Open Access

Therapeutical approaches to paroxysmal hemicrania, hemicrania continua and short lasting unilateral neuralgiform headache attacks: a critical appraisal

  • Carlo Baraldi1Email author,
  • Lanfranco Pellesi1,
  • Simona Guerzoni1,
  • Maria Michela Cainazzo1 and
  • Luigi Alberto Pini1
The Journal of Headache and PainOfficial Journal of the "European Headache Federation" and of "Lifting The Burden - The Global Campaign against Headache"201718:71

https://doi.org/10.1186/s10194-017-0777-3

Received: 26 April 2017

Accepted: 4 July 2017

Published: 20 July 2017

Abstract

Background

Hemicrania continua (HC), paroxysmal hemicrania (PH) and short lasting neuralgiform headache attacks (SUNCT and SUNA) are rare syndromes with a difficult therapeutic approach. The aim of this review is to summarize all articles dealing with treatments for HC, PH, SUNCT and SUNA, comparing them in terms of effectiveness and safety.

Methods

A survey was performed using the pubmed database for documents published from the 1st January 1989 onwards. All types of articles were considered, those ones dealing with symptomatic cases and non-English written ones were excluded.

Results

Indomethacin is the best treatment both for HC and PH. For the acute treatment of HC, piroxicam and celecoxib have shown good results, whilst for the prolonged treatment celecoxib, topiramate and gabapentin are good options besides indomethacin. For PH the best drug besides indomethacin is piroxicam, both for acute and prolonged treatment. For SUNCT and SUNA the most effective treatments are intravenous or subcutaneous lidocaine for the acute treatment of active phases and lamotrigine for the their prevention. Other effective therapeutic options are intravenous steroids for acute treatment and topiramate for prolonged treatment. Non-pharmacological techniques have shown good results in SUNCT and SUNA but, since they have been tried on a small number of patients, the reliability of their efficacy is poor and their safety profile mostly unknown.

Conclusions

Besides a great number of treatments tried, HC, PH, SUNCT and SUNA management remains difficult, according with their unknown pathogenesis and their rarity, which strongly limits the studies upon these conditions. Further studies are needed to better define the treatment of choice for these conditions.

Background

Trigeminal autonomic cephalalgias (TACs) is a rare group of headaches characterized by unilateral attacks of severe throbbing pain, mainly localized in the orbital region, associated with unilateral cranial autonomic signs such as lacrimation, conjunctival injection, palpebral ptosis, rhinorrhoea, eyelid edema, facial sweating, facial redness and ear-fullness. The International Classification of Headache Disorders 3rd Edition beta version (ICHD-III-beta) recognizes 4 TACs: cluster headache (CH), hemicrania continua (HC), paroxysmal hemicrania (PH) and short-lasting unilateral neuralgiform headache attacks (SUNCT and SUNA) [1]. HC is characterized by a continuous background of moderate pain intensity and has only recently been classified as a TAC [2]; on the contrary, CH, PH, SUNCT and SUNA lack the history of background pain [1]. TACs rather than CH are uncommon and neglected syndromes: the annual prevalence of PH and short lasting unilateral neuralgiform headache attacks is about 0.5/1000 in the general population and is still unknown for HC [3], this facilitate their misdiagnosis, which often delays the correct treatment [4]. Treatment delay, especially in chronic forms, dramatically decreases the patients’ quality of life because pain is often severe, highly-disabling and can last, even if not continuously, for many hours during the day [5]. Only a few therapeutic tools are available for these conditions and this is firstly due to their infrequent diagnosis, which makes the conduction of well-prepared randomized clinical placebo-controlled trials (RCPCTs) almost impossible. The effectiveness and safety of the treatments are reported mainly in case-reports, case-series, letters to the editor and brief communications. This leads to a not-scheduled treatment for TACs and the absence of shared guidelines. Furthermore, there aren’t studies clearly ranking treatments to manage TACs, nor one comparing them in terms of effectiveness and/or safety. The aim of this study is to rank all therapeutic options available in literature for HC, PH, SUNCT and SUNA treatment and to compare, when possible, their effectiveness and safety. Since there are already shared guide-lines and a large amount of reviews dealing with CH, this won’t be discussed further.

Methods

Search strategy

A MEDLINE search using the electronic data-base pubmed has been performed to check all articles dealing with the treatment of primary HC, PH, SUNCT and SUNA form the 1st of January 1989 (the first complete year in which the first International Headache Society classification was available) onwards. All articles types were considered and non-English written ones were excluded. The research was performed using the following terms: “((paroxysmal hemicrania) AND (“1989/01/01”[Date - Publication]: “3000”[Date - Publication])) AND English[Language]” for PH, “((hemicrania continua) AND (“1989/01/01”[Date - Publication]: “3000”[Date - Publication])) AND English[Language]” for HC, “((short lasting neuralgiform headache attacks) AND (“1989/01/01”[Date - Publication]: “3000”[Date - Publication])) AND English[Language]” for SUNCT and SUNA. Short lasting unilateral neuralgiform headache attack was treated as one entity, not differentiating between short lasting neuralgiform headache attacks with conjunctival injection and tearing (SUNCT) and short lasting neuralgiform headache attacks with autonomic signs (SUNA). A few articles cited in the references of the above-mentioned ones were cited even though they were not present in pubmed, but were found in SCOPUS and EMBASE.

Data

Altogether, 691 articles were found of which 290 articles for HC, 250 for PH and 151 for short lasting unilateral neuralgiform headache attacks. Cited articles should fulfill the ICHD-III beta guide-lines for TACs diagnosis, not deal with a symptomatic case and correctly state treatment. Reviews were considered only if new cases were included. For HC, 230 articles were excluded: 67 summarized results from other studies without adding any new case, 138 didn’t deal with HC therapy and 24 referred to symptomatic cases. For PH, 195 articles were excluded: 67 reported and summarized only the results of different works, 90 didn’t consider PH therapy or described it unsatisfactorily, 29 referred to symptomatic PH and 9 didn’t fulfill all ICHD-III diagnostic criteria, making a diagnosis of “probable PH”. For SUNCT and SUNA 95 articles were excluded: 60 were reviews, 20 of them didn’t deal with SUNCT or SUNA therapy or reported it unsatisfactorily, 11 reported symptomatic cases and 4 didn’t full-filled all diagnostic criteria. Steps followed for article selection are summarized in Fig. 1. For every article, each patient was analyzed and only those treatments correctly stated in terms of regimen and response were considered. If a patient took a drug in different dosages or underwent a non-pharmacological procedure following different regimens, only the one giving the maximum effect was considered. Every patient was classified as a responder if he/she was accredited with, at least, a partial relief. Moreover, as to grade the different therapies better, pain-free patients were sub-classified as complete responders. Finally, the signaled AEs were collected. Since all these diseases are characterized by exacerbations periods in which pain attacks develops and inter-critic periods in which pain is absent (PH, SUNCT and SUNA) or slight-moderate (HC), treatments were divided in two categories: treatments used to cease attacks during exacerbations and treatments taken regularly to control pain (especially in HC), trying to prevent the incoming of new active phases. The first treatments were indicated as “acute treatments”, whilst the second as “prolonged treatments”. Some acute treatments in HC and PH were used also to control pain outside exacerbations and were both considered as acute and prolonged treatments.
Fig. 1

Flow-chart of article selection

Drug mean dosage and therapeutic standards for non-pharmacological treatments were considered and summarized, even if not statistically analyzed.

Treatments used in less than five patients or which were clearly ineffective were not pooled in the statistical analysis, even if reported. Data regarding treatments used in 5 or more patients are summarized in Table 1, those ones regarding treatments used in less than 5 patients are reported in the Additional file 1: Table S1.
Table 1

Treatment options for HC, PH and SLUNHA used in, at least, 5 patients

Treatment

Number of patients

Mean dosage ±SD* [range]

Route of administration

Responders proportion % [95% CI]

Complete responders proportion % [95% CI]

AE proportion % [95% CI]

AE causing the stoppage or reduction of therapy proportion % [95% CI]

References

Section A- Hemicrania continua

Acute treatments

  Indomethacin

159

Adult: 145 ± 125

[25–325]

Pediatric: 100 ± 50

[25–175]

IM 1.3%

REC 0.6%

OS 98.1%

157/159

99 [97–100]

151/159

95 [92–98]

75/83

90

46/83

55

[661]

  SONB

17

**

 

17/17

100

5/17

29 [8–50]

-

-

[6264]

  GONB

15

***

 

6/15

40 [15–65]

1/15

7 [0–19]

-

-

[10, 35, 43, 48, 62]

  Celecoxib

11

528 ± 241

[200–800]

OS 100%

9/11

82 [59–100]

8/11

73 [46–100]

-

-

[32, 49, 52, 65]

  Piroxicam

7

37 ± 10

[20–40]

OS 100%

6/7

86 [60–100]

5/7

71 [38–100]

-

-

[40, 66]

  MONB

6

0.5–1.5 mg/ml solution with 12.μrg/m

andrenaline

 

0/6

0

0/6

0

-

-

[62]

  Oxygen

13

8 ± 5a

INAL 100%

0/13

0

0/13

0

-

-

[39, 47]

  Sumatriptan

8

6

SC 100%

0/7

0

0/7

0

-

-

[32, 67]

Prolonged treatments

  Indomethacin

159

Adult:115 ± 100

[25–225]

Pediatric:55 ± 35

[25–75]c

IM 1.3%

REC 0.6%

OS 98.1%

157/159

99 [97–100]

151/159

95 [92–98]

75/83

90

46/83

55

[661]

  SONB

17

**

 

17/17

100

5/17

29 [8–50]

-

-

[6264]

  Melatonin

17

12

[3–30]

OS 100%

9/17

53 [29–77]

5/17

29 [8–50]

6/13

45

3/13

23

[13, 21, 31, 33, 37, 48]

  GONB

15

***

 

6/15

40 [15–65]

1/15

7 [0–19]

-

-

[10, 35, 43, 48, 62]

  ONS

14

****

 

12/14

84 [68–100]

3/14

21 [3–39]

-

-

[10, 33, 68]

