Central Sensitization Theory of Migraine: Clinical Implications
Thomas Jefferson University Hospitals, Filadelfia, Pennsylvania, United StatesHeadache The Journal of Head and Face Pain (Impact Factor: 2.71). 12/2006; 46 Suppl 4(s4):S182-91. DOI: 10.1111/j.1526-4610.2006.00602.x
The clinical science of migraine headache continues to evolve. Theories of the pathophysiology of migraine have progressed from the early vascular basis of migraine to more complex current theories that emphasize the centrality of neuronal dysfunction. The most recently articulated theory of migraine is the central sensitization hypothesis, which proposes that altered processing of sensory input in the brainstem, principally the trigeminal nucleus caudalis, could account for many of the temporal and symptomatic features of migraine, as well as its poor response to triptan therapy when such treatment is initiated hours after the onset of pain. Both preclinical and clinical data support the central sensitization theory. A critical clinical implication of this theory is that drugs that are capable of either aborting or arresting the process of central sensitization, most prominently dihydroergotamine, may have a unique role in the treatment of migraine. An additional, and highly practical, implication is based upon the finding that cutaneous allodynia-pain arising from innocuous stimulation of the skin, as in hair brushing or the application of cosmetics-is an easily identifiable marker of central sensitization. Thus, the presence or absence of cutaneous allodynia can be integrated into the routine clinical assessment of migraine and utilized as a determinant of treatment. Future basic and clinical research on central sensitization is likely to be of ongoing importance to the field.
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
- "Therefore, it can play the role of NSAIDs such as Naproxen and Ibuprofen without their adverse GI effects. 3. Neuroinflammation of the meningeal and dural trigeminal nociceptors leads to peripheral sensitization . Chamomile is traditionally used for inflammation, pain, neuralgia, etc . "
ABSTRACT: Migraine is a chronic recurring headache for which no complete treatment has been found yet. Therefore, finding new treatment approaches and medicines is important. In this review, we consider the probable mechanism of action of a traditional and ethnic formulary of chamomile extract in sesame oil as a new topical medication for migraine pain relief. Chamomile oil is prepared in traditional Persian medicine by boiling aqueous extract of chamomile in sesame oil. To optimize the procedure, we can use a Clevenger-type apparatus to extract the essential oil and add it to the end product. The preparation includes both essential oils (chamazulene and bisabolol oxide) and polyphenols (a flavonoid such as apigenin and its derivatives). It probably possesses pain relief effects for migraines because of the following properties: 1) chamazulene and apigenin, which inhibit iNOS expression in activated macrophages and can lead to the prohibition of NO release and synthesis; 2) chamomile flavonoids, which have a strong inhibitory effect on endogenous prostaglandin E2 (PGE2) levels in RAW 264.7 macrophages and can play the role of selective COX-2 inhibitor; 3) chamomile polyphenols, which possess anti-inflammatory effects due to the inhibition of pro-inflammatory biomarkers in THP1 macrophages and which can reduce inflammation in neurovascular units (NVU) at the site of migraine pain; 4) chamomile, which has neuroprotective effects because of reduced NO levels; 5) sesamine in sesame oil, which possesses an anti-inflammatory effect. These effects are supported by main pathophysiology theories of migraine such as neural and sensitization theories. Chamomile oil is a traditional formulation still used in Iran as an ethno-medicine. Because of the mentioned mechanisms of action, it can be hypothesized that chamomile oil is a novel medicine for the relief of migraine pain.
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
- "Early appropriate conservative management  is also important given the emerging role for central sensitisation [51-57] and the autonomic nervous system (ANS) in COFP . Reducing the peripheral afferent barrage at the earliest opportunity and down regulating any dysfunctional ANS as soon as possible through early diagnosis, reassurance, and management will also all hopefully reduce the chance of central neuroplastic changes, “central sensitisation” [51,59]. Reducing the potential for central sensitisation, or up regulation of the ANS, occurring may then help improve the success of (simpler) therapies, reduce treatment times, and improve prognosis by reducing the potential for the condition becoming chronic. "
ABSTRACT: Pain affecting the face or mouth and lasting longer than three months ("chronic orofacial pain", COFP) is relatively common in the UK. This study aims to describe and model current care pathways for COFP patients, identify areas where current pathways could be modified, and model whether these changes would improve outcomes for patients and use resources more efficiently.Methods/design: The study takes a prospective operations research approach. A cohort of primary and secondary care COFP patients (n = 240) will be recruited at differing stages of their care in order to follow and analyse their journey through care. The cohort will be followed for two years with data collected at baseline 6, 12, 18, and 24 months on: 1) experiences of the care pathway and its impacts; 2) quality of life; 3) pain; 4) use of health services and costs incurred; 5) illness perceptions. Qualitative in-depth interviews will be used to collect data on patient experiences from a purposive sub-sample of the total cohort (n = 30) at baseline, 12 and 24 months. Four separate appraisal groups (public, patient, clincian, service manager/commissioning) will then be given data from the pathway analysis and asked to determine their priority areas for change. The proposals from appraisal groups will inform an economic modelling exercise. Findings from the economic modelling will be presented as incremental costs, Quality Adjusted Life Years (QALYs), and the incremental cost per QALY gained. At the end of the modelling a series of recommendations for service change will be available for implementation or further trial if necessary. The recent white paper on health and the report from the NHS Forum identified chronic conditions as priority areas and whilst technology can improve outcomes, so can simple, appropriate and well-defined clinical care pathways. Understanding the opportunity cost related to care pathways benefits the wider NHS. This research develops a method to help design efficient systems built around one condition (COFP), but the principles should be applicable to a wide range of other chronic and long-term conditions.
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
- "Then, discontinue it gradually after 75% reduction in frequency and intensity of attacks   . This improvement is observed through a headache diary . If there is recurrence, treatment will be extended for as long as necessary, considering the limitations of each medication . "
ABSTRACT: To determine the minimum duration of migraine prophylaxis, after patients become pain-free. Migraine patients diagnosed according to criteria of International Classification of Headache Disorders-2 were treated prophylactically. After becoming pain-free, they were divided into two equal groups: in group 1, prophylaxis was maintained for another 12months and in group 2, for 24months. Each group was followed for more three years after prophylaxis period. Of the 50 patients, 39 (78%) were female and 11 (22%) were male. The age ranged from 18 to 50years. Before treatment, the attack frequency for groups 1 and 2 was, respectively, 16.3±12.8 and 16.4±11.8days per month (p=0.769). Patients in groups 1 and 2 have become pain-free, respectively, with 21.4±11.2 and 16.8±9.9months (p=0.161). During three years without treatment, groups 1 and 2 maintained an annual frequency of respectively 3.2 and 0.5 headache days. Of the patients in group 2, 76.0% (19/25) remained pain-free during follow-up, versus 44.0% (11/25) of group 1, with a significant difference (p=0.001). The best results were obtained when migraine prophylaxis was maintained for 24months after patients became pain-free.
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.