Viganò Alessandro, Toscano Massimiliano, Puledda Francesca, Di Piero Vittorio
Headache Research Centre and Neurocritical Care Unit, Department of Human Neuroscience, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy.
Molecular and Cellular Networks Lab, Department of Anatomy, Histology, Forensic Medicine and Orthopaedics, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy.
Front Pharmacol. 2019 Feb 5;10:32. doi: 10.3389/fphar.2019.00032. eCollection 2019.
Chronic migraine (CM) is the most disabling form of migraine, because pharmacological treatments have low efficacy and cumbersome side effects. New evidence has shown that migraine is primarily a disorder of brain plasticity and migraine chronification depends on a maladaptive process favoring the development of a brain state of hyperexcitability. Due to the ability to induce plastic changes in the brain, researchers started to look at Non-Invasive Brain Stimulation (NIBS) as a possible therapeutic option in migraine field. On one side, NIBS techniques induce changes of neural plasticity that outlast the period of the stimulation (a fundamental prerequisite of a prophylactic migraine treatment, concurrently they allow targeting neurophysiological abnormalities that contribute to the transition from episodic to CM. The action may thus influence not only the cortex but also brainstem and diencephalic structures. Plus, NIBS is not burdened by serious medication side effects and drug-drug interactions. Although the majority of the studies reported somewhat beneficial effects in migraine patients, no standard intervention has been defined. This may be due to methodological differences regarding the used techniques (e.g., transcranial magnetic stimulation, transcranial direct current stimulation), the brain regions chosen as targets, and the stimulation types (e.g., the use of inhibitory and excitatory stimulations on the basis of opposite rationales), and an intrinsic variability of stimulation effect. Hence, it is difficult to draw a conclusion on the real effect of neuromodulation in migraine. In this article, we first will review the definition and mechanisms of brain plasticity, some neurophysiological hallmarks of migraine, and migraine chronification-related (dys)plasticity. Secondly, we will review available results from therapeutic and physiological studies using neuromodulation in CM. Lastly we will discuss the results obtained in these preventive trials in the light of a possible effect on brain plasticity.
慢性偏头痛(CM)是偏头痛最致残的形式,因为药物治疗疗效低且副作用麻烦。新证据表明,偏头痛主要是一种脑可塑性障碍,偏头痛慢性化取决于一个有利于过度兴奋脑状态发展的适应不良过程。由于能够在大脑中诱导可塑性变化,研究人员开始将非侵入性脑刺激(NIBS)视为偏头痛领域一种可能的治疗选择。一方面,NIBS技术诱导的神经可塑性变化在刺激期之后仍持续存在(这是预防性偏头痛治疗的一个基本前提),同时它们能够针对导致从发作性偏头痛转变为慢性偏头痛的神经生理异常。其作用因此可能不仅影响皮层,还影响脑干和间脑结构。此外,NIBS没有严重药物副作用和药物相互作用的负担。尽管大多数研究报告了对偏头痛患者有一定有益效果,但尚未确定标准干预措施。这可能是由于所用技术(如经颅磁刺激、经颅直流电刺激)、所选作为靶点的脑区以及刺激类型(如基于相反原理使用抑制性和兴奋性刺激)方面的方法学差异,以及刺激效果的内在变异性。因此,很难就神经调节在偏头痛中的实际效果得出结论。在本文中,我们首先将回顾脑可塑性的定义和机制、偏头痛的一些神经生理特征以及与偏头痛慢性化相关的(功能)可塑性。其次,我们将回顾在慢性偏头痛中使用神经调节的治疗和生理研究的现有结果。最后,我们将根据对脑可塑性的可能影响来讨论这些预防性试验中获得的结果。