• Aucun résultat trouvé

Transcutaneous Vagus Nerve Stimulation (tVNS) for headache prophylaxis: initial experience

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2021

Partager "Transcutaneous Vagus Nerve Stimulation (tVNS) for headache prophylaxis: initial experience"

Copied!
1
0
0

Texte intégral

(1)

P O S T E R P R E S E N T A T I O N

Open Access

Transcutaneous Vagus Nerve Stimulation (tVNS)

for headache prophylaxis: initial experience

D Magis

*

, P Gérard, J Schoenen

From The European Headache and Migraine Trust International Congress

London, UK. 20-23 September 2012

Introduction

Neurostimulation is of increasing interest in headache therapy. Invasive neurostimulation methods were found effective in drug-refractory headaches. There is a need for non invasive therapies that could be justified in less disabled patients. Previous case reports suggested that internal Vagus Nerve Stimulation (VNS) might be effec-tive in headache prevention [1-3].

Objectives

We explored efficacy and safety of a transcutaneous VNS device (tVNS, Gammacore®) as preventive treatment in primary headache sufferers. The aim of this pilot trial was to determine a target subpopulation for a multicenter sham-controlled study.

Methods

Eighteen patients accepted to undertake prophylaxis with tVNS: 12 migraine without aura patients (MO, 5 with medication overuse, MOH, 3 chronic), 4 patients with trigeminal autonomic cephalalgia (2 chronic cluster headache, CCH), and 2 with hemicrania continua (HC). tVNS was applied 3 times/day during 90 seconds. Data were collected using headache diaries.

Results

Results are available for 13 patients. Ten patients stopped tVNS after 0.7 to 6 weeks because of lack of efficacy (N=9) and/or side effects (N=6). In one patient with CCH, attacks decreased from 4.5/day to 0.39/day, and in a patient with MOH headache days decreased from 7/week to 3/week and intensity from 8.5 to 4/10. The benefit remains after 5 months of treatment and attack frequency increases when stimulation is interrupted. The last patient had HC with initial intensity decrease from 8.5 to 4/10 but

relapsed after 8 weeks. Reported side effects were local discomfort (N=3), tonic muscle contraction (N=3), fatigue (N=1), palpitations (N=1) and cervical muscle spasm (N=1).

Conclusions

Our initial experience suggests that tVNS might help some headache patients. That it was not effective in many patients may be due to the fact that the vagus nerve is not or insufficiently stimulated. There were no serious adverse events but the stimulation could be poorly tolerated.

Published: 21 February 2013 References

1. Sadler RM, Purdy RA, Rahey S: Vagal nerve stimulation aborts migraine in patient with intractable epilepsy. Cephalalgia 2002, 22(6):482-4. 2. Hord ED, Evans MS, Mueed S, Adamolekun B, Naritoku DK: The effect of

vagus nerve stimulation on migraines. The journal of pain : official journal of the American Pain Society 2003, 4(9):530-4.

3. Mauskop A: Vagus nerve stimulation relieves chronic refractory migraine and cluster headaches. Cephalalgia 2005, 25(2):82-86.

doi:10.1186/1129-2377-14-S1-P198

Cite this article as: Magis et al.: Transcutaneous Vagus Nerve Stimulation (tVNS) for headache prophylaxis: initial experience. The Journal of Headache and Pain 2013 14(Suppl 1):P198.

Submit your manuscript to a

journal and benefi t from:

7 Convenient online submission 7 Rigorous peer review

7 Immediate publication on acceptance 7 Open access: articles freely available online 7 High visibility within the fi eld

7 Retaining the copyright to your article

Submit your next manuscript at 7 springeropen.com

University Department of Neurology, Belgium

Magis et al. The Journal of Headache and Pain 2013, 14(Suppl 1):P198 http://www.thejournalofheadacheandpain.com/content/14/S1/P198

© 2013 Magis et al; licensee Springer. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Références

Documents relatifs

These new directions address four major challenges faced by landscape-change studies, i.e., studying processes and not merely spatial patterns, extrapolating results in space and

21 These guidelines highlight the need for different steps, including research into an obvious etiology, diagnosis and treatment of the causes, including asthma,

(DGE) classified according to the International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery (ISGPS) criteria (13) but only with grade B and C retained for this study, as our center policy

44 Evidence-based recom- mendations for improving health and social outcomes among patients who are vulnerably housed or experi- encing homelessness are listed in Box 4 and described

determinant for each condition in an individual with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, bladder cancer, and intractable sinusitis, the patient is still considered to

Tools for Practice articles in Canadian Family Physician (CFP) are adapted from articles published on the Alberta College of Family Physicians (ACFP) website, summarizing

Second-year family medicine residents who intended to provide cancer care and those who thought they were adequately trained to do so, by expected area of practice.

Patients  in  the  APTCare  study  were  the  most  frail  or  at-risk  patients  in  the  practice.  To  be  eligible,  they  had  to  be  at  risk