  Gabapentin

13

1600

[600–3600]

OS 100%

11/13

85 [65–100]

6/13

46 [19–73]

4/9

44

0/9

0

[7, 21, 32, 43, 55, 69]

  Topiramate

13

133

[50–300]

OS 100%

11/13

85 [65–100]

8/13

62 [35–89]

2/7

29

2/7

29

[11, 24, 28, 29, 36, 38, 43, 49, 70]

  OnabotulinumtoxinA

12

155b

[100–185]

SC 100%

12/12

100

4/12

33 [6–60]

-

-

[22, 43]

  Celecoxib

11

528 ± 241

[200–800]

OS 100%

9/11

82 [59–100]

8/11

73 [46–100]

-

-

[32, 49, 52, 65]

  Verapamil

8

265

[120–480]

OS 100%

3/8

38 [4–72]

0/8

0

1/1

100

1/1

100

[7, 21, 32, 43, 55, 69]

  Piroxicam

7

37 ± 10

[20–40]

OS 100%

6/7

86 [60–100]

5/7

71 [38–100]

-

-

[40, 66]

  MONB

6

0.5–1.5 mg/ml solution with 12.μrg/m

andrenaline

 

0/6

0

0/6

0

-

-

[62]

Section B- Paroxysmal hemicrania

Acute treatments

  Indomethacin

168

Adult: 97 ± 39

Pediatric: 35 ± 27

OS 95%

IM 0.6%

RECTAL 4.4%

163/168

97 [94–100]

150/168

89 [85–94]

42/78

54 [43–64]

21/78

27 [17–37]

[26, 38, 53, 60, 71118]

  Sumatriptan

24

6

SC 100%

5/24

21 [5–37]

1/24

4 [0–8]

1/1

100

1/1

100

[38, 76, 84, 103, 104, 114]

  Oxygen

11

7 ± 4a

INAL 100%

6/18

33 [11–55]

0/18

0

-.

-

[38, 89, 119]

  SONB

6

**

 

0/6

0

0/6

0

-

-

[62]

  GONB

6

**

 

0/6

0

0/6

0

-

-

[62]

  MONB

6

**

 

0/6

0

0/6

0

-

-

[62]

  Piroxicam

5

36 ± 9

OS 100%

3/5

60 [17–100]

2/5

40 [0–80]

-

-

[66]

Prolonged treatments

  Indomethacin

168

Adult: 97 ± 39

Pediatric: 35 ± 27c

OS 95%

IM 0.6%

RECTAL 4.4%

163/168

97 [94–100]

150/168

89 [85–94]

42/78

54 [43–64]

21/78

27 [17–37]

[26, 38, 53, 60, 70118]

  Verapamil

30

Adult: 248 ± 87

Pediatric: 200 ± 70

OS 100%

14/30

47 [26–64]

5/30

17 [3–31]

2/3

66

1/3

33

[38, 81, 83, 87, 91, 92, 98, 101, 103, 111, 115]

  Carbamazepine

15

803 ± 275

OS 100%

3/15

20 [0–40]

0/15

0

-

-

[84, 98, 101, 107, 110, 120]

  Topiramate

12

Adult: 172 ± 75

Pediatric: 48 ± 3

OS 100%

9/12

75 [50–99]

5/12

42 [14–70]

2/2

100

2/2

100

[38, 75, 93, 101, 105, 109, 115]

  SONB

6

**

 

0/6

0

0/6

0

-

-

[62]

  GONB

6

**

 

0/6

0

0/6

0

-

-

[62]

  MONB

6

**

 

0/6

0

0/6

0

-

-

[62]

  Piroxicam

5

36 ± 9

OS 100%

3/5

60 [17–100]

2/5

40 [0–80]

-

-

[66]

  Amitriptyline

5

32 ± 17

OS 100%

2/5

40 [0–80]

0/5

0

-

-

[73, 78, 91, 92]

Section C- Short lasting unilateral neuralgiform headache attacks

 Acute treatments

  Lidocaine

36

1.9

[1–3.5]

IV 75%

SC 25%

34/36

94 [87–100]

29/36

80 [67–93]

13/36

36 [15–58]

6/36

16 [1–31]

[124129]

  Prednisone

11

53 [20–100]

OS 91%

IV 9%

6/11

50 [20–80]

1/11

10 [0–28]

-

-

[124, 129134]

  Methylprednisolone

7

193

[16–1000]

IV 57%

OS 43%

5/7

71 [38–100]

4/7

57 [20–94]

-

-

[125, 132, 135137]

  Phenytoin

5

270

[200–300]

OS 100%

1/5

20 [0–55]

0/5

[0–0]

-

-

[124, 138141]

Prolonged treatments

  Lamotrigine

84

231

[50–900]

OS 100%

68/84

81 [73–89]

38/84

45 [35–55]

32 [16–48]

13 [12–25]

[124, 125, 127129, 134, 139, 140, 142155]

  Carbamazepine

78

737

[100–2000]

OS 100%

38/78

49 [38–60]

9/78

11 [4–18]

50

[20–80]

40

[10–70]

[124127, 131134, 137140, 143, 146, 147, 150152, 155157, 159166]

  Indomethacin

50

116

[50–225]

OS 100%

4/50

8 [1–15]

1/50

2 [0–4]

50

[0–100]

-

[124, 125, 127, 129, 131, 134, 138, 139, 141, 146148, 150, 154, 157159, 162, 165, 167171]

  Gabapentin

48

1581

[300–3600]

OS 100%

28/48

59 [45–74]

13/48

28 [15–41]

0/8

0

0/8

0

[124127, 137, 138, 140, 141, 145, 150, 153, 167, 172, 173]

  Topiramate

36

168

[40–400]

OS 100%

20/36

56 [39–72]

10/36

28 [13–43]

75

[32–100]

2

[0–55]

[124126, 129, 134, 135, 138, 143, 145, 148, 155]

  VTA DBS

9

Amplitude: 4 mV Frequency: 185 Hz

Pulse width: 60 ms

 

9/9

100

9/9

100

9/9

100

1/9

11

[174]

  GONB

9

Bupivacaine 12.5 every 3 months

 

5/9

55 [44–66]

2/9

22 [33–44]

-

-

[125, 140]

  ONS

7

Amplitude: 0.3–3.15 V

Frequency: 60–130 Hz

Pulse width: 450 ms

 

7/7

100

7/7

100

0/7

0

0/7

0

[175]

  Verapamil

6

347

[240–640]

OS 100%

2/6

33 [0–71]

1/6

17 [0–34]

-

-

[134, 138, 139, 162, 170]

  Valproate

5

950 ± 655

[250–2000]

OS 100%

0/5

0

0/5

0

-

-

[124, 131, 139, 168]

*For non-pharmacological procedures the method used has been reported. Drug dosages are in mg/day if not otherwise specified

**Antonaci: 0.5–1.5 mg/ml solution with 12.5 μg/m andrenaline; Guerrero 2 cm3 of 0.5% bupivacaine and 2% mepivacaine in a 1:1 ratio¸ Weyker 25% 0.25 ml + bupivacaine 10 mg triamcinolone

***Beams: 9 cm3 of 1% lidocaine with 40 mg triamcinolone; Garza and Guerrero: 2 cm3 of 0.5% Bupivacaine and 2% mepivacaine in a 1:1 ratio

****Burns: frequency of 60 Hz and pulse width of 250 μs for all patients; the amplitude of the bion current could be adjusted within a given range

aL/min, bUI; cmaintainance dose, unchanged for, at least, 1 month

Statistical analysis

Continuous data were expressed as mean ± standard deviation. Binary variables were express as proportion and percentages. Odds and odds ratios (OR) were considered for statistical analysis. Continuous data and odds were approximated at the second decimal figure, OR and all p-values at the third. Statistical analysis was performed using the STATAIc 13 software. For every syndrome, the odds of responders, complete responders, AEs and AEs causing treatment reduction or discontinuation were compared based on the test of the equality of odds.

Results

Hemicrania continua (HC)

Globally, 65 articles were considered for the statistical analysis [670]. Indomethacin was referred to as the most widely used treatment for HC. Melatonin was used in 17 patients, gabapentin and topiramate were utilized in 13 patients, onabotulinumtoxinA (OnabotA) in 12 patients and celecoxib in 11 patients. The other drugs were used in less than 10 patients. Supraorbital nerve blockade (SONB) was used on 17 patients, great occipital nerve blockade (GONB) on 15, occipital nerve stimulation (ONS) on 14 patients and minor occipital nerve blockade (MONB) on 6 patients.

Other drugs rather than indomethacin were used before indomethacin was given in 60% of cases, but only in the 20% of cases data were good enough to be considered (data not shown). Alternatively, since indomethacin was stopped in the 30% of cases because of its related AEs, other treatments were tried. Pharmacological treatments used in at least 5 patients, are summarized in Table 1 (section A). Statistical comparisons between the odds of responders and complete responders are summarized in Table 2 for the acute treatments and in Table 3 for the prolonged treatments. Data regarding those treatments performed in less than 5 patients are reported in Additional file 1: Table S1 (section A).
Table 2

comparisons between the odds of partial and complete responders for the acute treatments of HC*

*Cells report the OR of responders and complete responders of the indicated treatments and the 95% CI. OR are calculated as the odds of responder/complete responders of he treatments indicated in the coloured boxes split by the odds of responders/complete responders of the column treatments. The highlighted cells indicate a p-value of the test of equality of odds lower than 0.05. Arrows indicate if the column treatment is better (↑) or worse (↓) than the coloured boxes' ones

Table 3

comparisons between the odds of responders and complete responders of prolonged treatments for HC*

*Cells report the OR of responders and complete responders of the indicated treatments and the 95% CI. OR are calculated as the odds of responder/complete responders of he treatments indicated in the coloured boxes split by the odds of responders/complete responders of the column treatments. The highlighted cells indicate a p-value of the test of equality of odds lower than 0.05. Arrows indicate if the column treatment is better (↑) or worse (↓) than the coloured boxes' ones

Effectiveness

Acute treatments

Indomethacin, supraorbital nerve blockade (SONB), great occipital nerve blockade (GONB), celecoxib, piroxicam, minor occipital nerve blockade (MONB), oxygen, sumatriptan, methylprednisolone, ibuprofen, dorsal root ganglion blockade (DRGB), sphenopalatine ganglion blockade (SPGB) and ergotamine were the drugs considered for exacerbation management in HC.

