-
Otolaryngology--head and Neck Surgery :... Dec 2023To systematically search the literature and organize relevant advancements in the connection between tinnitus and the activity of different functional brain regions...
OBJECTIVE
To systematically search the literature and organize relevant advancements in the connection between tinnitus and the activity of different functional brain regions using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI).
DATA SOURCES
MEDLINE (OVID), EMBASE (OVID), CINAHL (EBSCO), Web of Science, ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and PROSPERO from inception to April 2022.
REVIEW METHODS
Studies with adult human subjects who suffer from tinnitus and underwent fMRI to relate specific regions of interest to tinnitus pathology or compensation were included. In addition, fMRI had to be performed with a paradigm of stimuli that would stimulate auditory brain activity. Exclusion criteria included non-English studies, animal studies, and studies that utilized a resting state magnetic resonance imaging or other imaging modalities.
RESULTS
The auditory cortex may work to dampen the effects of central gain. Results from different studies show variable changes in the Heschl's gyrus (HG), with some showing increased activity and others showing inhibition and volume loss. After controlling for hyperacusis and other confounders, tinnitus does not seem to influence the inferior colliculus (IC) activation. However, there is decreased connectivity between the auditory cortex and IC. The cochlear nucleus (CN) generally shows increased activation in tinnitus patients. fMRI evidence indicates significant inhibition of thalamic gating. Activating the thalamus may be of important therapeutic potential.
CONCLUSION
Patients with tinnitus have significantly altered neuronal firing patterns, especially within the auditory network, when compared to individuals without tinnitus. Tinnitus and hyperacusis commonly coexist, making differentiation of the effects of these 2 phenomena frequently difficult.
Topics: Adult; Animals; Humans; Auditory Cortex; Brain; Hyperacusis; Magnetic Resonance Imaging; Tinnitus
PubMed: 37522290
DOI: 10.1002/ohn.459 -
The Annals of Pharmacotherapy Nov 2007Nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs such as aspirin and ibuprofen have been shown to be effective in treating migraine. (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs such as aspirin and ibuprofen have been shown to be effective in treating migraine.
OBJECTIVE
To evaluate the efficacy of low-dose ibuprofen for treatment of acute migraine attack.
METHODS
Clinical trials were identified through electronic searches (MEDLINE, EMBASE, EBM review, and the Cochrane Library) up to November 2006 and historical searches of relevant articles. Studies were included if they (1) were double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trials that evaluated ibuprofen tablets in moderate or severe migraine attacks in patients greater than 16 years of age, (2) evaluated at least one migraine attack, and (3) reported headache relief, pain-free, sustained pain-free, or relief of other migraine-associated symptoms at 2 hours. The MeSH search terms used were migraine disorders, headache, vascular headache, ibuprofen, adult, and clinical trial. This was followed by a key word search using migraine, cephalalgia, and cephalgia as key words. The reference lists of relevant articles were also scanned to identify possible published trials. There was no language restriction. Two authors extracted data independently. Disagreements were resolved through discussion.
RESULTS
Ibuprofen 200 and 400 mg were more effective than placebo in reducing pain intensity and eliminating pain (pain-free) within 2 hours in adults with moderate or severe migraine attacks. For the 200 mg dose, the number needed to treat was 8 (95% CI 5 to 20) for headache relief and 13 (95% CI 8 to 50) for pain-free. The risk ratios for headache relief and pain-free were 1.89 (95% CI 1.45 to 2.46; p < 0.0001) and 2.15 (95% CI 1.24 to 3.73; p = 0.0063), respectively, for ibuprofen 400 mg. The 24-hour sustained pain-free outcome with ibuprofen was no better than with placebo. Ibuprofen 400 mg increased the chance of relief in photophobia and phonophobia by 30% (95% CI 8 to 57; p < 0.01) and 49% (95% CI 23 to 81; p < 0.0001), respectively.
CONCLUSIONS
The available evidence suggests that ibuprofen 200 and 400 mg are effective in reducing headache intensity and rendering patients pain-free at 2 hours. Photophobia and phonophobia improved with 400 mg dosing. Due to the limited data and the shortcomings of the available evidence, further studies are needed.
Topics: Acute Disease; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Dose-Response Relationship, Drug; Double-Blind Method; Female; Humans; Ibuprofen; Male; Migraine Disorders; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 17878396
DOI: 10.1345/aph.1K121 -
Journal of Clinical Pharmacy and... Dec 2005To evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of frovatriptan in acute migraine treatment. (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
To evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of frovatriptan in acute migraine treatment.
