Cutaneous nociception and neurogenic inflammation evoked by PACAP38 and VIP

Pituitary adenylate cyclase-activating peptide-38 (PACAP38) and vasoactive intestinal peptide (VIP) belong to the same secretin–glucagon superfamily and are present in nerve fibers in dura and skin. Using a model of acute cutaneous pain we explored differences in pain perception and vasomotor responses between PACAP38 and VIP in 16 healthy volunteers in a double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover study. All participants received intradermal injections of 200 pmol PACAP38, 200 pmol VIP and placebo into the volar forearm. Measurements included pain intensity on a visual analog scale (VAS), blood flow by laser Doppler flowmetry, visual flare and wheal. Pain intensities after PACAP38 and VIP were mild and limited to a short time of about 100 s after injection. The area under the VAS-time curve was larger following PACAP38 (P = 0.004) and VIP (P = 0.01) compared to placebo. We found no statistical difference in pain perception between PACAP38 and VIP. Skin blood flow increase, flare and wheal were larger after both PACAP38 (P = 0.011) and VIP (P = 0.001) compared to placebo. VIP induced a considerably larger increase in skin blood flow, flare and wheal than PACAP38 (P = 0.002). In conclusion, we found that peripheral nociceptive cutaneous responses elicited by PACAP38 and VIP are similar in healthy volunteers. This suggests that acute pain and vasomotor responses following intradermal injections of PACAP38 and VIP are primarily mediated by VPAC receptors

Diagnosis and management of migraine in ten steps

Migraine is a disabling primary headache disorder that directly affects more than one billion people worldwide. Despite its widespread prevalence, migraine remains under-diagnosed and under-treated. To support clinical decision-making, we convened a European panel of experts to develop a ten-step approach to the diagnosis and management of migraine. Each step was established by expert consensus and supported by a review of current literature, and the Consensus Statement is endorsed by the European Headache Federation and the European Academy of Neurology. In this Consensus Statement, we introduce typical clinical features, diagnostic criteria and differential diagnoses of migraine. We then emphasize the value of patient centricity and patient education to ensure treatment adherence and satisfaction with care provision. Further, we outline best practices for acute and preventive treatment of migraine in various patient populations, including adults, children and adolescents, pregnant and breastfeeding women, and older people. In addition, we provide recommendations for evaluating treatment response and managing treatment failure. Lastly, we discuss the management of complications and comorbidities as well as the importance of planning long-term follow-up

Secondary headaches: secondary or still primary?

The second edition of the International Classification of Headache Disorders makes a distinction between primary and secondary headaches. The diagnosis of a secondary headache is made if the underlying disease is thought to cause headache or if a close temporal relationship is present together with the occurrence of the headache. At first glance, this may allow clearly secondary headaches to be distinguished from primary headaches. However, by reviewing the available literature concerning several selected secondary headaches, we will discuss the hypothesis that some secondary headaches can also be understood as a variation of primary headaches in the sense that the underlying cause (e.g. infusion of glyceryl trinitrate [ICHD-II 8.1.1], epilepsy [7.6.2], brain tumours [7.4], craniotomy [5.7], etc.) triggers the same neurophysiologic mechanisms that are responsible for the pain in primary headache attacks

Antidromic vasodilatation and the migraine mechanism

Despite the fact that an unprecedented series of new discoveries in neurochemistry, neuroimaging, genetics and clinical pharmacology accumulated over the last 20 years has significantly increased our current knowledge, the underlying mechanism of the migraine headache remains elusive. The present review article addresses, from early evidence that emerged at the end of the nineteenth century, the role of ‘antidromic vasodilatation’ as part of the more general phenomenon, currently defined as neurogenic inflammation, in the unique type of pain reported by patients suffering from migraine headaches. The present paper describes distinctive orthodromic and antidromic properties of a subset of somatosensory neurons, the vascular- and neurobiology of peptides contained in these neurons, and the clinical–pharmacological data obtained in recent investigations using provocation tests in experimental animals and human beings. Altogether, previous and recent data underscore that antidromic vasodilatation, originating from the activation of peptidergic somatosensory neurons, cannot yet be discarded as a major contributing mechanism of the throbbing head pain and hyperalgesia of migraine