4.6 Article

Cranial autonomic symptoms in migraine: characteristics and comparison with cluster headache

Journal

JOURNAL OF NEUROLOGY NEUROSURGERY AND PSYCHIATRY
Volume 80, Issue 10, Pages 1116-1119

Publisher

BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1136/jnnp.2008.157743

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Taipei-Veterans General Hospital [V96C1-041]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Cranial autonomic symptoms (CAS) are distinguishing features of trigeminal autonomic cephalalgias, of which cluster headache (CH) is the most common, but they can occur in patients with migraine. For migraine with strictly unilateral headache, the presence of CAS might cause diagnostic confusion with CH. Characteristics of CAS in migraine and comparisons with those in CH have rarely been reported. Methods: This study prospectively recruited consecutive patients with migraine and CH treated at a headache clinic. Six CAS items were surveyed, including: conjunctival injection, lacrimation, nasal congestion, rhinorrhoea, eyelid oedema and forehead/facial sweating. The CAS characteristics recorded included: laterality, intensity, time sequence and consistency with headache attacks. Results: A total of 786 migraine patients (625 women/161 men, mean age 40 (13) years) and 98 CH patients (11 women/87 men, mean age 36 (11) years) were recruited. The prevalence of >= 1 CAS in migraine patients was 56% and did not differ among migraine subtypes. Except for forehead/facial sweating, the features of the other CAS differed between patients with migraine and CH: CAS in migraine tended to be bilateral (OR 5.8-23.8 among different CAS), be unrestricted to the headache sides (OR 5.0-20.4), appear with mild to moderate intensity (OR 1.7-7.7) and be inconsistent with headache attacks (OR 2.8-6.7). Conclusions: CAS were present in half of our migraine patients and the clinical features may help differentiate migraine from CH.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available