Oxygen, minor occipital nerve blockade (MONB) and sumatriptan seemed to have no effect on HC and no responders have been registered; for this reason they weren’t pooled in the statistical analysis. Ergotamine, ibuprofen, DRGB, SPGB and methylprednisolone weren’t pooled in the statistical analysis because of the small number of patients treated with these. Indomethacin has a significantly higher odds of responders than celecoxib (p < 0.001), piroxicam (p < 0.001) and GONB (p < 0.001), but a similar proportion of responders than SONB, which reduced painful symptoms in each patient (p = 0.541). Indomethacin has also the highest odds of complete responders, even if compared with SONB (all p < 0.001). Considering other treatments rather than indomethacin, piroxicam and celecoxib haven’t shown a significantly different odds of responders (p = 0.837) and complete responders (p = 0.219). Celecoxib has a higher odds of responders than GONB (p = 0.037) and a significantly higher odds of complete responders than GONB (p < 0.001) and SONB (p = 0.028). Finally, SONB shows a significantly higher odds of responders than GONB (p < 0.001), but a similar odds of pain-free patients (p = 0.105). All comparisons are summarized in Table 2.

Prolonged treatments

Indomethacin, melatonin, gabapentin, topiramate, OnabotA, celecoxib, verapamil, piroxicam, ONS, SONB, GONB, acemethacin, amytriptiline, DRGB, SPGB, valproate, lithium, troclear injections of triamcinolone, fentanyl and tilidine are the drugs used for the treatment of HC outside exacerbations, to prevent the incoming of new active phases and control the background pain. Data regarding acemethacin, amytriptiline, DRGB, SPGB, valproate, lithium, troclear injections of triamcinolone, fentanyl and tilidine were not pooled in the statistical analysis because of the small number of patients who tried them.

Indomethacin has a significantly higher odds of responders than all other treatments except for OnabotA (p = 0.723) and SONB (p = 0.541); moreover, it has a significantly higher odds of pain-free patients compared to the other types of treatment (all p < 0.001).

Considering the other types of treatment, verapamil has a lower odds of responders than gabapentin (P = 0.03), topiramate (p = 0.03), OnabotA (p = 0.002), ONS (p = 0.018) and SONB (p < 0.001). Verapamil has also a lower odds of complete responders than gabapentin (p = 0.027), topiramate (p = 0.006), celecoxib (p = 0.002) and piroxicam (p = 0.005). GONB has an odds of responder lower than gabapentin (p = 0.018), topiramate (p = 0.018), OnabotA (p = 0.001), celecoxib (p = 0.037), ONS (p = 0.008) and SONB (p < 0.001). Furthermore, it has a lower odds of complete responders than gabapentin (p = 0.018), topiramate (p = 0.002), celecoxib (p < 0.001) and piroxicam (p = 0.002).

Furthermore, melatonin has an odds of responders significantly lower than OnabotA (p = 0.006). All comparisons are summarized in Table 3.

Safety

Considering the poor number of signaled AEs, no statistical comparisons were made between the different odds of AEs and AEs causing the discontinuation or the modification of therapy. The only mild-quality data dealing with drugs’ safety profile regarded indomethacin: AEs status was clearly declared in 83 patients, 75% of whom reported an AE and 46 were forced to discontinue or reduce therapy.

Paroxysmal hemicrania (PH)

Fifty five articles were considered for PH [26, 38, 53, 60, 62, 66, 71123]. Indomethacin is the most used treatment (168 patients), followed by verapamil (30 patients), sumatriptan (24 patients) and oxygen (18 patients). Carbamazepine (CBZ) was tried on 15 patients, topiramate on 12 patients, amitriptyline and piroxicam on 5 patients. SONB, MONB and GONB were all used upon 6 patients. Piroxicam and amitriptyline were used upon 5 patients. All other treatments were used on less than 5 patients and were not taken into consideration for the statistical analysis. Treatments used in 5 or more patients are summarized in Table 1 (section B). Statistical comparisons of the odds of responders and complete responders for acute treatments are summarized in Table 4 whilst for the prolonged ones in Table 5. Data regarding those drugs taken by less than 5 patients are summarized in the Additional file 1: Table S1 (section B).
Table 4

statistical comparisons between the odds of responders and complete responders of acute treatments for PH*

*Cells report the OR of responders and complete responders of the indicated treatments and the 95% CI. OR are calculated as the odds of responder/complete responders of he treatments indicated in the coloured box split by the odds of responders/complete responders of the column treatments. The highlighted cells indicate a p-value of the test of equality of odds lower than 0.05. Arrows indicate if the column treatment is better (↑) or worse (↓) than the coloured boxes' ones

Table 5

statistical comparisons between the odds of responders and complete responders of prolonged treatments for PH*

*Cells report the OR of responders and complete responders of the indicated treatments and the 95% CI. OR are calculated as the odds of responder/complete responders of he treatments indicated in the coloured box split by the odds of responders/complete responders of the column treatments. The highlighted cells indicate a p-value of the test of equality of odds lower than 0.05. Arrows indicate if the column treatment is better (↑) or worse (↓) than the coloured boxes' ones

Effectiveness

Acute treatments

Indomethacin, sumatriptan, oxygen, MONB, GONB, SONB, piroxicam, rofecoxib, prednisone, valdecoxib, etoricoxib, naproxen, betamethasone, methylprednisolone, HDBS and SPGB were considered as acute treatments. The last eight were used in less than 5 patients and so weren’t pooled in the statistical analysis; MONB, GONB and SONB weren’t pooled in the statistical analysis either as they were clearly ineffective. Rofecoxib was not considered as it has been taken off the International market. Indomethacin has a significantly higher odds of responders and complete responders than piroxicam, sumatriptan and oxygen (all p < 0.001). Moreover, piroxicam has a significantly higher odds of complete responders, both than sumatriptan (p = 0.0187) and oxygen (p = 0.006). All comparisons are reported in Table 4.

Prolonged treatments

To prevent the recurrence of PH exacerbations 26 treatments were find out from literature. Indomethacin, verapamil, CBZ, topiramate, MONB, GONB, SONB, piroxicam and amytriptiline were those treatments used in more than 5 patients and pooled in the statistical analysis. Propranolol, acetylsalicylic acid, lithium, ergotamine, dipyrone, valproate, acetazolamide, baclofen, phenytoin, methysergide, doxepine, flunnarizine, gabapentin, bethametasone, methylprednisolone, OnabotA, hypothalamic deep brain stimulation (HDBS), sphenopalatine ganglion blockade (SPGB) were used in less than 5 patients and so weren’t taken into consideration for the statistical analysis. Indomethacin has a the highest odds of responders and complete responders (all p < 0.001). Besides indomethacin, all other drugs show a not-significantly different odds of responders between them. Considering the complete responders, CBZ has a lower odds than piroxicam (p = 0.012) and topiramate (p = 0.007). All comparisons are reported in Table 5.

Safety

AEs were cited in a very small number of works and many reports refers only to indomethacin; for these reasons it was not possible to make a reliable comparison between the safety profile of those drugs. Anyway, AEs were stated for 78 patients receiving indomethacin: the 54% of them suffered from an AE (mainly gastro-intestinal) and the 27% discontinued or interrupted the therapy.

Short lasting unilateral neuralgiform headache attacks (SUNCT and SUNA)

Globally 56, studies were analyzed [124179]. The most widely used treatment to control the excruciating and frequent attacks during active phases was lidocaine (36 patients), followed by prednisone (11 patients) and methylprednisolone (7 patients). To prevent the incoming of new active phases the most used treatments were: lamotrigine (84 patients), CBZ (78 patients), indomethacin (48 patients), gabapentin (48 patients) and topiramate (36 patients). All other treatments were used in less than 10 patients.

All these data are summarized in Table 1 (section C), data regarding statistical comparisons between the odds of responders and complete responders are summarized in Table 6 (acute treatments) and in Table 7 (prolonged treatments). Data regarding treatments used in less than 5 patients are reported in Additional file 1: Table S1 -section C.
Table 6

statistical comparisons between the odds of responders and complete responders of acute treatment for SUNCT and SUNA*

*Cells report the OR of responders and complete responders of the indicated treatments and the 95% CI. OR are calculated as the odds of responder/complete responders of he treatments indicated in the coloured box split by the odds of responders/complete responders of the column treatments. The highlighted cells indicate a p-value of the test of equality of odds lower than 0.05. Arrows indicate if the column treatment is better (↑) or worse (↓) than the coloured boxes' ones

Table 7

statistical comparisons between the odds of responders and complete responders of prolonged treatments for SUNCT and SUNA*

*Cells report the OR of responders and complete responders of the indicated treatments and the 95% CI. OR are calculated as the odds of responder/complete responders of he treatments indicated in the coloured box split by the odds of responders/complete responders of the column treatments. The highlighted cells indicate a p-value of the test of equality of odds lower than 0.05. Arrows indicate if the column treatment is better (↑) or worse (↓) than the coloured boxes' ones

Effectiveness

Acute treatments

Lidocaine, prednisone, methylprednisolone, phenytoin, celecoxib, superior trigeminal nerve blockade (STGB) and HDBS were considered for the management of exacerbation in SUNCT and SUNA. Lidocaine was effective in the 94% of patients, of which 80% of them were completely pain-free. Lidocaine has a significantly higher odds of responders than prednisone (p < 0.001) and phenytoin (p = 0.001), but comparable to methylprednisolone (p = 0.058). The same trend was seen for the odds of pain-free patients: lidocaine has an odds of complete responders significantly higher than prednisone (p = 0.002) and phenytoin (p < 0.001), but comparable to methylprednisolone (p = 0.1797). Methylprednisolone has significantly higher odds of complete responders than phenytoin (p = 0.0384). All comparisons are reported in Table 6. All other treatments were used upon less than 5 patients and weren’t pooled in the statistical analysis.

Prolonged treatments

Lamotrigine, topiramate, gabapentin, verapamil, indomethacin, CBZ, GONB, ventral tegmental area deep brain stimulation, ONS, clonazepam, HDBS, OnabotA, baclofen, pregabalin, gamma-knife radiosurgery of the trigeminal nerve, nifedipine, fentanyl, lithium, methysergide, zonisamide, lomerizine and STGB were those drugs used for the prevention of new active phases. The last 12 were not pooled in the statistical analysis due to the poor number of patients who tried them.

Lamotrigine has an odds of responders significantly higher than topiramate (p = 0.004), even if the odds of complete responders were comparable (p = 0.074). Lamotrigine has also a higher odds of responders (p = 0.008) and complete responders (p = 0.0487) than gabapentin and, moreover, than indomethacin, verapamil and CBZ (all p-value < 0.001).

Indomethacin has an odds of responders lower than topiramate, gabapentin, CBZ, VTA DBS and ONS (all p < 0.001). Ventral tegmental area deep brain stimulation and ONS have an odds of responders significantly higher than the ones of all other treatments despite lamotrigine (all p-values < 0.001).

Considering pain-free patients, indomethacin has a lower odds than lamotrigine, topiramate, gabapentin, GONB, VTA DBS and ONS (all p-values < 0.001). ONS has an odds of complete responders higher than all other treatments. All comparisons are reported in Table 7.

Safety

Acute treatments

Since the only reported AEs were for IV lidocaine, no statistical comparisons were made for short-term treatment drugs. Anyway, safety profile of IV or SC Lidocaine was stated for 36 patients, 13 of which suffered from a mild AE and 6 from an AE causing the discontinuation of therapy.

Prolonged treatments

According with the low number of signaled AEs, verapamil and indomethacin were excluded from the statistical analysis. Lamotrigine has more AEs than gabapentin (p = 0.039), but no differences were noted for the AEs causing the stop or the reduction of therapy (p = 0.232). No differences were found in the proportion of AEs between lamotrigine and CBZ (p = 0.311), but a tendency in a higher number of AEs causing the discontinuation or the modification of therapy was seen for CBZ (p = 0.06). Topiramate has a higher number of AEs than gabapentin (P = 0.002), but a similar occurrence of severe AEs. Topiramate has also the same proportion of AEs than CBZ and the same number of complete responders. Gabapentin was absolutely the safest drug, showing also a lower number of AEs than CBZ (P = 0.01). Because of the poor number of AEs causing the discontinuation or the modification of therapy, data regarding the comparison of their proportion between the different treatments were not shown in the previous Table.

Discussion

General considerations

Due to the infrequent diagnosis of these conditions, only case-reports or small case-series were found in literature and this strongly limits the reliability of the analysis. In many articles responders are not so well identifiable and in a very few ones the partial response was clearly described in terms of reduction of headache frequency, intensity or both, making almost impossible a comparison between the activity of different drugs on these aspects of pain. Treatment safety profile is hard to study too, primarily due to the sporadic report of AEs.

Hemicrania continua (HC)

The first choice treatment for HC is indomethacin: for the management of recurrent exacerbations indomethacin should be the first choice drug, according with the higher effectiveness than all other treatments (see Table 2), which should be reserved to patients who don’t tolerated indomethacin. SONB has a similar proportion of responders but the lower odds of pain-free patients suggest that this technique is worse and more effective in diminishing pain rather than abolishing it [180]. It should also be considered that SONB has been tested only in a smaller number of patients than indomethacin and currently the experience on the use of these techniques is scarce, both for long-term availability (mean follow-up time = 93 days-data not show) and AEs profile. Celecoxib has an odds of responders lower than indomethacin but higher than GONB and an odds of complete responders higher than GONB and SONB, so it appears a better therapeutical approach than the last two in patients who don’t tolerate indomethacin. Piroxicam is comparable to celecoxib in terms of effectiveness, mirroring a similar action, as also stated by other studies [181]. GONB and MONB usefulness in relieving HC exacerbations seems to be negligible, like the usefulness of those treatments available for CH attacks, like SC sumatriptan and oxygen inhalation. This confirms that, despite the clinical over-lapping of HC and CH, the underlying pathogenetic mechanisms should be different, thus justifying a different pharmacological response [182]. HC management on long-time periods is unscheduled, but medications have been introduced trying to prevent pain recurrence. The prolonged use of drugs which were effective exacerbation control is a common practice and drugs like indomethacin, piroxicam and celecoxib are frequently used in HC patients outside active phases, even for many months: in our sample the duration of indomethacin assumption ranged between 5 and 1440 days, whereas from 18 to 540 for celecoxib. For piroxicam those data were not available, but its use for “many months” was reported in 5 patients out of 7. The stoppage of these drugs was due to AEs, mainly gastro-intestinal (GI), in the 70% of cases. The development of serious AEs is the main reason for which indomethacin, piroxicam and celecoxib should not be continued for many months outside exacerbations, even if the dose is titrated to the lowest possible or a preventive therapy with a proton pump inhibitor is started. SONB and GONB were both used even for the prevention of HC exacerbations, but GONB seems of no effect and SONB has a low odds of pain-free patients, denoting a partial action. The incoming of GI AEs and the low effectiveness of GONB and SONB impose the use of other drugs to control pain.

Gabapentin, topiramate, melatonin and OnabotA seems to be comparable in terms of effectiveness even if, considering the p-values of these comparisons (p = 0.063), a better action for gabapentin and topiramate than melatonin should be hypothesed. ONS should be a reliable option besides pharmacological techniques, as also confirmed from a recently published statement from the European Headache Federation [183]. The usefulness of verapamil in HC is scarce, since it has a lower odds of responders than indomethacin, OnabotA, topiramate, ONS and gabapentin and an odds of complete responders lower than all other treatments, except the non-pharmacological ones and melatonin.

The question on the tolerability of these treatments remains open and the unfair data about AEs make any comparison doubtful. Anyway, from the available literature, celecoxib and piroxicam should have a similar AEs profile than indomethacin with an even higher risk of cardiovascular side-effects with celecoxib [184], but a lower risk of renal AEs according to its higher COX-2 selectivity [185]: celecoxib and other COX-2 selective NSAIDs should be avoided with cardiovascular co-morbidities, but should be chosen after indomethacin in patients with renal diseases of with gastro-intestinal co-morbidities.

Paroxysmal hemicrania (PH)

PH is another member of the so-called indomethacin-responsive headaches [1] and, in fact, indomethacin is undoubtedly the best treatment even for this condition. The activity of other treatments is low both for the acute treatment and for the prolonged one. Piroxicam emerges as the best treatment besides indomethacin for exacerbations management, according to the higher odds of pain-free patients than oxygen and sumatriptan. The usefulness of this last two drugs is almost null and this confirms once again the differences in TACs’ pathogenesis besides their clinical similarity [182]. Even when used for PH control outside active phases indomethacin is the most effective treatment. Even so, since PH is frequently chronic and indomethacin assumption for long periods of time may cause a wide range of AEs, this usually lead to the discontinuation of therapy in about 27% of cases. This imposes the use of different treatments to control the pain, but other tested drugs seems to be of little use with the most effective being rofecoxib, which has been retired from the international market because of its cardiac side-effects [186]. Piroxicam seems to be the most effective treatment other than indomethacin, even if the possibility of having GI AEs remains [187] and, like indomethacin, its use should be avoided for long periods of time. Since the hypothesized overlapping between PH and migraine pathogenesis [15], two well-known migraine prophylaxis such as topiramate and amitriptyline have been tried for PH, with comparable and moderate results. Topiramate and amitriptyline are also comparable to piroxicam and verapamil in terms of effectiveness, even though the latter shows a not-significant higher odds of responders and complete responders. CBZ usefulness seems to be low and the null number of complete responders should discourage its use for PH management.

Short lasting unilateral neuralgiform headache attacks (SUNCT and SUNA)

To stop SUNCT and SUNA exacerbations, lidocaine (intravenously or subcutaneously) seems to be the most effective treatment and is now emerging as a novel option for chronic pain syndromes [188]. Its effectiveness is unquestionable, but paranoid idealization, depressive thoughts and cardiac arrhythmias were registered as AEs: this imposes the careful and shortest use of this drug only for the worst cases and the patient’s continuous monitoring with a 12-lead ECG registration and sequential blood pressure measurements during the treatment [189]. In our sample the time of use ranged between 2 to 10 days (data not shown). Steroids represent a less effective but safer options for stopping attacks, with methylprednisolone presenting a better action than prednisone, even if not significantly. As previously discussed for lidocaine, steroids should be given intravenously for the shortest time as possible: from literature it is well-known that they can have a wide range of AEs, which can be prevented by reducing the duration of infusion to the time necessary for the ceasing of painful exacerbations [190]. In our sample the mean time of infusion was 8 ± 4.32 days (data not shown) The usefulness of phenytoin should be considered negligible.

Lamotrigine is the best drug for the prevention of the incoming of new active phases, but seems to be more suitable in reducing attacks frequency rather than abolishing them completely: it has an odds of partial responders higher than all other drugs, but the odds of complete responders are comparable, with the exceptions of CBZ and indomethacin, which efficacy is scarce. Non-pharmacological techniques have an odds of responders comparable to lamotrigine and, moreover, ONS has even a higher odds of complete responders. Lamotrigine has also a similar AEs profile than other treatments except for gabapentin, confirming the available literature [191].

Verapamil, gabapentin and topiramate have similar effectiveness, with gabapentin showing a better AEs profile, even if the number of reported AEs is too poor to let a reliable comparison. CBZ appears less useful in treating SUNCT and SUNA than gabapentin and topiramate, according with the lower number of complete responders. Indomethacin usefulness in these conditions is sometimes reported, but should be considered as negligible: an occasional benefit of this drug in SUNCT or SUNA should rise the question of a diagnostic mistake with HC, PH or a secondary headache, imposing the reconsideration of the initial diagnosis, following scheduled diagnostic algorithms [192].

Recently, non-pharmacological techniques has gained importance in the treatment of these disorders, but the experience with these treatments is scarce and the long-term follow-up of patients is often lacking in many studies. From the available data ONS has emerged as the best technique and this result is in accordance with the findings in CH, were ONS is the only class-A evidence treatment for the American Headache Society (AHS) [193]. Moreover, even the European Headache Federation (EHF) has confirmed the effectiveness and safety of this technique in SUNCT and SUNA, pointing out that 4 patients out of 6 analyzed were nearly pain free with mild facial paresthesia as the principal AE [183].

From the reviewed literature, ONS has demonstrated an almost complete effectiveness and a good safety profile, but it has been tried only on 7 patients. Ventral tegmental area deep brain stimulation has shown a similar effectiveness, but adverse events were reported in the 100% of cases and should be reserved to the refractory cases. Finally, GONB appears to be less effective but also safer than the previous techniques and should be considered as a reliable alternative in patients with episodic forms.

In Fig. 2 the ORs of complete responders and the relative IC95% are visually summarized for all diseases. ORs are calculated as the odds of pain-free patients for the indicated treatments split by the odds of pain-free patients for the most used treatment for every disease.
Fig. 2

Odds ratios of complete responders. For HC and PH the referral treatment is indomethacin. For SUNCT and SUNA the referral treatment is lamotrigine. If the whole 95% CI of the OR is lower than 1, the referral treatments is better than the reported one

Conclusion

PH, HC, SUNCT and SUNA represent a hard challenge for clinicians who work in headache or pain fields. Moreover, their infrequence makes difficult to study the pathogenesis of these conditions, as well as design well-done RCPCT for new drugs. From the review of the available literature indomethacin emerges as the best treatment for HC and PH, while other drugs like celecoxib, topiramate and gabapentin may be useful. SUNCT and SUNA should be managed with intravenous steroids or lidocaine in the worst cases and for short periods of time, with a subsequent change for preventive treatment to lamotrigine or ONS.

In conclusion, it should be highlighted that further studies are required to implement guidelines to treat the disease and to discover new effective and safe therapies for these conditions.

Notes

Abbreviations

AE: 

Adverse event

AHS: 

American Headache Society

CBZ: 

Carbamazepine

EHF: 

European Headache Federation

GONB: 

Great occipital nerve blockade

HC: 

Hemicrania continua

ICHD-III-beta: 

International classification of headache disorders-3rd edition, beta version

IHS: 

International Headache Society

IV: 

Intravenous

MONB: 

Minor occipital nerve blockade

NSAIDs: 

Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs

OnabotA: 

onabotulinumtoxinA

ONS: 

Occipital nerve stimulation

OR: 

Odds ratio

PH: 

Paroxysmal hemicrania

RCPCT: 

Randomized clinical placebo-controlled trials

SLUNHA: 

Short-lasting unilateral neuralgiform headache attacks

SON: 

Supra-orbital nerve

SONB: 

Supraorbital nerve blockade

STGB: 

Superior trigeminal ganglion blockade

Declarations

Authors’ contributions

CB, LP, SG and MMC drafted the manuscript. CB and LAP conceived the study, participated in drafting the manuscript and made the statistical analysis. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.

Authors’ Affiliations

(1)
Medical Toxicology - Headache and Drug Abuse Centre, University of Modena and Reggio Emilia

References

  1. Headache Classification Committee of the International Headache Society (IHS) (2013) The international classification of headache disorders, 3rd edition (beta version). Cephalalgia 33:629–808View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  2. Vincent MB (2013) Hemicrania continua. Unquestionably a trigeminal autonomic cephalalgia. Headache 53:863–868PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  3. Costa A, Antonaci F, Ramusino MC, Nappi G (2015) The neuropharmacology of cluster headache and other trigeminal autonomic cephalalgias. Curr Neuropharmacol 13:304–323PubMedPubMed CentralView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  4. Viana M, Tassorelli C, Allena M, Nappi G, Sjaastad O, Antonaci F (2013) Diagnostic and therapeutic errors in trigeminal autonomic cephalalgias and hemicrania continua: a systematic review. J Headache Pain 14:14PubMedPubMed CentralView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  5. May A (2013) Diagnosis and clinical features of trigemino-autonomic headaches. Headache 53:1470–1478PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  6. Marano E, Volpe G, Della Rocca G, Di Stasio E, Bonuso S, Sorge F (1994) “Hemicrania continua”: a possible case with alternating sides. Cephalalgia 14:307–308PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  7. Kuritzky A (1992) Indomethacin-resistant hemicrania continua. Cephalalgia 12:57–59PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  8. Prakash S, Brahmbhatt KJ, Chawda NT, Tandon N (2009) Hemicrania continua responsive to intravenous methylprednisolone. Headache 49:604–609PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  9. Moorjani BI, Rothner AD (2001) Indomethacin-responsive headaches in children and adolescents. Sem Ped Neurol 1:40–45View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  10. Burns B, Watkins L, Goadsby PJ (2008) Treatment of hemicrania continua by occipital nerve stimulation with a bion device: long-term follow-up of a crossover study. Lancet Neurol 7:1001–1012PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  11. Prakash S, Husain M, Sureka DS, Shah NP, Shah ND (2009) Is there need to search for alternatives to indomethacin for hemicrania continua? Case reports and a review. J Neurol Sci 277:187–190PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  12. Prakash S, Shah ND (2009) Delayed response to indomethacin in patients with hemicrania continua: real or phantom headache? Cephalalgia 30:375–379View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  13. Spears RC (2006) Hemicrania continua: a case in which a patient experienced complete relief on melatonin. Headache 46:515–527View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  14. Spitz M, Peres MFP (2004) Hemicrania continua post-partum. Cephalalgia 24:603–604PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  15. Terlizzi R, Cevoli S, Nicodemo M, Pierangeli G, Grimaldi D, Cortelli P (2011) A case of strictly unilateral migraine without aura transformed in an episodic hemicrania continua. Neurol Sci 32:169–170PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  16. Weatherall MW, Bahra A (2011) Familial hemicrania continua. Cephalalgia 31:245–249PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  17. Peres MFP, Stiles MA, Oshinsky M, Rozen TD (2001) Remitting form of hemicrania continua with seasonal pattern. Headache 41:592–594PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  18. Palmieri A, Mainardi F, Dainese F, Zanchin G (2004) Hemicrania continua evolving from migraine with aura: clinical evidence of a possible correlation between two forms of primary headache. Cephalalgia 24:1007–1008PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  19. Kuhn J, Kuhn KF, Cooper-Mahkorn D, Bewermeyer H (2005) Remitting form of hemicrania continua: two new cases exhibiting one unusual autonomic feature. Headache 45:751–762View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  20. Southerland AM, Login IS (2011) Rigorously deefined hemicrania continua presenting bilaterally. Cephalalgia 31:1490–1492PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  21. Rozen TD (2005) Verapamil-responsive hemicrania continua in a patient with episodic cluster headache. Cephalalgia 26:351–353View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  22. Miller S, Correia F, Lagrata S, Matharu MS (2015) onabotulinumtoxinA for hemicrania continua: open label experience in 9 patients. J Headache Pain 16:19PubMedPubMed CentralView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  23. Baldacci F, Nuti A, Cafforio G, Lucetti C, Logi C, Cipriani G, Orlandi G, Bonuccelli U (2008) “INDOTEST” in atypical hemicrania continua. Cephalalgia 28:300–301PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  24. Prakash S, Rathore C (2016) Two cases of hemicrania continua-trigeminal neuralgia syndrome: expanding the spectrum of trigeminal autonomic cephalalgia-Tic (TAC-TIC) syndrome. Headache 30:1–6Google Scholar
  25. Jurgen TP, Schulte LH, May A (2013) Indomethacin-induced de novo headache in hemicrania continua-fighting fire with fire? Cephalalgia 33:1203–1205View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  26. Castellanos-Pinedo F, Zurdo M, Martinez-Acebes E (2006) Hemicrania continua evolving from episodic paroxysmal hemicrania. Cephalalgia 26:1143–1145PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  27. Da Silva HM, Alcantara MC, Bordini CA, Speciali JG (2002) Strictly unilateral headache reminiscent of hemicrania continua resistant to indomethacin but responsive to gabapentin. Cephalagia 22:409–410View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  28. Spears RC (2009) Is gabapentin an effective treatment choice for hemicrania continua? J Headache Pain 10:271–275PubMedPubMed CentralView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  29. Cosentino G, Fierro B, Puma AR, Talamanca S, Brighina F (2010) Different forms of trigeminal autonomic cephalalgias in the same patient: description of a case. J Headache Pain 11:281–284PubMedPubMed CentralView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  30. Yablon LA, Newman LC (2010) Hemicrania continua: a second case in which the remitting form evolved from the chronic form. Headache 50:1381–1389PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  31. Lambru G, Castellini P, Bini A, Evangelista A, Manzoni GC, Torelli P (2008) Hemicrania continua evolving from cluster headache responsive to valproic acid. Headache 48:1374–1376PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  32. Allena M, Tassorelli C, Sances G, Guaschino E, Sandrini G, Nappi G, Antonaci F (2010) Is hemicrania continua a single entity of the association of two headache forms? Considerations from a case report. Headache 27:877–881Google Scholar
  33. Androulakis XM, Krebs KA, Ashkenazi A (2016) Hemicrania continua may respond to repetitive sphenopalatine ganglion block: a case report. Headache 56:573–579PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  34. Cuadrado ML, Porta-Etessam J, Pareja JA, Matias-Guiu J (2009) Hemicrania continua responsive to trochlear injection of corticosteroids. Cephalalgia 30:373–374View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  35. Beams JL, Kline MT, Rozen TD (2015) Treatment of hemicrania continua with radiofrequency ablation and long-term follow-up. Cephalalgia 35:1208–1213PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  36. Brighina F, Palermo A, Cosentino G, Fierro B (2007) Prophylaxis of hemicrania continua: two new cases effectively treated with topiramate. Headache 47:441–443PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  37. Rozen TD (2015) How effective is melatonin as a preventive treatment for hemicrania continua? A clinic-based study. Headache 55:430–436PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  38. Camarda C, Camarda R, Monastero R (2008) Chronic paroxysmal hemicrania and hemicrania continua responding to topiramate: two case reports. Clin Neurol Neurosur 110:88–91View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  39. Cittadini E, Goadsby PJ (2010) Hemicrania continua: a clinical study of 39 patients with diagnostic implications. Brain 133:1973–1986PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  40. Trucco M, Antonaci F, Sandrini G (1992) Hemicrania continua: a case responsive to piroxicam-beta-cyclodextrin. Headache 32:39–40PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  41. Pareja JA, Sjaastad O (1996) Chronic paroxysmal hemicrania and hemicrania continua. Interval between indomethacin administration and response. Headache 36:20–23PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  42. Fantini J, Kosica N, Zorzon M, Belluzzo M, Granato A (2015) Hemicrania continua with visual aura successfully treated with a combination of indomethacin and topiramate. Neurol Sci 36:643–644PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  43. Garza I, Cutrer FM (2010) Pain relief and persistence of dysautonomic features in a patient with hemicrania continua responsive to botulinum toxin type A. Cephalalgia 30:500–503PubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. Jouber J (1991) Hemicrania continua in a black patient: the importance of the non continuous stage. Headache 31:482–484Google Scholar
  45. Rozen TD (2013) Indomethacin-responsive TACs (Paroxysmal hemicrania, hemicrania continua and LASH): further proof of a distinct spectrum of headache disorders. Headache 53:1499–1500PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  46. Eren O, Straube A, Schoberl F, Schankin C (2017) Hemicrania continua: beneficial effect of non-invasive vagus nerve stimulation in a patient with a contraindication for indomethacin. Headache 57:298–301PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  47. Goadsby PJ (2012) Trigeminal autonomic cephalalgias. Continuum Lifelong Learning Neurol 18:883–895View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  48. Hollingworth M, Young TM (2014) Melatonin responsive hemicrania continua in which indomethacin was associated with contralateral headache. Headache 54:916–919PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  49. Matharu MS, Bradbury P, Swash M (2005) Hemicrania continua: side alternation and response to topiramate. Cephalalgia 26:341–344View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  50. Newman LC, Spears RC, Lay CL (2004) Hemicrania continua: a third case in which attacks alternate sides. Headache 44:821–823PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  51. Nicpon KJ, Nicpon KW, Cicpon JJ (2010) Prophylaxis of hemicrania continua: three cases effectively treated with acemethacin. Cephalalgia 31:625–627PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  52. Porta-Etessam J, Cuadrado M, Rodriguez-Gomez O, Garcia-Ptacek, Valencia C (2010) Are COX-2 drugs the second line option in indomethacin responsive headaches? J Headache Pain 11:405–407PubMedPubMed CentralView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  53. Prakash S, Shah ND, Bhanvadia RJ (2009) Hemicrania continua unresponsive or partial responsive to indomethacin: does it exist? A diagnostic and therapeutic dilemma. J Headache Pain 10:59–63PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  54. Prakash S, Rathore C, Makwana P (2015) Hemicrania continua with contralateral cranial autonomic features: a case report. J Headache Pain 16:21PubMedPubMed CentralView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  55. Rajabally JA, Jacob S (2005) Hemicrania continua responsive to verapamil. Headache 45:1082–1087PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  56. Prakash S, Shah ND (2010) Pure menstrual hemicrania continua: does it exist? A case report. Cephalalgia 10:631–633View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  57. Solomon S, Newman LC (1999) Chronic daily bilateral headache responsive to indomethacin. Headache 39:754–757PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  58. Rozen TD (2009) Can indomethacin act as a disease modifying agent in hemicrania continua? A supportive clinical case. Headache 49:759–762PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  59. Young WB, Silberstein SD (1993) Hemicrania continua and symptomatic medication overuse. Headache 33:485–487PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  60. Goadsby PJ, Lipton RB (1997) A review of paroxysmal hemicranias, SUNCT syndrome and other short-lasting headaches with autonomic feature, including new cases. Brain 120:193–209PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  61. Pareja JA, Palomo T, Gorriti MA, Pareja J, Espejo J, Moron B, Trigo M (1990) Hemicrania continua. The first Spanish case: a case report. Cephalalgia 10:143–145PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  62. Antonaci F, Pareja JA, Caminero AB, Sjaastad O (1997) Chronic paroxysmal hemicrania and hemicrania continua: anesthetic blockades of pericranial nerves. Funct Neurol 12:11–15PubMedGoogle Scholar
  63. Weyker P, Webb C, Mathew L (2012) Radiofrequency ablation of the supra-orbital nerve in the treatment algorithm of hemicrania continua. Pain Physician 15:719–724Google Scholar
