What’s in a name? tension-type headache versus migraine
- 35 Downloads
For years clinicians and researchers have debated the nosology of headache generally and of “migraine” versus “tension-type headache” in particular, an exhaustive process that arguably has done little to improve patient management and clinical outcome. New research data now indicate that the migraine versus tension-type distinction indeed may possess some clinical use, because patients with migraine or “mixed” headache syndromes may respond differently to a specific therapeutic intervention than patients with “pure” tension-type headache. This variable response to treatment intervention would seem to imply that similarly distinctive biologies are generating the respective headache syndromes, but to date we have insufficient evidence to support that conclusion.
KeywordsMigraine Sumatriptan Cluster Headache Chronic Daily Headache International Headache Society
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References and Recommended Reading
- 1.Ad Hoc Committee on Classification of Headache: Classification of headache. JAMA 1962, 179:717–718.Google Scholar
- 2.Classification and diagnostic criteria for headache disorders, cranial neuralgias and facial pain. Headache Classification Committee of the International Headache Society [no authors listed]. Cephalalgia 1988, 8(suppl 7):1-96.Google Scholar
- 6.Sicuteri F, Testi A, Anselmi B: Biochemical investigations in headache: increase in the hydroxyindoleacetic acid excretion during migraine attacks. Int Arch Allergy 1961, 19:55–58.Google Scholar
- 9.Rothrock JF, Mar KR, Yaksh TL, et al.: Cerebrospinal fluid analyses in migraine patients and controls. Cephalalgia 1995, 15:489–493. The authors presented clear evidence that migraine reflects disordered central neurotransmission, that this abnormality is present in all clinical phenotypes of migraine, and that prophylactic treatment of migraine may produce clinical improvement, which is paralleled by at least partial correction of the predisposing biologic abnormality.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 21.Raskin NH: Headache, edn 2. New York: Churchill Livingstone; 1988.Google Scholar
- 24.Ferrari MD, Odink J, Bruyn GW: Biochemical differences between classic migraine, common migraine and tension headache. In New Trends in Clinical Neurology: Migraine and Other Headaches. Edited by Ferrari MD, Lataste X. Carnforth, NJ: Parthenon; 1989:151–160.Google Scholar
- 28.Weihe E, Schafer MK, Nohr D, Persson S: Expression of neuropeptides, neuropeptide receptors and neuropeptide processing enzymes in spinal neurons and peripheral non-neural cells and plasticity in models of inflammatory pain. In Neuropeptides, Nociception and Pain. Edited by Hokfelt T et al. London: Chapman & Hall; 1994:43–69.Google Scholar
- 31.Guitera V, Munoz P, Pascual J, et al.: Prevalence and diagnostic distribution of chronic daily headache in the general population. Cephalalgia 1997, 17:283.Google Scholar
- 32.Silberstein SD, Lipton RB: Classification of daily and near daily headache: field trial of revised IHS criteria. Neurology 1996, 47:871–875. The authors took on the “dark continent” of chronic daily headache (CDH), proposed a new diagnostic classification system, and field tested their system. Their results offer nothing less than a new language for exploring and treating CDH.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- 35.Lipton R, Stewart W, Cady R, et al.: Sumatriptan for the range of headaches in migraine sufferers: results of the Spectrum Study. Headache 2000, 40:783–791. The first study to demonstrate convincingly that patients with an established diagnosis of IHS migraine will respond to acute treatment with oral sumatriptan regardless of the clinical characteristics of the particular attack being treated.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar