Disorders of consciousness: Painless or painful conditions?-evidence from neuroimaging studies

The experience of pain in disorders of consciousness is still debated. Neuroimaging studies, using functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI), Positron Emission Tomography (PET), multichannel electroencephalography (EEG) and laser-evoked potentials, suggest that the perception of pain increases with the level of consciousness. Brain activation in response to noxious stimuli has been observed in patients with unresponsive wakefulness syndrome (UWS), which is also referred to as a vegetative state (VS), as well as those in a minimally conscious state (MCS). However, all of these techniques suggest that pain-related brain activation patterns of patients in MCS more closely resemble those of healthy subjects. This is further supported by fMRI findings showing a much greater functional connectivity within the structures of the so-called pain matrix in MCS as compared to UWS/VS patients. Nonetheless, when interpreting the results, a distinction is necessary between autonomic responses to potentially harmful stimuli and conscious experience of the unpleasantness of pain. Even more so if we consider that the degree of residual functioning and cortical connectivity necessary for the somatosensory, affective and cognitive-evaluative components of pain processing are not yet clear. Although procedurally challenging, the particular value of the aforementioned techniques in the assessment of pain in disorders of consciousness has been clearly demonstrated. The study of pain-related brain activation and functioning can contribute to a better understanding of the networks underlying pain perception while addressing clinical and ethical questions concerning patient care. Further development of technology and methods should aim to increase the availability of neuroimaging, objective assessment of functional connectivity and analysis at the level of individual cases as well as group comparisons. This will enable neuroimaging to truly become a clinical tool to reliably investigate pain in severely brain-injured patients as well as an asset for research

Guideline on the use of onabotulinumtoxinA in chronic migraine. a consensus statement from the European Headache Federation

OnabotulinumtoxinA is being increasingly used in the management of chronic migraine (CM). Treatment with onabotulinumtoxinA poses challenges compared with traditional therapy with orally administered preventatives. The European Headache Federation identified an expert group that was asked to develop the present guideline to provide recommendations for the use of onabotulinumtoxinA in CM. The expert group recommend onabotulinumtoxinA as an effective and well-tolerated treatment of CM. Patients should preferably have tried two to three other migraine prophylactics before start of onabotulinumtoxinA. Patients with medication overuse should be withdrawn from the overused medication before initiation of onabotulinumtoxinA if feasible, if not onabotulinumtoxinA can be initiated from the start or before withdrawal. OnabotulinumtoxinA should be administered according to the PREEMPT injection protocol, i.e. injecting 155 U-195 U to 31-39 sites every 12-weeks. We recommend that patients are defined as non-responders, if they have less than 30% reduction in headache days per month during treatment with onabotulinumtoxinA. However other factors such as headache intensity, disability and patient preferences should also be considered when evaluating response. Treatment should be stopped, if the patient does not respond to the first two to three treatment cycles. Response to continued treatment with onabotulinumtoxinA should be evaluated by comparing the 4 weeks before with the 4 weeks after each treatment cycle. It is recommended that treatment is stopped in patients with a reduction to less than 10 headache days per month for 3 months and that patients are re-evaluated 4-5 months after stopping onabotulinumtoxinA to make sure that the patient has not returned to CM. Questions regarding efficacy and tolerability of onabotulinumtoxinA could be answered on the basis of scientific evidence. The other recommendations were mainly based on expert opinion. Future research on the treatment of CM with onabotulinumtoxinA may further improve the management of this highly disabling disorder

Prevention and treatment of ischaemic and haemorrhagic stroke in people with diabetes mellitus: a focus on glucose control and comorbidities