METHODS
Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Clinical trials of frovatriptan were systematically identified through electronic searches and historical searches up until February 2005. Studies were included if they were (i) double-blind, randomized, placebo controlled trials that evaluated frovatriptan 2.5 mg in acute migraine treatment and (ii) reporting the efficacy data in terms of pain-free, headache response, headache recurrence, or relief of migraine-associated symptoms. Two authors extracted data independently. Disagreements were resolved through discussion. The efficacy was estimated using risk ratio (RR), risk difference, and number needed to treat together with 95% confidence intervals.
RESULTS
Five trials involving a total of 2,866 patients were included. Frovatriptan 2.5 mg was more effective than placebo in rendering patient pain-free (RR 3.70, 95% CI 2.59-5.29, P < 0.0001 at 2 h and 2.67, 95% CI 2.21-3.22, P < 0.0001 at 4 h post-dose). It was also superior to placebo in reducing headache severity. The pooled RR was 1.66 (95% CI 1.48-1.88, P < 0.0001) and 1.83 (95% CI 1.66-2.00, P < 0.0001), respectively, at 2 and 4 h after treatment. In those whose headache was relieved at 4 h, the risk of headache recurrence within 24 h was reduced by 26% with frovatriptan (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.59-0.93, P = 0.009). Frovatriptan was also superior to placebo in improving symptoms associated with migraine. At 2 h after dosing, frovatriptan reduced the risk of nausea by 14% (95% CI 6-20%, P = 0.0005), photophobia 17% (95% CI 12-22%, P < 0.0001), and phonophobia 14% (95% CI 17-20%, P < 0.0001). The corresponding numbers at 4 h after dosing were 37% (95% CI 30-43%, P < 0.0001), 34% (95% CI 29-39%, P < 0.0001) and 30% (95% CI 23-36%, P < 0.0001), respectively. Frovatriptan caused more adverse events than did placebo (RR 1.31, 95% CI 1.07-1.62, P = 0.01).
CONCLUSION
The available evidence suggests that frovatriptan is more effective but may cause more adverse events than placebo in the treatment of acute moderate to severe migraine. It is effective in providing pain relief and reducing the risk of recurrence. However, its effectiveness relative to other more established agents needs to be better defined by appropriate head to head trials.
Topics: Carbazoles; Double-Blind Method; Humans; Meta-Analysis as Topic; Migraine Disorders; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Treatment Outcome; Tryptamines
PubMed: 16336284
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2710.2005.00677.x -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Feb 2012Migraine is a common, disabling condition and a burden for the individual, health services and society. Many sufferers choose not to, or are unable to, seek professional... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Migraine is a common, disabling condition and a burden for the individual, health services and society. Many sufferers choose not to, or are unable to, seek professional help and rely on over-the-counter (OTC) analgesics. Diclofenac is an established analgesic, and new formulations using the potassium or epolamine salts, which can be dissolved in water, have been developed for rapid absorption, which may be beneficial in acute migraine. Co-therapy with an antiemetic should help to reduce the nausea and vomiting commonly associated with migraine.
OBJECTIVES
To determine the efficacy and tolerability of diclofenac, alone or in combination with an antiemetic, compared to placebo and other active interventions in the treatment of acute migraine headaches in adults.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Oxford Pain Relief Database, ClinicalTrials.gov, and reference lists for studies through 27 September 2011.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised, double-blind, placebo- and/or active-controlled studies using self administered diclofenac to treat a migraine headache episode, with at least 10 participants per treatment arm.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. We used numbers of participants achieving each outcome to calculate relative risk (or 'risk ratio') and numbers needed to treat to benefit (NNT) or harm (NNH) compared to placebo or a different active treatment.
MAIN RESULTS
Five studies (1356 participants) compared oral diclofenac with placebo, and one also compared it with sumatriptan; none combined diclofenac with a self administered antiemetic. Four studies treated attacks with single doses of medication, and two allowed an optional second dose for inadequate response. Only two studies, with three active treatment arms, provided data for pooled analysis of primary outcomes. For single doses of diclofenac potassium 50 mg versus placebo (two studies), the NNTs were 6.2, 8.9, and 9.5 for pain-free at two hours, headache relief at two hours, and pain-free responses at 24 hours, respectively.Associated symptoms of nausea, photophobia and phonophobia, and functional disability were reduced within two hours, and similar numbers of participants experienced adverse events, which were mostly mild and transient.There were insufficient data to evaluate other doses of oral diclofenac, or to compare different formulations or different dosing regimens; only one study compared oral diclofenac with an active comparator (oral sumatriptan 100 mg).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Oral diclofenac potassium 50 mg is an effective treatment for acute migraine, providing relief from pain and associated symptoms, although only a minority of patients experience pain-free responses. Adverse events are mostly mild and transient and occur at the same rate as with placebo.
