Cochrane ENT, Nuffield Department of Surgical Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Wadham College, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2023 Apr 12;4(4):CD015322. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD015322.pub2.
Vestibular migraine is a form of migraine where one of the main features is recurrent attacks of vertigo. These episodes are often associated with other features of migraine, including headache and sensitivity to light or sound. The unpredictable and severe attacks of vertigo can lead to a considerable reduction in quality of life. The condition is estimated to affect just under 1% of the population, although many people remain undiagnosed. A number of pharmacological interventions have been used, or proposed to be used, at the time of a vestibular migraine attack to help reduce the severity or resolve the symptoms. These are predominantly based on treatments that are in use for headache migraine, with the belief that the underlying pathophysiology of these conditions is similar. OBJECTIVES: To assess the benefits and harms of pharmacological interventions used to relieve acute attacks of vestibular migraine.
The Cochrane ENT Information Specialist searched the Cochrane ENT Register; Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); Ovid MEDLINE; Ovid Embase; Web of Science; ClinicalTrials.gov; ICTRP and additional sources for published and unpublished trials. The date of the search was 23 September 2022.
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs in adults with definite or probable vestibular migraine comparing triptans, ergot alkaloids, dopamine antagonists, antihistamines, 5-HT3 receptor antagonists, gepants (CGRP receptor antagonists), magnesium, paracetamol or non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) with either placebo or no treatment. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcomes were: 1) improvement in vertigo (assessed as a dichotomous outcome - improved or not improved), 2) change in vertigo (assessed as a continuous outcome, with a score on a numerical scale) and 3) serious adverse events. Our secondary outcomes were: 4) disease-specific health-related quality of life, 5) improvement in headache, 6) improvement in other migrainous symptoms and 7) other adverse effects. We considered outcomes reported at three time points: < 2 hours, 2 to 12 hours, > 12 to 72 hours. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence for each outcome. MAIN RESULTS: We included two RCTs with a total of 133 participants, both of which compared the use of triptans to placebo for an acute attack of vestibular migraine. One study was a parallel-group RCT (of 114 participants, 75% female). This compared the use of 10 mg rizatriptan to placebo. The second study was a smaller, cross-over RCT (of 19 participants, 70% female). This compared the use of 2.5 mg zolmitriptan to placebo. Triptans may result in little or no difference in the proportion of people whose vertigo improves at up to two hours after taking the medication. However, the evidence was very uncertain (risk ratio 0.84, 95% confidence interval 0.66 to 1.07; 2 studies; based on 262 attacks of vestibular migraine treated in 124 participants; very low-certainty evidence). We did not identify any evidence on the change in vertigo using a continuous scale. Only one of the studies assessed serious adverse events. No events were noted in either group, but as the sample size was small we cannot be sure if there are risks associated with taking triptans for this condition (0/75 receiving triptans, 0/39 receiving placebo; 1 study; 114 participants; very low-certainty evidence). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The evidence for interventions used to treat acute attacks of vestibular migraine is very sparse. We identified only two studies, both of which assessed the use of triptans. We rated all the evidence as very low-certainty, meaning that we have little confidence in the effect estimates and cannot be sure if triptans have any effect on the symptoms of vestibular migraine. Although we identified sparse information on potential harms of treatment in this review, the use of triptans for other conditions (such as headache migraine) is known to be associated with some adverse effects. We did not identify any placebo-controlled randomised trials for other interventions that may be used for this condition. Further research is needed to identify whether any interventions help to improve the symptoms of vestibular migraine attacks and to determine if there are side effects associated with their use.
前庭性偏头痛是偏头痛的一种形式,其主要特征之一是反复发作的眩晕。这些发作通常伴有偏头痛的其他特征,包括头痛和对光或声音敏感。眩晕的不可预测和严重发作可能会导致生活质量显著下降。据估计,这种情况影响了不到 1%的人口,但许多人仍未被诊断出来。有许多药理学干预措施已被用于前庭性偏头痛发作时,以帮助减轻严重程度或缓解症状。这些主要基于用于头痛偏头痛的治疗方法,其信念是这些疾病的潜在病理生理学是相似的。
评估用于缓解前庭性偏头痛急性发作的药理学干预措施的益处和危害。
Cochrane ENT 信息专家检索了 Cochrane ENT 登记册;CENTRAL(中央对照试验注册库);Ovid MEDLINE;Ovid Embase;Web of Science;ClinicalTrials.gov;ICTRP 和其他发表和未发表试验的来源。检索日期为 2022 年 9 月 23 日。
我们纳入了在成人中进行的比较曲坦类药物、麦角生物碱、多巴胺拮抗剂、抗组胺药、5-HT3 受体拮抗剂、 gepants(CGRP 受体拮抗剂)、镁、对乙酰氨基酚或非甾体抗炎药(NSAIDs)与安慰剂或无治疗的明确或可能的前庭性偏头痛的随机对照试验(RCTs)和准 RCTs。
我们使用了标准的 Cochrane 方法。我们的主要结局是:1)眩晕改善(评估为二分类结局 - 改善或未改善),2)眩晕变化(评估为连续结局,使用数值量表上的评分)和 3)严重不良事件。我们的次要结局是:4)疾病特异性健康相关生活质量,5)头痛改善,6)其他偏头痛症状改善和 7)其他不良反应。我们考虑了在<2 小时、2 至 12 小时、>12 至 72 小时报告的结局。我们使用 GRADE 评估每个结局的证据确定性。
我们纳入了两项 RCTs,共有 133 名参与者,均比较了曲坦类药物与安慰剂用于急性前庭性偏头痛发作。一项研究是一项平行组 RCT(114 名参与者,75%为女性)。这比较了使用 10mg 利扎曲坦与安慰剂。第二项研究是一项较小的交叉 RCT(19 名参与者,70%为女性)。这比较了使用 2.5mg 佐米曲坦与安慰剂。
曲坦类药物可能在服用药物后 2 小时内对眩晕改善的患者比例没有或几乎没有差异。然而,证据非常不确定(风险比 0.84,95%置信区间 0.66 至 1.07;2 项研究;基于 124 名参与者中治疗的 262 次前庭性偏头痛发作;极低确定性证据)。我们没有发现任何使用连续量表评估眩晕变化的证据。只有一项研究评估了严重不良事件。两组均未发生任何事件,但由于样本量较小,我们不能确定使用曲坦类药物治疗这种疾病是否存在风险(75 名接受曲坦类药物的患者中 0/75 例,39 名接受安慰剂的患者中 0/39 例;1 项研究;114 名参与者;极低确定性证据)。
用于治疗急性前庭性偏头痛发作的干预措施的证据非常有限。我们只确定了两项研究,都评估了曲坦类药物的使用。我们将所有证据评为极低确定性,这意味着我们对效应估计值的信心很小,不能确定曲坦类药物对前庭性偏头痛的症状是否有任何影响。尽管我们在本综述中确定了治疗潜在危害的稀疏信息,但曲坦类药物用于其他疾病(如头痛偏头痛)已知与一些不良反应有关。
我们没有发现任何可能用于这种疾病的其他干预措施的安慰剂对照随机试验。需要进一步研究以确定是否有任何干预措施有助于改善前庭性偏头痛发作的症状,并确定使用它们是否存在副作用。