  64. Guerrero AL, Herrero-Velazquez S, Penas ML, Mulero P, Pedraza MI, Cortijo E, Fernandez R (2012) Peripheral nerve blocks: a therapeutic alternative for hemicrania continua. Cephalalgia 36:505–508View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  65. Peres MFP, Silberstein SD (2002) Hemicrania continua responds to cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors. Headache 42:530–531PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  66. Sjaastad O, Antonaci F (1995) A piroxicam derivative partly effective in chronic paroxysmal hemicrania and hemicrania continua. Headache 35:549–550PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  67. Antonaci F, Pareja JA, Caminero AB, Sjaastad A (1996) Chronic paroxysmal hemicrania and hemicrania continua: lack of efficacy of sumatriptan. Headache 38:197–200View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  68. Schwedt TJ, Dodick DW, Hentz J, Trentman TL, Zimmerman RS (2007) Occipital nerve stimulation for chronic headache – long-term safety and efficacy. Cephalalgia 27:153–157PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  69. Matharu MS, Boes CJ, Goadsby PJ (2003) Management of trigeminal autonomic cephalalgias and hemicrania continua. Drugs 63:1637–1677PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  70. Modar K, Fayyaz A (2013) Hemicrania continua responsive to botulinum toxin type a: a case report. Headache 53:831–833View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  71. Micieli G, Cavallini A, Fachinetti F, Sances G, Nappi G (1989) Chronic paroxysmal hemicrania: a chronobiological study (case report). Cephalalgia 9:281–286PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  72. Martinez-Salio A, Porta-Etessam J, Peres-Martinez D, Balserio J, Gutierrez-Riva E (2000) Chronic paroxysmal hemicrania-TIC syndrome. Headache 40:682–685PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  73. Benoliel R, Sharav Y (1998) Paroxysmal hemicrania. Case studies and review of literature. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 85:285–292PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  74. Bingel U, Weillel E (2005) An unusual indomethacin-sensitive headache: a case of bilateral episodic paroxysmal hemicrania without autonomic symptoms? Cephalalgia 25:148–150PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  75. Blankenburg M, Hechler T, Dubbel G, Wamsler C, Zernikow B (2009) Paroxysmal hemicrania in children—symptoms, diagnostic criteria, therapy and outcome. Cephalalgia 29:873–882PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  76. Antonaci F, Pareja JA, Caminero AB, Sjaastad O (1998) Chronic paroxysmal hemicrania and hemicrania continua: lack of efficacy of sumatriptan. Headache 38:197–200PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  77. Dodick DW (1998) Exatratrigeminal episodic paroxysmal hemicrania. Further clinical evidence of functionally relevant brain stem connections. Headache 38:794–798PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  78. Blau JN, Engel H (1990) Episodic paroxysmal hemicrania: a further case and review of literature. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 53:343–344PubMedPubMed CentralView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  79. Boes CJ, Swanson JW, Dodick DW (1998) Chronic paroxysmal hemicrania presenting as otalgia with a sensation of external acoustic meatus obstruction: two cases and a pathophysiologic hypothesis. Headache 38:787–791PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  80. Mateo I, Pascual J (1999) Coexistence of chronic paroxysmal hemicrania and benign cough headache. Headache 39:437–438PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  81. Zidverc-Trajkovic J, Pavlovic AM, Mijajlovic M, Jovanovic Z, Sternic N, Kostic VS (2005) Cluster headache and paroxysmal hemicrania: differential diagnosis. Cephalalgia 25:244–248PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  82. Newman LC, Lipton RB, Solomon S (1993) Episodic paroxysmal hemicrania: 3 new cases and a review of literature. Headache 33:195–197PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  83. Centonze V, Bassi A, Causarano V, Dalfino L, Centonze A, Albano O (2000) Simultaneous occurrence of ipsilateral cluster headache and chronic paroxysmal hemicrania: a case report. Headache 40:54–56PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  84. Cohen AS, Matharu MS, Goadsby PJ (2006) Paroxysmal hemicrania in a family. Cephalalgia 26:486–488PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  85. Evans RW, Olesen J (2000) Remitting chronic paroxysmal hemicrania or episodic paroxysmal hemicrania? Headache 40:858–859PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  86. Evans RW (2007) Bilateral paroxysmal hemicrania with autonomic symptoms: the first case report. Cephalalgia 28:191–192PubMedGoogle Scholar
  87. De Almeida DB, Cunali PA, Santos PL, Brioschi M, Prandini M (2004) Chronic paroxysmal hemicrania in early childhood: case report. Cephalalgia 24:608–609PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  88. Sarlani E, Schwartz AH, Greenspan JD, Grace EG (2003) Chronic paroxysmal hemicrania: a case report and review of literature. J Orof Pain 17:74–78Google Scholar
  89. Cittadini E, Matharu MS, Goadsby PJ (2008) Paroxysmal hemicrania: a prospective clinical study of 31 cases. Brain 131:1142–1155PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  90. Fuad F, Jones NS (2002) Paroxysmal hemicrania and cluster headache: two discrete entities or is there an overlap? Clin. Otolaryngology 27:472–479Google Scholar
  91. Warner JS, Wamil AW, McLean MJ (1994) Acetazolamide for the treatment of chronic paroxysmal hemicrania. Headache 34:597–599PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  92. Tehindrazanarivelo AD, Visy JM, Bousser MJ (1992) Ipsilateral cluster headache and chronic paroxysmal hemicrania: two case reports. Cephalalgia 12:318–320PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  93. Tarantino S, Vollono C, Capuano A, Vigevano F, Valeriani M (2011) Chronic paroxysmal hemicrania in pediatric age: report of two cases. J Headache Pain 12:263–267PubMedPubMed CentralView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  94. Totczeck A, Diener HC, Gaul C (2014) Concomitant occurrence of different trigeminal autonomic cephalalgias: a case series and review of the literature. Cephalalgia 34:231–235View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  95. Talvik I, Peet A, Talvik T (2009) Three-year follow-up of a girl with chronic paroxysmal hemicrania. Pediatr Neurol 40:68–69PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  96. Siow HC (2004) Seasonal episodic paroxysmal hemicrania responding to cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors. Cephalalgia 24:414–415PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  97. Pugach NL (2008) An unusual form of TAC–TAC sine autonomic phenomena. J Headache Pain 9:331–332PubMedPubMed CentralView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  98. Rossi P, Di Lorenzo G, Faraoni J, Sauli E (2005) Seasonal, extratrigeminal, episodic paroxysmal hemicrania successfully treated with single suboccipital steroid injections. Eur J Neurol 12:903–906PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  99. Mathew NT, Kailasam J, Fischer A (2002) Responsiveness to celecoxib in chronic paroxysmal hemicrania. Neurology 55:316View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  100. Seidel S, Wober C (2009) Paroxysmal hemicrania with visual aura in a 17-year-old boy. Headache 49:607–609PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  101. Morelli N, Mancuso M, Felisati G, Lozza P, Maccaris A, Cafforio G, Gori S, Mirri L, Giudetti D (2009) Does sphenopalatine endoscopic ganglion block have an effect in paroxysmal hemicrania? A case report. Cephalalgia 30:365–367View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  102. Lisotto C, Maggioni F, Mainrdi F, Zanchin G (2003) Rofecoxib for the treatment of chronic paroxysmal hemicrania. Cephalalgia 23:318–320PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  103. Pascual J, Quijano J (1998) A case of chronic paroxysmal hemicrania responding to subcutaneous sumatriptan. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 65:407PubMedPubMed CentralView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  104. Mulder LJMM, Spierings ELH (2004) Non-lateralized pain in a case of chronic paroxysmal hemicrania? Cephalalgia 24:52–54PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  105. Prakash S, Belani P, Susvirkar A, Trivendi A, Ahuja S, Patel A (2013) Paroxysmal hemicrania: a retrospective study of a consecutive series of 22 patients and a critical analysis of the diagnostic criteria. J Headache Pain 14:26PubMedPubMed CentralView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  106. Shah ND, Prakash S (2009) Coexistence of cluster headache and paroxysmal hemicrania: does it exist? A case report and literature review. J Headache Pain 10:219–223PubMedPubMed CentralView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  107. Sanahuja J, Vazquez P, Falguera M (2005) Paroxysmal hemicrania-tic syndrome responsive to acetazolamide. Cephalalgia 25:547–549PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  108. Muller KI, Bekkelund SI (2011) Hemicrania continua changed to chronic paroxysmal hemicrania after treatment with cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitor. Headache 51:300–305PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  109. Raieli V, Cicala V, Vanadia F (2015) Pediatric paroxysmal hemicrania: a case report and some clinical considerations. Neurol Sci. doi:10.1007/s10072-015-2362-3
  110. Zukerman E, Peres MFP, Kaup AO, Monzillo PH, Costa AR (2000) Chronic paroxysmal hemicrania–tic syndrome. Neurology 54:1524–1526PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  111. Shabbir N, McAbee G (1994) Adolescent chronic paroxysmal hemicrania responsive to verapamil monotherapy. Headache 34:209–210PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  112. Maggioni F, Palmieri A, Viaro F, Mainardi F, Zanchin G (2007) Menstrual paroxysmal hemicrania, a possible new entity? Cephalalgia 27:1085–1087PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  113. Caminero AB, Pareja JA, Dobato JL (1998) Chronic paroxysmal hemicrania- TIC syndrome. Cephalalgia 18:159–161PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  114. Dahlof C (1993) Subcutaneous sumatriptan does not abort attacks of chronic paroxysmal hemicrania (CPH). Headache 33:201–202PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  115. Boes CJ, Matharu MS, Goadsby PJ (2003) The paroxysmal hemicrania-TIC syndrome. Cephalalgia 23:24–28PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  116. Pareja JJ, Pareja J (1992) Chronic paroxysmal hemicrania coexisting with migraine. Differential response to pharmacological treatment. Headache 32:77–78PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  117. Pareja JA, Caminero AB, Franco E, Casado JL, Pascual J, Sanchez del Rio M (2001) Dose, efficacy and tolerability for long-term indomethacin treatment of chronic paroxysmal hemicrania and hemicrania continua. Cephalalgia 21:906–910PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  118. Pareja JA (1995) Chronic paroxysmal hemicrania: dissociation of the pain and autonomic features. Headache 35:111–113PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  119. Boes CJ, Dodick DW (2002) Refining the clinical spectrum of chronic paroxysmal hemicrania: a review of 74 patients. Headache 42:699–708PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  120. Evers S, Husstedt IW (1996) Alternatives in drug treatment for chronic paroxysmal hemicrania. Headache 36:429–432PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  121. Kudrow DB, Kudrow L (1989) Successful aspirin prophylaxis in a child with chronic paroxysmal hemicrania. Headache 29:280–281PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  122. Gobel H, Heinze A, Heinze-Kuhn K, Austermann K (2001) Botulinum toxin A in the treatment of headache syndromes and pericranial pain syndromes. Pain 91:195–199PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  123. Walcott BP, Bamber NI, Anderson DI (2009) Successful treatment of chronic paroxysmal hemicrania with posterior hypothalamic stimulation: technical case report. Neurosurgery 5:E997View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  124. Matharu MS, Cohen AS, Goadsby PJ (2004) SUNCT syndrome responsive to intravenous lidocaine. Cephalalgia 24:985–992PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  125. Cohen AS (2007) Short-lasting neuralgiform headache attacks with conjunctival injection and tearing. Cephalalgia 27:824–832PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  126. Zhang Y, Zhang H, Lain YJ, Ma YQ, Xie NC, Chen X, Zhang L (2016) Botulinum toxin a for the treatment of a child with SUNCT syndrome. Pain Res Manag 2016. doi:10.1155/2016/8016065