Topics: Acute Disease; Adult; Analgesics; Antiemetics; Diclofenac; Drug Therapy, Combination; Humans; Hyperacusis; Migraine Disorders; Nausea; Photophobia; Sumatriptan
PubMed: 22336852
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008783.pub2 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Oct 2010Migraine is a common, disabling condition and a burden for the individual, health services and society. Many sufferers do not seek professional help, relying instead on... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Migraine is a common, disabling condition and a burden for the individual, health services and society. Many sufferers do not seek professional help, relying instead on over-the-counter analgesics. Co-therapy with an antiemetic should help to reduce symptoms commonly associated with migraine headaches.
OBJECTIVES
To determine efficacy and tolerability of ibuprofen, alone or in combination with an antiemetic, compared to placebo and other active interventions in the treatment of acute migraine headaches in adults.
SEARCH STRATEGY
We searched Cochrane CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Oxford Pain Relief Database for studies through 22 April 2010.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised, double-blind, placebo- or active-controlled studies using self-administered ibuprofen to treat a migraine headache episode, with at least 10 participants per treatment arm.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. Numbers of participants achieving each outcome were used to calculate relative risk and number needed to treat (NNT) or harm (NNH) compared to placebo or other active treatment.
MAIN RESULTS
Nine studies (4373 participants, 5223 attacks) compared ibuprofen with placebo or other active comparators; none combined ibuprofen with a self-administered antiemetic. All studies treated attacks with single doses of medication. For ibuprofen 400 mg versus placebo, NNTs for 2-hour pain-free (26% versus 12% with placebo), 2-hour headache relief (57% versus 25%) and 24-hour sustained headache relief (45% versus 19%) were 7.2, 3.2 and 4.0, respectively. For ibuprofen 200 mg versus placebo, NNTs for 2-hour pain-free (20% versus 10%) and 2-hour headache relief (52% versus 37%) were 9.7 and 6.3, respectively. The higher dose was significantly better for 2-hour headache relief than the lower dose. Soluble formulations of ibuprofen 400 mg were better than standard tablets for 1-hour, but not 2-hour headache relief.Associated symptoms of nausea, vomiting, photophobia and phonophobia and functional disability were reduced within 2 hours, and fewer participants used rescue medication with ibuprofen compared with placebo. Similar numbers of participants experienced adverse events, which were mostly mild and transient.Ibuprofen 400 mg did not differ from rofecoxib 25 mg for 2-hour headache relief, 24-hour headache relief or use of rescue medication.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Ibuprofen is an effective treatment for acute migraine headaches, providing pain relief in about half of sufferers, but complete relief from pain and associated symptoms for only a minority. NNTs for all efficacy outcomes were better with 400 mg than 200 mg in comparisons with placebo, and soluble formulations provided more rapid relief. Adverse events were mostly mild and transient, occurring at the same rate as with placebo.
Topics: Administration, Oral; Adult; Analgesics, Non-Narcotic; Antiemetics; Drug Therapy, Combination; Humans; Ibuprofen; Migraine Disorders; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 20927770
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008039.pub2 -
European Journal of Neurology Jun 2024The aim was to provide insights to the characteristics of headache in the context of COVID-19 on behalf of the Headache Scientific Panel and the Neuro-COVID-19 Task...
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE
The aim was to provide insights to the characteristics of headache in the context of COVID-19 on behalf of the Headache Scientific Panel and the Neuro-COVID-19 Task Force of the European Academy of Neurology (EAN) and the European Headache Federation (EHF).
METHODS
Following the Delphi method the Task Force identified six relevant questions and then conducted a systematic literature review to provide evidence-based answers and suggest specific diagnostic criteria.
RESULTS
No data for facial pain were identified in the literature search. (1) Headache incidence during acute COVID-19 varies considerably, with higher prevalence rates in prospective compared to retrospective studies (28.9%-74.6% vs. 6.5%-34.0%). (2) Acute COVID-19 headache is usually bilateral or holocranial and often moderate to severe with throbbing pain quality lasting 2-14 days after first signs of COVID-19; photo-phonophobia, nausea, anosmia and ageusia are common associated features; persistent headache shares similar clinical characteristics. (3) Acute COVID-19 headache is presumably caused by immune-mediated mechanisms that activate the trigeminovascular system. (4) Headache occurs in 13.3%-76.9% following SARS-CoV-2 vaccination and occurs more often amongst women with a pre-existing primary headache; the risk of developing headache is higher with the adenoviral-vector-type vaccines than with other preparations. (5) Headache related to SARS-CoV-2 vaccination is mostly bilateral, and throbbing, pressing, jolting or stabbing. (6) No studies have been conducted investigating the underlying mechanism of headache attributed to SARS-CoV-2 vaccines.
