3 research outputs found
Peripheral neuromodulation for the management of headache
Context: Neuromodulation is an expanding field of study for headache treatment to reduce pain by targeting structures within the nervous system that are commonly involved in headache pathophysiology, such as the vagus nerve (VNS), occipital nerves, or sphenopalatine ganglion (SPG) for stimulation. Pharmaceutical medical therapies for abortive and prophylactic treatment, such as triptans, NSAIDs, beta-blockers, TCAs, and antiepileptics, are effective for some individuals, but the role that technology plays in investigating other therapeutic modalities is essential. Peripheral neuromodulation has gained popularity and FDA approval for use in treating certain headaches and migraine headache conditions, particularly in those who are refractory to treatment. Early trials found FDA approved neurostimulatory implant devices, including Cephaly and SpringTMS, improved patient-oriented outcomes with reductions in headaches per month (frequency) and severity. Evidence Acquisition: This was a narrative review. The sources for this review are as follows: Searching on PubMed, Google Scholar, Medline, and ScienceDirect from 1990 - 2019 using keywords: Peripheral Neuromodulation, Headache, vagus nerve, occipital nerves, sphenopalatine ganglion. Results: The first noninvasive neurostimulator device approved for migraine treatment was the Cefaly device, an external trigeminal nerve stimulation device (e-TNS) that transcutaneously excites the supratrochlear and supraorbital branches of the ophthalmic nerve. The second noninvasive neurostimulation device receiving FDA approval was the single-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulator, SpringTMS, positioned at the occiput to treat migraine with aura. GammaCore is a handheld transcutaneous vagal nerve stimulator applied directly to the neck at home by the patient for treatment of cluster headache (CH) and migraine. Several other devices are in development for the treatment of headaches and target headache evolution at different levels and inputs. The Scion device is a caloric vestibular stimulator (CVS) which interfaces with the user through a set of small cones resting in the ear canal on either side and held in place by modified over-ear headphones. The pulsante SPG Microstimulator is a patient-controlled device implanted in the patient�s upper jaw via an hour-long oral procedure to target the sphenopalatine ganglion. The occipital nerve stimulator (ONS) is an invasive neuromodulation device for headache treatment that consists of an implanted pulse generator on the chest wall connected to a subcutaneous lead with 4 - 8 electrodes that is tunneled the occiput. Conclusions: The aim of this review is to provide a comprehensive overview of the efficacy, preliminary outcomes, and limitations of neurostimulatory implants available for use in the US and those pending further development. © 2020, Author(s)
Recommended from our members
Health Disparities in Presentation, Treatment, Genomic Testing, and Outcomes of Pancreatic Cancer in Hispanic and Non-Hispanic Patients
Background: There are few conflicting results regarding the treatment and outcomes of Hispanic patients with pancreatic cancer. This study comprehensively evaluated the differences in baseline characteristics, treatments, genomic testing, and outcomes among Hispanic (H) and Non-Hispanic (NH) patients with early-stage (ES) and late-stage (LS) pancreatic cancer (PC). Methods: This is a retrospective analysis from 2013 to 2020 of 294 patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma; data collected included patient demographics, clinical characteristics, treatment regimens, response, germline and somatic genetic testing, and survival outcomes. Excluded those with insufficient data. Univariate comparisons used parametric and nonparametric tests as appropriate to evaluate for differences between H and NH groups. Fisher’s exact tests were performed to evaluate the difference in frequency. Kaplan–Meier and Cox regression analysis assessed the survival. Results: The analysis included 198 patients who had a late-stage disease and 96 patients with early-stage disease at the time of diagnosis. Among the early-stage patients, the median age at diagnosis was 60.7 years in the H versus 66.7 years in the NH (p = 0.03). No other differences were observed in baseline characteristics, treatments offered, and median overall survival (NH 25 vs. H 17.7 months, p = 0.28). Performance status, negative surgical margins, and adjuvant therapy were clinically significant and univariable with improved OS (p < 0.05), regardless of ethnicity. Hispanic patients with early pancreatic cancer were noted to be at a greater risk of death with a statistically significant hazard ratio of 3.1 (p = 0.005, 95% CI, 1.39–6.90). Among the late-stage patients, Hispanic patients with ≥ 3 predisposing risk factors for pancreatic cancer were 44% vs. 25% of NH (p = 0.006). No significant differences were noted in baseline characteristic treatments, progression-free, and median overall survivals (NH 10.0 vs. 9.2 months, p = 0.4577). In the late-stage genomic testing, germline testing performed in NH 69.4% vs. H 43.9% (p = 0.003) revealed no difference among groups. For the somatic testing, the pathogenic variants with actionable mutations were 2.5% of NH and 17.6% of H patients (p = 0.03). Conclusion: Hispanic patients with early-stage pancreatic adenocarcinoma present at a younger age and with more risk factors in the late stage. These patients have significantly lower overall survival compared to their non-Hispanic counterparts. Hispanic patients in our study were 2.9 less likely to receive germline screening and more like to have somatic genetic actionable pathogenic variants. Overall, only a minority of all patients were enrolled in a pancreatic cancer clinical trial or offered genomic testing, highlighting a critical need and missed opportunity in advancing progress and improving outcomes for this disease, mainly in the underrepresented Hispanic population. © 2023, The Author(s).Open access articleThis item from the UA Faculty Publications collection is made available by the University of Arizona with support from the University of Arizona Libraries. If you have questions, please contact us at [email protected]