E Domínguez-Durán1, M A Montilla-Ibáñez2, M G Álvarez-Morujo de Sande3, E Domènech-Vadillo4,5, C Bécares-Martínez6, R González-Aguado7, G Guerra-Jiménez8. 1. Hospital Infanta Luisa, Calle San Jacinto 87, 41010, Sevilla, Spain. emiliodominguezorl@gmail.com. 2. Complejo Hospitalario de Jaén, Jaén, Spain. 3. Hospital Universitario Puerta del Mar, Cádiz, Spain. 4. Hospital Universitari Joan XXIII, Tarragona, Spain. 5. Institud D'Investigació Sanitària Pere Virgili, Reus, Spain. 6. Hospital Universitario de Torrevieja, Torrevieja, Spain. 7. Hospital Universitario Marqués de Valdecilla, Santander, Spain. 8. Complejo Hospitalario Universitario Insular Materno-Infantil, Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, Spain.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Vestibular migraine (VM) consists of recurrent episodes of vestibular symptoms that are accompanied by migraine in at least 50% of the episodes. The criteria of the Bárány Society include two diagnostic categories: "actual" vestibular migraine and probable vestibular migraine. There is a wide range of drugs that can be prescribed for the prophylactic treatment of VM, but recommendations for the selection of the most appropriate drug are currently lacking. OBJECTIVE: To measure the extent to which the prophylactic treatment of VM reduces vestibular symptoms, headache and the number of crises depending on the diagnostic category of the Bárány Society and the drug used for prophylaxis. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This is a multicenter prospective study. Patients with VM who presented to any of the participating centers and who subsequently met the VM criteria were prescribed one of the following types of prophylaxis: acetazolamide, amitriptyline, flunarizine, propranolol or topiramate. Patients were called back for a follow-up visit 5 weeks later. This allowed the intensity of vestibular symptoms, headache and the number of crises before and during treatment to be compared. RESULTS: 31 Patients met the inclusion criteria. During the treatment, all the measured variables decreased significantly. In a visual analogue scale, the intensity of vestibular symptoms decreased by 45.8 points, the intensity of headache decreased by 47.8 points and patients suffered from 15.6 less monthly crises compared to the period before the treatment. No significant between-group differences were found when patients were divided based on their diagnostic category or the choice of prophylaxis prescribed to them. CONCLUSION: The treatment of VM produces a reduction of symptoms and crises with no significant differences based on patients' diagnostic categories or the choice of prophylaxis prescribed to them.
INTRODUCTION: Vestibular migraine (VM) consists of recurrent episodes of vestibular symptoms that are accompanied by migraine in at least 50% of the episodes. The criteria of the Bárány Society include two diagnostic categories: "actual" vestibular migraine and probable vestibular migraine. There is a wide range of drugs that can be prescribed for the prophylactic treatment of VM, but recommendations for the selection of the most appropriate drug are currently lacking. OBJECTIVE: To measure the extent to which the prophylactic treatment of VM reduces vestibular symptoms, headache and the number of crises depending on the diagnostic category of the Bárány Society and the drug used for prophylaxis. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This is a multicenter prospective study. Patients with VM who presented to any of the participating centers and who subsequently met the VM criteria were prescribed one of the following types of prophylaxis: acetazolamide, amitriptyline, flunarizine, propranolol or topiramate. Patients were called back for a follow-up visit 5 weeks later. This allowed the intensity of vestibular symptoms, headache and the number of crises before and during treatment to be compared. RESULTS: 31 Patients met the inclusion criteria. During the treatment, all the measured variables decreased significantly. In a visual analogue scale, the intensity of vestibular symptoms decreased by 45.8 points, the intensity of headache decreased by 47.8 points and patients suffered from 15.6 less monthly crises compared to the period before the treatment. No significant between-group differences were found when patients were divided based on their diagnostic category or the choice of prophylaxis prescribed to them. CONCLUSION: The treatment of VM produces a reduction of symptoms and crises with no significant differences based on patients' diagnostic categories or the choice of prophylaxis prescribed to them.
Authors: Michael von Brevern; Pierre Bertholon; Thomas Brandt; Terry Fife; Takao Imai; Daniele Nuti; David Newman-Toker Journal: J Vestib Res Date: 2015 Impact factor: 2.435
Authors: Thomas Lempert; Jes Olesen; Joseph Furman; John Waterston; Barry Seemungal; John Carey; Alexander Bisdorff; Maurizio Versino; Stefan Evers; David Newman-Toker Journal: J Vestib Res Date: 2012 Impact factor: 2.435
Authors: Jose A Lopez-Escamez; John Carey; Won-Ho Chung; Joel A Goebel; Måns Magnusson; Marco Mandalà; David E Newman-Toker; Michael Strupp; Mamoru Suzuki; Franco Trabalzini; Alexandre Bisdorff Journal: J Vestib Res Date: 2015 Impact factor: 2.435
Authors: Michael Strupp; Jose A Lopez-Escamez; Ji-Soo Kim; Dominik Straumann; Joanna C Jen; John Carey; Alexandre Bisdorff; Thomas Brandt Journal: J Vestib Res Date: 2016 Impact factor: 2.354