CONCLUSION
The results of this joint EAN/EHF initiative provide a framework for a better understanding of headache in the context of SARS-CoV-2 infection and vaccination.
Topics: Humans; COVID-19; COVID-19 Vaccines; Facial Pain; Headache; SARS-CoV-2; Vaccination
PubMed: 38415282
DOI: 10.1111/ene.16251 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Apr 2010Migraine is a common, disabling condition and a burden for the individual, health services and society. Many sufferers choose not to, or are unable to, seek professional... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Migraine is a common, disabling condition and a burden for the individual, health services and society. Many sufferers choose not to, or are unable to, seek professional help and rely on over-the-counter analgesics. Co-therapy with an antiemetic should help to reduce nausea and vomiting commonly associated with migraine headaches.
OBJECTIVES
To determine the efficacy and tolerability of aspirin, alone or in combination with an antiemetic, compared to placebo and other active interventions in the treatment of acute migraine headaches in adults.
SEARCH STRATEGY
We searched Cochrane CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Oxford Pain Relief Database for studies through 10 March 2010.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised, double-blind, placebo- or active-controlled studies using aspirin to treat a discrete migraine headache episode, with at least 10 participants per treatment arm.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. Numbers of participants achieving each outcome were used to calculate relative risk and numbers needed to treat (NNT) or harm (NNH) compared to placebo or other active treatment.
MAIN RESULTS
Thirteen studies (4222 participants) compared aspirin 900 mg or 1000 mg, alone or in combination with metoclopramide 10 mg, with placebo or other active comparators, mainly sumatriptan 50 mg or 100 mg. For all efficacy outcomes, all active treatments were superior to placebo, with NNTs of 8.1, 4.9 and 6.6 for 2-hour pain-free, 2-hour headache relief, and 24-hour headache relief with aspirin alone versus placebo, and 8.8, 3.3 and 6.2 with aspirin plus metoclopramide versus placebo. Sumatriptan 50 mg did not differ from aspirin alone for 2-hour pain-free and headache relief, while sumatriptan 100 mg was better than the combination of aspirin plus metoclopramide for 2-hour pain-free, but not headache relief; there were no data for 24-hour headache relief.Associated symptoms of nausea, vomiting, photophobia and phonophobia were reduced with aspirin compared with placebo, with additional metoclopramide significantly reducing nausea (P < 0.00006) and vomiting (P = 0.002) compared with aspirin alone.Fewer participants needed rescue medication with aspirin than with placebo. Adverse events were mostly mild and transient, occurring slightly more often with aspirin than placebo.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Aspirin 1000 mg is an effective treatment for acute migraine headaches, similar to sumatriptan 50 mg or 100 mg. Addition of metoclopramide 10 mg improves relief of nausea and vomiting. Adverse events were mainly mild and transient, and were slightly more common with aspirin than placebo, but less common than with sumatriptan 100 mg.
Topics: Adult; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Antiemetics; Aspirin; Drug Therapy, Combination; Humans; Metoclopramide; Migraine Disorders; Nausea; Photophobia; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Sumatriptan; Vomiting
PubMed: 20393963
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008041.pub2 -
Journal of the Association For Research... Feb 2024To assess the available evidence to support a genetic contribution and define the role of common and rare variants in tinnitus.
PURPOSE
To assess the available evidence to support a genetic contribution and define the role of common and rare variants in tinnitus.
METHODS
After a systematic search and quality assessment, 31 records including 383,063 patients were selected (14 epidemiological studies and 17 genetic association studies). General information on the sample size, age, sex, tinnitus prevalence, severe tinnitus distribution, and sensorineural hearing loss was retrieved. Studies that did not include data on hearing assessment were excluded. Relative frequencies were used for qualitative variables to compare different studies and to obtain average values. Genetic variants and genes were listed and clustered according to their potential role in tinnitus development.
RESULTS
The average prevalence of tinnitus estimated from population-based studies was 26.3% for any tinnitus, and 20% of patients with tinnitus reported it as an annoying symptom. One study has reported population-specific differences in the prevalence of tinnitus, the white ancestry being the population with a higher prevalence. Genome-wide association studies have identified and replicated two common variants in the Chinese population (rs2846071; rs4149577) in the intron of TNFRSF1A, associated with noise-induced tinnitus. Moreover, gene burden analyses in sequencing data from Spanish and Swede patients with severe tinnitus have identified and replicated ANK2, AKAP9, and TSC2 genes.