Diabetes mellitus is a significant risk factor for both ischaemic and haemorrhagic stroke, affecting up to a third of individuals with cerebrovascular diseases. Beyond being a risk factor for stroke, diabetes and hyperglycaemia have a negative impact on outcomes after ischaemic and haemorrhagic stroke. Hyperglycaemia during the acute ischaemic stroke phase is associated with a higher risk of haemorrhagic transformation and poor functional outcome, with evidence in favour of early intervention to limit and manage severe hyperglycaemia. Similarly, intensive glucose control nested in a broader bundle of care, including blood pressure, coagulation and temperature control, can provide substantial benefit for clinical outcomes after haemorrhagic stroke. As micro- and macrovascular complications are frequent in people with diabetes, cardiovascular prevention strategies also need to consider tailored treatment. In this regard, the broader availability of sodium–glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors and glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists can allow tailored treatments, particularly for those with heart failure and chronic kidney disease as comorbidities. Here, we review the main concepts of hyperacute stroke management and CVD prevention among people with diabetes, capitalising on results from large studies and RCTs to inform clinicians on preferred treatments. Graphical Abstract

a consensus statement from the European Headache Federation (EHF) and the European Society of Contraception and Reproductive Health (ESC)

Several data indicate that migraine, especially migraine with aura, is associated with an increased risk of ischemic stroke and other vascular events. Of concern is whether the risk of ischemic stroke in migraineurs is magnified by the use of hormonal contraceptives. As migraine prevalence is high in women of reproductive age, it is common to face the issue of migraine and hormonal contraceptive use in clinical practice. In this document, we systematically reviewed data about the association between migraine, ischemic stroke and hormonal contraceptive use. Thereafter a consensus procedure among international experts was done to develop statements to support clinical decision making, in terms of cardiovascular safety, for prescription of hormonal contraceptives to women with migraine. Overall, quality of current evidence regarding the risk of ischemic stroke in migraineurs associated with the use of hormonal contraceptives is low. Available data suggest that combined hormonal contraceptive may further increase the risk of ischemic stroke in those who have migraine, specifically migraine with aura. Thus, our current statements privilege safety and provide several suggestions to try to avoid possible risks. As the quality of available data is poor further research is needed on this topic to increase safe use of hormonal contraceptives in women with migraine

European Headache Federation (EHF) consensus on the definition of effective treatment of a migraine attack and of triptan failure

Attack; Migraine; TriptanAtaque; Migraña; TriptánAtac; Migranya; TriptanBackground Triptans are migraine-specific acute treatments. A well-accepted definition of triptan failure is needed in clinical practice and for research. The primary aim of the present Consensus was to provide a definition of triptan failure. To develop this definition, we deemed necessary to develop as first a consensus definition of effective treatment of an acute migraine attack and of triptan-responder. Main body The Consensus process included a preliminary literature review, a Delphi round and a subsequent open discussion. According to the Consensus Panel, effective treatment of a migraine attack is to be defined on patient well-being featured by a) improvement of headache, b) relief of non-pain symptoms and c) absence of adverse events. An attack is considered effectively treated if patient’s well-being, as defined above, is restored within 2 hours and for at least 24 hours. An individual with migraine is considered as triptan-responder when the given triptan leads to effective acute attack treatment in at least three out of four migraine attacks. On the other hand, an individual with migraine is considered triptan non-responder in the presence of failure of a single triptan (not matching the definition of triptan-responder). The Consensus Panel defined an individual with migraine as triptan-resistant in the presence of failure of at least 2 triptans; triptan refractory, in the presence of failure to at least 3 triptans, including subcutaneous formulation; triptan ineligibile in the presence of an acknowledged contraindication to triptan use, as specified in the summary of product characteristics. Conclusions The novel definitions can be useful in clinical practice for the assessment of acute attack treatments patients with migraine. They may be helpful in identifying people not responding to triptans and in need for novel acute migraine treatments. The definitions will also be of help in standardizing research on migraine acute care.This work is supported by a grant from the European Headache Federation to cover publication fees

Use of non-pharmacological therapies in individuals with migraine eligible for treatment with monoclonal antibodies targeting Calcitonin Gene-Related Peptide (CGRP)-signaling: a single-center cross-sectional observational study

