. Results: We included 210 patients (female 86.7%, mean age 46.4 years old) from 22 Spanish hospitals from February 2019 to June 2020. Most patients (89.5%) suffered from chronic migraine with a mean evolution of 8.6 years. MOH was present in 70% of patients, and 17.1% had migraine with aura. Patients had failed a mean of 7.8 preventive treatments at baseline (botulinum toxin type A-BoNT/A-had been used by 95.2% of patients). Most patients (67.6%) started with erenumab 70 mg. Sixty-one percent of patients were also simultaneously taking oral preventive drugs and 27.6% were getting simultaneous BoNT/A. Responder rate was 37.1% and the mean reduction of MMDs and MHDs was -6.28 and -8.6, respectively. Changes in PROs were: MIDAS: -35 points, HIT-6: -11.6 points, PIGC: 4.7 points. Predictors of good response were prior HIT-6 score < 80 points (p = 0.01), ≤ 5 prior preventive treatment failures (p = 0.026), absence of MOH (p = 0.039), and simultaneous BoNT/A treatment (p < 0.001). Twenty percent of patients had an adverse event, but only two of them were severe (0.9%), which led to treatment discontinuation. Mild constipation was the most frequent adverse event (8.1%). Conclusions: In real-life, in a personalized managed access program, erenumab shows a good effectiveness profile and an excellent tolerability in migraine prevention in our cohort of refractory patients