CONCLUSIONS
The genetic contribution to tinnitus is starting to be revealed and it shows population-specific effects in European and Asian populations. The common allelic variants associated with tinnitus that showed replication are associated with noise-induced tinnitus. Although severe tinnitus has been associated with rare variants with large effect, their role on hearing or hyperacusis has not been established.
Topics: Humans; Tinnitus; Genome-Wide Association Study; Hearing; Hearing Loss, Sensorineural; Hyperacusis
PubMed: 38334885
DOI: 10.1007/s10162-024-00925-6 -
Journal of Clinical Medicine Sep 2022Patients with single-sided deafness can experience an ipsilateral disabling tinnitus that has a major impact on individuals' social communication and quality of life.... (Review)
Review
Patients with single-sided deafness can experience an ipsilateral disabling tinnitus that has a major impact on individuals' social communication and quality of life. Cochlear implants appear to be superior to conventional treatments to alleviate tinnitus in single-sided deafness. We conducted a systematic review to evaluate the effectiveness of cochlear implants in single-sided deafness with disabling tinnitus when conventional treatments fail to alleviate tinnitus (PROSPERO ID: CRD42022353292). All published studies in PubMed/MEDLINE and SCOPUS databases until December 2021 were included. A total of 474 records were retrieved, 31 studies were included and were divided into two categories according to whether tinnitus was assessed as a primary complaint or not. In all studies, cochlear implantation, evaluated using subjective validated tools, succeeded in reducing tinnitus significantly. Objective evaluation tools were less likely to be used but showed similar results. A short-(3 months) and long-(up to 72 months) term tinnitus suppression was reported. When the cochlear implant is disactivated, complete residual tinnitus inhibition was reported to persist up to 24 h. The results followed a similar pattern in studies where tinnitus was assesed as a primary complaint or not. In conclusion, the present review confirmed the effectiveness of cochlear implantation in sustainably reducing disabling tinnitus in single-sided deafness patients.
PubMed: 36233532
DOI: 10.3390/jcm11195664 -
Cephalalgia : An International Journal... Sep 2017Introduction Migraine headache is a neurological disorder whose attacks are associated with nausea, vomiting, photophobia and phonophobia. Treatments for migraine aim to... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis Review
Introduction Migraine headache is a neurological disorder whose attacks are associated with nausea, vomiting, photophobia and phonophobia. Treatments for migraine aim to either prevent attacks before they have started or relieve attacks (abort) after onset of symptoms and range from complementary therapies to pharmacological interventions. A number of treatment-related adverse events such as somnolence, fatigue, and chest discomfort have previously been reported in association with triptans. The comparative tolerability of available agents for the abortive treatment of migraine attacks has not yet been systematically reviewed and quantified. Methods We performed a systematic literature review and Bayesian network meta-analysis for comparative tolerability of treatments for migraine. The literature search targeted all randomized controlled trials evaluating oral abortive treatments for acute migraine over a range of available doses in adults. The primary outcomes of interest were any adverse event, treatment-related adverse events, and serious adverse events. Secondary outcomes were fatigue, dizziness, chest discomfort, somnolence, nausea, and vomiting. Results Our search yielded 141 trials covering 15 distinct treatments. Of the triptans, sumatriptan, eletriptan, rizatriptan, zolmitriptan, and the combination treatment of sumatriptan and naproxen were associated with a statistically significant increase in odds of any adverse event or a treatment-related adverse event occurring compared with placebo. Of the non-triptans, only acetaminophen was associated with a statistically significant increase in odds of an adverse event occurring when compared with placebo. Overall, triptans were not associated with increased odds of serious adverse events occurring and the same was the case for non-triptans. For the secondary outcomes, with the exception of vomiting, all triptans except for almotriptan and frovatriptan were significantly associated with increased risk for all outcomes. Almotriptan was significantly associated with an increased risk of vomiting, whereas all other triptans yielded non-significant lower odds compared with placebo. Generally, the non-triptans were not associated with decreased tolerability for the secondary outcomes. Discussion In summary, triptans were associated with higher odds of any adverse event or a treatment-related adverse event occurring when compared to placebo and non-triptans. Non-significant results for non-triptans indicate that these treatments are comparable with one another and placebo regarding tolerability outcomes.
Topics: Acute Disease; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Clinical Trials as Topic; Drug Therapy, Combination; Humans; Migraine Disorders; Naproxen; Sumatriptan; Treatment Outcome; Tryptamines
PubMed: 27521843
DOI: 10.1177/0333102416660552