Introduction: Accessibility of treatment with monoclonal antibodies targeting the calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) signaling pathway is impeded by regulatory restrictions. Affected individuals may seek out other services including non-pharmacological therapies. Thus, we found it timely to ascertain the use of non-pharmacological therapies in individuals with treatment-resistant migraine eligible for and naïve to treatment with CGRP-signaling targeting monoclonal antibodies. Methods: We conducted a single-center cross-sectional observational study of patients eligible for and naïve to treatment with monoclonal antibodies targeting CGRP or its receptor. We recorded demographical information (gender, age, educational level, employment status, and income), disease burden (frequency of headache days and migraine days), previous use of preventive pharmacological medications for migraine, and use of non-pharmacological therapies over the past 3 months including frequency of interventions, costs, and patient-reported assessment of efficacy on a 6-point scale (0: no efficacy, 5: best possible efficacy). Results: We included 122 patients between 17 June 2019 and 6 January 2020; 101 (83%) were women and the mean age was 45.2 ± 13.3 years. One-third (n = 41 [34%]) had used non-pharmacological therapy within the past 3 months. Among these participants, the median frequency of different interventions was 1 (IQR: 1–2), the median number of monthly visits was 2.3 (IQR: 1.3–4), mean and median monthly costs were 1,086 ± 1471, and 600 (IQR: 0–1200) DKK (1 EUR = ~7.5 DKK), respectively, and median patient-reported assessment of the efficacy of interventions was 2 (IQR: 0–3). Conclusion: Even in a high-income country with freely accessible headache services and universal healthcare coverage, there was a non-negligible direct cost in parallel with low satisfaction for non-pharmacological therapies among patients at a tertiary headache center.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

Burden and attitude to resistant and refractory migraine: a survey from the European Headache Federation with the endorsement of the European Migraine & Headache Alliance

Cura de migranya; Migranya refractària; Migranya resistentMigraine care; Refractory migraine; Resistant migraineCuidado de la migraña; Migraña refractaria; Migraña resistenteBackground New treatments are currently offering new opportunities and challenges in clinical management and research in the migraine field. There is the need of homogenous criteria to identify candidates for treatment escalation as well as of reliable criteria to identify refractoriness to treatment. To overcome those issues, the European Headache Federation (EHF) issued a Consensus document to propose criteria to approach difficult-to-treat migraine patients in a standardized way. The Consensus proposed well-defined criteria for resistant migraine (i.e., patients who do not respond to some treatment but who have residual therapeutic opportunities) and refractory migraine (i.e., patients who still have debilitating migraine despite maximal treatment efforts). The aim of this study was to better understand the perceived impact of resistant and refractory migraine and the attitude of physicians involved in migraine care toward those conditions. Methods We conducted a web-questionnaire-based cross-sectional international study involving physicians with interest in headache care. Results There were 277 questionnaires available for analysis. A relevant proportion of participants reported that patients with resistant and refractory migraine were frequently seen in their clinical practice (49.5% for resistant and 28.9% for refractory migraine); percentages were higher when considering only those working in specialized headache centers (75% and 46% respectively). However, many physicians reported low or moderate confidence in managing resistant (8.1% and 43.3%, respectively) and refractory (20.7% and 48.4%, respectively) migraine patients; confidence in treating resistant and refractory migraine patients was different according to the level of care and to the number of patients visited per week. Patients with resistant and refractory migraine were infrequently referred to more specialized centers (12% and 19%, respectively); also in this case, figures were different according to the level of care. Conclusions This report highlights the clinical relevance of difficult-to-treat migraine and the presence of unmet needs in this field. There is the need of more evidence regarding the management of those patients and clear guidance referring to the organization of care and available opportunities.Publication fees for this publication were covered by the European Headache Federation

