Montenegro Monique M, Kissoon Narayan R
Department of Neurology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States.
Department of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States.
Front Pain Res (Lausanne). 2023 Mar 20;4:1054764. doi: 10.3389/fpain.2023.1054764. eCollection 2023.
Occipital nerve stimulation (ONS) has been investigated as a potential treatment for disabling headaches and has shown promise for disorders such as chronic migraine and cluster headache. Long term outcomes stratified by headache subtype have had limited exploration, and literature on outcomes of this neuromodulatory intervention spanning 2 or more years is scarce.
We performed a narrative review on long term outcomes with ONS for treatment of headache disorders. We surveyed the available literature for studies that have outcomes for 24 months or greater to see if there is a habituation in response over time. Review of the literature revealed evidence in treatment of occipital neuralgia, chronic migraine, cluster headache, cervicogenic headache, short lasting unilateral neuralgiform headache attacks (SUNHA) and paroxysmal hemicrania. While the term "response" varied per individual study, a total of 17 studies showed outcomes in ONS with long term sustained responses (as defined per this review) in the majority of patients with specific headache types 177/311 (56%). Only 7 studies in total (3 cluster, 1 occipital neuralgia, 1 cervicogenic headache, 1 SUNHA, 1 paroxysmal hemicrania) provided both short-term and long-term responses up to 24 months to ONS. In cluster headache, the majority of patients (64%) were long term responders (as defined per this review) and only a minority of patients 12/62 (19%) had loss of efficacy (e.g., habituation). There was a high number 313/439 (71%) of adverse events per total number of patients in the studies including lead migration, requirements of revision surgery, allergy to surgical materials, infection and intolerable paresthesias.
With the evidence available, the response to ONS was sustained in the majority of patients with cluster headache with low rates of loss of efficacy in this patient population. There was a high percent of adverse events per number of patients in long term follow-up and likely related to the off-label use of leads typically used for spinal cord stimulation. Further longitudinal assessments of outcomes in occipital nerve stimulation with devices labelled for use in peripheral nerve stimulation are needed to evaluate the extent of habituation to treatment in headache.
枕神经刺激(ONS)已被研究作为治疗致残性头痛的一种潜在方法,并且已显示出对慢性偏头痛和丛集性头痛等疾病有治疗前景。按头痛亚型分层的长期疗效探索有限,关于这种神经调节干预2年或更长时间疗效的文献也很少。
我们对枕神经刺激治疗头痛疾病的长期疗效进行了叙述性综述。我们查阅了现有文献,寻找那些有24个月或更长时间疗效结果的研究,以查看随着时间推移反应是否会出现适应性变化。文献综述揭示了枕神经刺激在治疗枕神经痛、慢性偏头痛、丛集性头痛、颈源性头痛、短暂性单侧神经痛样头痛发作(SUNHA)和发作性偏侧头痛方面的证据。虽然每个研究中“反应”的定义各不相同,但共有17项研究显示,在大多数特定头痛类型的患者中,枕神经刺激有长期持续反应(按本综述定义),177/311(56%)。总共只有7项研究(3项丛集性头痛、1项枕神经痛、1项颈源性头痛、1项SUNHA、1项发作性偏侧头痛)提供了枕神经刺激长达24个月的短期和长期反应。在丛集性头痛中,大多数患者(64%)是长期反应者(按本综述定义),只有少数患者12/62(19%)出现疗效丧失(如适应性变化)。在这些研究中,每总患者数中不良事件的发生率很高,为313/439(71%),包括导线移位、翻修手术需求、对手术材料过敏、感染和无法耐受的感觉异常。
根据现有证据,大多数丛集性头痛患者对枕神经刺激的反应是持续的,该患者群体中疗效丧失率较低。在长期随访中,每患者数中不良事件的百分比很高,可能与通常用于脊髓刺激的导线的标签外使用有关。需要对标记用于周围神经刺激的设备进行枕神经刺激疗效的进一步纵向评估,以评估头痛治疗中适应性变化的程度。