  127. Gatenbein AR, Goadsby PJ (2005) Familial SUNCT. Cephalalgia 25:457–459View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  128. Williams MH, Broadley SA (2008) SUNCT and SUNA: clinical features and medical treatment. J Clin Neurosci 15:526–534PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  129. Arroyo Martinez A, Romero Duran X, Gomez Beldarrain M, Pinedo A, Garcia-Monco JC (2010) Response to intravenous lidocaine in a patient with SUNCT syndrome. Cephalalgia 30:110–112PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  130. De Lourdes FM, Bruera O, Pozzo MJ, Leston J (2009) SCUNT syndrome responding absolutely to steroids in two cases with different etiologies. J Headache Pain 10:55–57View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  131. Sjaastad O, Saunte C, Salvesen R, Fredriksen TA, Seim A, Roe OD, Fostad K, Lobben OP, Zhao JM (1989) Shortlasting, unilateral neuralgiform headache attacks with conjunctival injection, tearing, sweating and rhinorrhea. Cephalalgia 9:147–156PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  132. Raimondi E, Gardella L (1998) SUNCT syndrome: two cases in Argentina. Headache 38:369–371PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  133. Calvo JF, Bruera OC, Lourdes-Figuerola D, Gestro D, Tinetti N, Leston JA (2004) SUNCT syndrome: clinical and 12-years follow-up case report. Cephalalgia 24:900–902PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  134. Rossi P, Cesarino F, Faroni J, Malpezzi MG, Sandrini G, Nappi G (2003) SUNCT syndrome successfully treated with topiramate: case reports. Cephalalgia 23:998–1000PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  135. Maihofner C, Speck V, Sperling W, Jeppe AG (2013) Complete remission of SUNCT syndrome by intravenous glucocorticoid treatment. Neurol Sci 34:1811–1812PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  136. Trauninger A, Alkonyi B, Kovacs N, Komoly S, Pfund Z (2010) Methylprednisolone therapy for short-term prevention of SUNCT syndrome. Cephalalgia 30:735–739PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  137. Marziniak M, Breyer R, Evers S (2009) SUNCT syndrome successfully treated with the combination of oxcarbazepine and gabapentin. Pain Med 8:1497–1500View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  138. Black DF, Dodick DW (2002) Two cases of medically and surgically intractable SUNCT: a reason for caution and an argument for a central mechanism. Cephalalgia 22:201–204PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  139. Piovesan EJ, Siow C, Kowacs PA, Werneck LC (2003) Influence of lamotrigine over the SUNCT syndrome: one patient follow-up for two years. Arq Neuropsiquiatr 61:691–694PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  140. Porta-Etessam J, Cuadrado ML, Galan L, Sampedro A, Valencia C (2010) Temporal response to bupivacaine bilateral great occipital nerve block in a patient with SUNCT syndrome. J Headache Pain 11:179PubMedPubMed CentralView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  141. Schwaag S, Frese A, Husstedt IW, Evers S (2003) SUNCT syndrome: the first German case series. Cephalalgia 23:398–400PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  142. D'Andrea G, Granella F, Cadaldini M (1999) Possible usefulness of lamotrigine in the treatment of SUNCT syndrome. Neurology 53:1609PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  143. Antonaci F, Sances G, Loi M, Sandrini G, Dumitrache C, Cuzzoni MG (2010) SUNCT syndrome with paroxysmal mydriasis: clinical and pupillometric findings. Cephalalgia 30:987–990PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  144. D'Andrea G, Granella F, Ghiotto N, Nappi G (2001) Lamotrigine in the treatment of SUNCT syndrome. Neurology 57:1723–1725PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  145. Lambru G, Matharu M (2013) Management of trigeminal autonomic cephalalgias in children and adolescents. Curr Pain Headache Rep 17:323PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  146. Leone M, Rigamonti A, Usai S, D'Amico D, Grazzi L, Bussone G (2000) Two new SUNCT cases responsive to lamotrigine. Cephalalgia 20:845–847PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  147. Gutierrez-Garcia JM (2002) SUNCT syndrome responsive to lamotrigine. Headache 42:823–825PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  148. Chakravarty A, Mukherjee A (2003) SUNCT syndrome responsive to lamotrigine: documentation of the first Indian case. Cephalalgia 23:474–475PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  149. Malik K, Rizvi S, Vaillancourt PD (2002) The SUNCT syndrome: successfully treated with lamotrigine. Pain Med 2:167–168View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  150. Tan DYH, Chua ET, Ng KB, Chan KP, Thomas J (2013) Frameless linac-based stereotactic radiosurgery treatment for SUNCT syndrome targeting the trigeminal nerve and sphenopalatine ganglion. Cephalalgia 33:1132–1136PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  151. Paliwal VK, Singh P, Kumar A, Rahi SK, Gupta RK (2012) Short-lasting unilateral neuralgiform headache with conjunctival injection and tearing (SUNCT) with preserved refractory period: report of three cases. J Headache Pain 13:167–169PubMedPubMed CentralView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  152. Martins IP, Viana P, Lobo PP (2016) Familial SUNCT in mother and son. Cephalalgia 36:993–997PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  153. Zabalza RJ (2012) Sustained response to botulinum toxin in SUNCT syndrome. Cephalalgia 32:869–872PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  154. Fantini J, Granato A, Zorzon M, Manganotti P (2016) Case report: coexistence of SUNCT and hypnic headache in the same patient. Headache 56:1503–1506PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  155. Cacão G, Correia Diaz F, Pereira-Monteiro J (2016) SUNCT syndrome: a cohort of 15 Portuguese patients. Cephalalgia 36:1002–1006PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  156. Becser N, Berky M (1995) SUNCT syndrome: a Hungarian case. Headache 35:158–160PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  157. Gay-Escoda C, Mayor-Subirana G, Camps-Font O, Berini-Aytes L (2015) SUNCT syndrome. Report of a case and treatment update. J Clin Exp Dent 7:342–347View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  158. Tada Y, Ikuta N, Negoro K (2009) Short-lasting unilateral neuralgiform headache attacks with cranial autonomic symptoms (SUNA). Inter Med 48:2141–2144View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  159. Pareja JA, Pareja J, Palomo T, Caballero V, Pamo M (1994) SUNCT syndrome: repetitive and overlapping attacks. Headache 34:114–116PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  160. Pareja JA, Sjaastad O (1994) SUNCT syndrome in the female. Headache 34:217–220PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  161. Cohen AS, Matharu MS, Goadsby PJ (2004) SUNCT syndrome in the elderly. Cephalalgia 24:508–509PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  162. Sabatovsky R, Huber M, Meuser T, Radbruch L (2001) SUNCT syndrome: a treatment option with local opioid blockade of the superior cervical ganglion? A case report. Cephalalgia 21:154–156View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  163. Effendi K, Jarjoura S, Mathieu D (2011) SUNCT syndrome successfully treated by gamma knife radiosurgery: case report. Cephalalgia 31:870–873PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  164. Bouhassira D, Attal N, Estève M, Chauvin M (1994) “SUNCT” syndrome. A case of transformation from trigeminal neuralgia? Cephalalgia 14:168–170PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  165. Ikawa M, Imai N, Manaka S (2010) A case of SUNCT syndrome responsive to zonisamide. Cephalalgia 31:501–503PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  166. Dora B (2006) SUNCT syndrome with dramatic response to oxcarbazepine. Cephalalgia 26:1171–1173PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  167. Hunt HC, Dodick DW, Bosch P (2002) SUNCT responsive to gabapentin. Headache 42:526–525View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  168. Volcy M, Tepper SJ, Rapoport AM, Sheftell FD, Bigal ME (2005) Short-lasting unilateral neuralgiform headache attacks with cranial autonomic symptoms (SUNA) – a case report. Cephalalgia 25:470–472PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  169. Vukovic-Cvetkovic’ VV, Jensen RH (2016) A boy with bilateral SUNA: a case report. Cephalalgia. doi:10.1177/0333102416663467
  170. Narbone MC, Gangemi S, Abbate M (2005) A case of SUNCT syndrome responsive to verapamil. Cephalalgia 25:476–478PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  171. Benoliel R, Sharav Y (1998) SUNCT syndrome. Case report and literature review. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Palhol Oral Radiol Ended 85:158–161View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  172. Etemadifar M, Maghzi AH, Ghasemi M, Chitsaz A, Kaji Esfahani M (2008) Efficacy of gabapentin in the treatment of SUNCT syndrome. Cephalalgia 28:1339–1342PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  173. Graff-Radford SB (2000) SUNCT syndrome responsive to gabapentin (Neurontin). Cephalalgia 20:515–517PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  174. Miller S, Akram H, Lagrata S, Hariz M, Zrinzo L, Matharu M (2016) Ventral tegmental area deep brain stimulation in refractory short-lasting unilateral neuralgiform headache attacks. Brain 1:1–10Google Scholar
  175. Lambru G, Shanahan P, Watkins L, Matharu MS (2014) Occipital nerve stimulation in the treatment of medically intractable SUNCT and SUNA. Pain Physician 17:29–41PubMedGoogle Scholar
  176. Broggi G, Franzini A, Leone M, Bussone G (2007) Update on neurosurgical treatment of chronic trigeminal autonomic cephalalgias and atypical facial pain with deep brain stimulation of posterior hypothalamus: results and comments. Neurol Sci 28:138–145View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  177. Franzini A, Messina G, Cordella R, Marras C, Broggi G (2010) Deep brain stimulation of the posteromedial hypothalamus: indications, long-term results, and neurophysiological considerations. Neurosurg Focus 29:1–13View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  178. Lyons MK, Dodick DW, Evidente VGH (2009) Responsiveness of short-lasting unilateral neuralgiform headache with conjunctival injection and tearing to hypothalamic deppe brain stimulation. J Neurosurg 110:279–281PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  179. Leone M, Franzini A, D'Andrea G, Broggi G, Casucci G, Bussone G (2005) Deep brain stimulation to relieve drug-resistant SUNCT. Ann Neurol 57:924–927PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  180. Cuadrado ML, Aledo-Serrano Á, Navarro P, López-Ruiz P, Fernández-de-Las-Peñas C, González-Suárez I, Orviz A, Fernández-Pérez C (2016) Short-term effects of greater occipital nerve blocks in chronic migraine: a double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled clinical trial. Cephalalgia. doi:10.1177/0333102416655159
  181. Riendeau D, Charleson S, Cromlish W, Mancini JA, Wong E, Guay J (1997) Comparison of the cyclooxygenase-1 inhibitory properties of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and selective COX-2 inhibitors, using sensitive microsomal and platelet assays. Can J Physiol Pharmacol 75:1088–1095PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  182. Leone M, Bussone G (2009) Pathophysiology of trigeminal autonomic cephalalgias. Lancet Neurol 8:755–764PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  183. Martelletti P, Jensen RH, Antal A, Arcioni R, Brighina F, de Tommaso M, Franzini A, Fontaine D, Heiland M, Jürgens TP, Leone M, Magis D, Paemeleire K, Palmisani S, Paulus W, May A, European Headache Federation (2013) Neuromodulation of chronic headaches: position statement from the European Headache Federation. J Headache Pain 14:86PubMedPubMed CentralView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  184. Solomon SD, Pfeffer MA, McMurray JJ, Fowler R, Finn P, Levin B, Eagle C, Hawk E, Lechuga M, Zauber AG, Bertagnolli MM, Arber N, Wittes J, APC and PreSAP Trial Investigators (2006) Effect of celecoxib on cardiovascular events and blood pressure in two trials for the prevention of colorectal adenomas. Circulation 114:1028–1035PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  185. Harirforoosh S, Jamali F (2008) Renal adverse effects of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. Expert Opin Drug Saf 8:669–681View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  186. Baron JA, Sandler RS, Bresalier RS, Lanas A, Morton DG, Riddell R, Iverson ER, Demets DL (2008) Cardiovascular events associated with rofecoxib: final analysis of the APPROVe trial. Lancet 372:1756–1764PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  187. Lipscomb GR, Wallis N, Armstrong G, Rees WDW (1998) Gastrointestinal tolerability of meloxicam and piroxicam: a double-blind placebo-controlled study. Br J Clin Pharmacol 46:133–137PubMedPubMed CentralView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  188. Schwartzman RJ, Patel M, Grothusen JR, Alexander GM (2009) Efficacy of 5-day continuous lidocaine infusion for the treatment of refractory complex regional pain syndrome. Pain Med 10:401–412PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  189. Samarin MJ, Mohrien KM, Oliphant CS (2005) Continuous intravenous antiarrhythmic agents in the intensive care unit: strategies for safe and effective use of amiodarone, lidocaine, and procainamide. Crit Care Nurs Q 38:329–344View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  190. Prakash S, Shah ND (2010) Post-infectious new daily persistent headache may respond to intravenous methylprednisolone. J Headache Pain 11(1):59–66. doi:10.1007/s10194-009-0171-x PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  191. French JA, Gazzola DM (2011) New generation antiepileptic drugs: what do they offer in terms of improved tolerability and safety? Ther Adv Drug Saf 2:141–158PubMedPubMed CentralView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  192. Mitsikostas DD, Ashina M, Craven A, Diener HC, Goadsby PJ, Ferrari MD, Lampl C, Paemeleire K, Pascual J, Siva A, Olesen J, Osipova V, Martelletti P, EHF committee (2015) European Headache Federation consensus on technical investigation for primary headache disorders. J Headache Pain 17:5. doi:10.1186/s10194-016-0596-y PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  193. Robbins MS, Starling AJ, Pringsheim TM, Becker WJ, Schwedt TJ (2016) Treatment of cluster headache: the American Headache Society evidence-based guidelines. Headache 56:1093–1106PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar

Copyright

© The Author(s). 2017