Migraine/Headache

Voxel-based morphometry (VBM) is a popular non-invasive magnetic resonance imaging technique to investigate brain gray matter (GM) differences between groups. Recently, two VBM studies in migraine have been published in The Journal of Headache and Pain. Reviewing the two and those previous published VBM studies, we found considerable variations of the results. Spatially diverse brain regions with decreased and increased GM alterations and null findings have been reported. It is interesting to know whether there is a reliable brain morphological signature for migraine. Coordinate-based meta-analysis (CBMA) is increasingly used to quantitatively pool individual neuroimaging studies to identify consistent and reliable findings. Several CBMA have been conducted, however, their results were inconsistent. The algorithms for CBMA have evolved and more eligible VBM studies in migraine have been published. We therefore conducted an updated CBMA using the latest algorithms for CBMA, seed-based d mapping with permutation of subject images (SDM-PSI). The present CBMA of 32 VBM studies (41 datasets comprising 1252 patients and 1025 healthy controls) found no evidence of consistent GM alterations in migraine. Sensitivity analysis, subgroup meta-analyses, and meta-regression analyses revealed that the result was robust. This negative result indicates that there is no reliable brain morphological signature for migraine. VBM investigations in migraine remain a heterogeneous field. Many potential confounding factors, such as underpowered sample sizes, variations in demographic and clinical characteristics, and differences in MRI scanners, head coils, scanning parameters, preprocessing procedures, and statistical strategies may cause the inconsistences of the results. Future VBM studies are warranted to enroll well-characterized and homogeneous subtype samples with appropriate sample sizes, comprehensively assess comorbidities and medication status, and use well-validated and standardized imaging protocols and processing and analysis pipelines to produce robust and replicable results in migraine.

Recently in the journal, epidemiological data are presented on visual snow syndrome (VSS) using a crowdsourcing online platform [1]. The authors applied criteria for VSS to a sample of people matched for age, sex, and ethnicity to United Kingdom census data. Further, they assessed frequent headache lasting longer than 4 hours, which was interpreted as migraine, and neurological symptoms during headache, interpreted as aura.

The triggers of primary headaches have considerable significance for our understanding and management of headache and migraine. Triggers explain the variance in headaches – why they occur when they do. Trigger management is generally viewed as an important component of a comprehensive treatment approach for headaches. Historically, however, triggers have not had a prominent place in the headache literature. This situation began to change 20 to 30 years ago, and the pace of change has increased exponentially in recent times. Nevertheless, the field is beset with issues that have held it back from achieving more. This review will focus on elaborating those issues with the goal of suggesting ways forward. The first issue considered will be the definition of a trigger, and how specific triggers are labeled. Consideration will then be given to a classification system for triggers. The review will discuss next the evidence relating to whether self-reported triggers can, indeed, precipitate headaches, and how the capacity to elicit headaches may be acquired or extinguished. Attention will be given to the very important clinical issue of trigger management. Finally, the pathways forward will be proposed. Perhaps the most useful thing to accomplish at this point in time would be agreement on a definition of headache triggers, a list of triggers, and a classification system for triggers. This would greatly assist in comparing research on triggers from different research groups as well as eliminating some of the issues identified in this review. An authoritative body such as the American Headache Society or the International Headache Society, could establish a multidisciplinary committee that would complete these tasks. Consideration should also be given to incorporating triggers into the International Classification of Headache Disorders as an axis or via the use of codes, as this would raise the profile of triggers in assessment and management.