VirusMINT: a viral protein interaction database

Understanding the consequences on host physiology induced by viral infection requires complete understanding of the perturbations caused by virus proteins on the cellular protein interaction network. The VirusMINT database (http://mint.bio.uniroma2.it/virusmint/) aims at collecting all protein interactions between viral and human proteins reported in the literature. VirusMINT currently stores over 5000 interactions involving more than 490 unique viral proteins from more than 110 different viral strains. The whole data set can be easily queried through the search pages and the results can be displayed with a graphical viewer. The curation effort has focused on manuscripts reporting interactions between human proteins and proteins encoded by some of the most medically relevant viruses: papilloma viruses, human immunodeficiency virus 1, Epstein–Barr virus, hepatitis B virus, hepatitis C virus, herpes viruses and Simian virus 40

Assessing the sustainability of the city-port transformations: Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) for alternatives portfolio selection.

In recent years, the EU has sought to define sustainable transition pathways towards more equitable, prosperous, and inclusive urban and territorial models, capable of responding to the rapid degradation of ecosystems, and improving quality of life of citizens. In this context, ports have been recognised as key strategic hubs not only for economic and logistical competitiveness, but also to generate employment and investment opportunities, and to address the challenges of the climate change. The research presents a multi-scale, multi-dimensional and multi- group methodological framework to support decision-making processes related to the development of sustainable transformations of port cities, capturing the complexity of interactions and conflicts. Integrating Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) approaches and Problem Structuring Methods (PSM), the proposed methodology aims to address the following gaps identified in the literature: (i) a scattered application of multi-group methods; (ii) the lack of social instances within the decision problem; (iii) a weak sustainability perspective; (iv) the use of one-dimensional scale assessment in sectoral studies. The case study of the city-port of Gela in Sicily (Italy) provided an opportunity to test the proposed methodology and to integrate multi-dimensional sustainability issues into feasibility studies, promoting a more balanced relationship between city and port. The interdependencies between environment, society and economy allowed MCDA to be identified as a suitable approach to address complex decision-making and support the sustainability assessment of port areas transformation. Two multi-criteria and multi-group evaluation methods guided the decision-making process to select a portfolio of preferred alternatives by assessing technical, environmental, and economic impacts and analysing stakeholder conflicts and coalitions. The process was carried out as follows: on the one hand, a multidimensional impact matrix integrating Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) divided into technical, financial-economic, and environmental categories through the application of the multi-criteria method EVAMIX; on the other hand, a social assessment with a dendrogram of coalitions derived from the application of the multi-group method NAIADE by modelling stakeholders’ preferences regarding a portfolio of alternatives related to the decision problem

Multi-Center Randomized Phase II Clinical Trial on Remote Ischemic Conditioning in Acute Ischemic Stroke Within 9 Hours of Onset in Patients Ineligible to Recanalization Therapies (TRICS-9): Study Design and Protocol

Aim: To assess the efficacy of remote ischemic conditioning (RIC) in patients with ischemic stroke within 9 h of onset, that are not candidates for recanalization therapies.Sample Size Estimates: A sample size of 80 patients (40 in each arm) should yield 80% power to detect a 20% difference in early neurological improvement at 72 h at p = 0.05, two sided.Methods and Design: TRICS-9 is a phase II, multicenter, controlled, block randomized, open-label, interventional clinical trial. Patients recruited in Italian academic hospitals will be randomized 1:1 to either RIC plus standard medical therapy or standard medical therapy alone. After randomization, RIC will be applied manually by four alternating cycles of inflation/deflation 5 min each, using a blood pressure cuff around the non-paretic arm.Study Outcomes: The primary efficacy outcome is early neurological improvement, defined as the percent change in the National Institute of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) at 72 h in each arm. Secondary outcomes include early neurologic improvement at 24 and 48 h, disability at 3 months, rate of symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage, feasibility (proportion of patients completing RIC), tolerability after RIC and at 72 h, blood levels of HIF-1 alpha, and HSP27 at 24 h and 72 h.Discussion/Conclusion: RIC in combination with recanalization therapies appears to add no clinical benefit to patients, but whether it is beneficial to those that are not candidates for recanalization therapies is still to be demonstrated. TRICS-9 has been developed to elucidate this issue