Explore the vast range of titles available.

Purpose of Review Headache is a common symptom of COVID-19 with emerging literature being published on the subject. Although it may seem unspecific, scientific evidence has allowed a better definition of this headache type, revealing relevant associations with other COVID-19 symptoms and prognoses. We therefore sought to highlight the most remarkable findings concerning headache secondary to COVID-19, specifically focusing on epidemiology, characteristics, pathophysiology, and treatments. Recent Findings The real prevalence of headache as a symptom of COVID-19 is still unclear ranging from 10 to 70%. Headache mainly has a tension-type-like phenotype, although 25% of individuals present with migraine-like features that also occur in patients without personal migraine history. This finding suggests that a likely pathophysiological mechanism is the activation of the trigeminovascular system. SARS-CoV-2 neurotropism can occur by trans-synaptic invasion through the olfactory route from the nasal cavity, leading to anosmia which has been associated with headache. SARS-CoV-2 protein has been found not only in olfactory mucosa and bulbs but also in trigeminal branches and the trigeminal ganglion, supporting this hypothesis. However, other mechanisms such as brain vessels inflammation due to SARS-CoV-2 damage to the endothelium or systemic inflammation in the context of cytokine storm cannot be ruled out. Interestingly, headache has been associated with lower COVID-19 mortality. No specific treatment for COVID-19 headache is available at present. Summary Studies show that investigating COVID-19 headache represents an opportunity not only to better understand COVID-19 in general but also to advance in the knowledge of both secondary and primary headaches. Future research is therefore warranted.

Purpose of Review Fibromyalgia Syndrome (FMS) is a complex chronic pain condition characterized by widespread musculoskeletal pain and numerous other debilitating symptoms. The purpose of this review is to provide a comprehensive overview, based on everyday clinical practice, of the drugs presently employed in the treatment of FMS. Recent Findings The treatment of FMS is based on a multimodal approach, with pharmacologic treatment being an essential pillar. The drugs used include tricyclic antidepressants, serotonin and noradrenaline reuptake inhibitors, other antidepressants, anticonvulsants, myorelaxants, and analgesics. The effectiveness of these medications varies, and the choice of drug often depends on the specific symptoms presented by the patient. Many drugs tend to either address only some domains of the complex FMS symptomatology or have a limited effect on pain. Summary Each treatment option comes with potential side effects and risks that necessitate careful consideration. It may be beneficial to divide patients into clinical subpopulations, such as FMS with comorbid depression, for more effective treatment. Despite the complexities and challenges, the pharmacological treatment remains a crucial part for the management of FMS. This review aims to guide clinicians in prescribing pharmacological treatment to individuals with FMS.

Purpose of Review The aim of this narrative review is to analyze the evidence about a peripheral or central origin of a tension headache attack in order to provide a further clarification for an appropriate approach. Recent Findings Tension headache is a complex and multifactorial pathology, in which both peripheral and central factors could play an important role in the initiation of an attack. Although the exact origin of a tension headache attack has not been conclusively established, correlations have been identified between certain structural parameters of the craniomandibular region and craniocervical muscle activity. Future research should focus on improving our understanding of the pathology with the ultimate goal of improving diagnosis. Summary The pathogenesis of tension-type headache involves both central and peripheral mechanisms, being the perpetuation over time of the headache attacks what would favor the evolution of an episodic tension-type headache to a chronic tension-type headache. The unresolved question is what factors would be involved in the initial activation in a tension headache attack. The evidence that favors a peripheral origin of the tension headache attacks, that is, the initial events occur outside the brain barrier, which suggests the action of vascular and musculoskeletal factors at the beginning of a tension headache attack, factors that would favor the sensitization of the peripheral nervous system as a result of sustained sensory input.

Purpose of Review To explore the mechanism and therapeutic effect of sympathetic nerve regulation on neuropathic pain. Recent Findings A comprehensive search was conducted in the PubMed and CNKI libraries, using the following keywords: stele ganglion block, neuropathic pain, sympathetic nerve block, sympathetic chemical destruction, and sympathetic radiofrequency thermocoagulation. We selected and critically reviewed research articles published in English that were related to sympathetic modulation in the treatment of neuropathic pain. The collected literature will be classified according to content and reviewed in combination with experimental results and clinical cases. Neuropathic pain was effectively treated with sympathetic regulation technology. Its mechanism includes the inhibition of sympathetic nerve activity, regulation of the inflammatory response, and inhibition of pain transmission, which greatly alleviates neuropathic pain in patients. Stellate ganglion blocks, thoracic and lumbar sympathectomies, chemical destruction, and radiofrequency thermocoagulation have been widely used to treat neuropathic pain. Summary Sympathetic regulation can effectively relieve pain symptoms and improve the patient's quality of life by inhibiting sympathetic nerve activity, reducing the production and release of pain-related mediators, and inhibiting pain transmission. CT-guided radiofrequency thermocoagulation of the thoracic and lumbar sympathetic nerves is effective and durable, with few complications, and is recommended as a treatment for intractable neuropathic pain.

Purpose of Review Our goal was to describe the changes to headache and neurological education that occurred as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, and the impact this had on medical learners. We also discuss subsequent implications for the future of education in the field of headache medicine. Recent Findings Both educators and learners faced many challenges during the pandemic. These include the following: cancellation of in-person educational meetings, limited in-person networking and wellness events, disengagement from virtual didactic curricula, limitations in procedure-based learning, redeployment to inpatient settings with a decrease in outpatient exposures, and blurred boundaries between home and work life due to more virtual collaboration and home computer use. The development of telehealth programs and trainee wellness initiatives, improved collaboration opportunities among geographically distant institutions, and greater access to conferences for learners are among the many improvements forged by these challenging times in medical education. Summary Given the high prevalence of headache disorders and the paucity of headache specialists, training new clinicians with competency in headache medicine is essential. There were many educational challenges and opportunities identified in the literature that resulted from the pressures of the pandemic. Educators need to develop assessments that capture any gaps in learning that may have occurred during this tumultuous time and be vigilant of remediation needs in our learners over the coming years. It is imperative to intentionally design curricula for the future by harnessing new pedagogical tools, innovations, and perspectives gleaned from our experience with the COVID-19 pandemic.

Purpose of Review People with headache usually experienced significantly lower health-related quality of life (HRQoL) than the healthy subjects. The goal of this systematic review was to evaluate the effectiveness of manual therapy on HRQoL in patients with tension-type headache (TTH), migraine (MH) or cervicogenic headache (CGH). Recent Findings We searched randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on MEDLINE, COCHRANE and PEDro databases. Treatment was manual therapy compared to usual care or placebo. The outcome was the HRQoL that could be measured by Headache Impact Test (HIT-6), Headache Disability Inventory (HDI), Migraine Disability Assessment Questionnaire (MIDAS) and Short Form Health Survey 12/36 (SF-12/36). For the RCT internal validity, we used the Cochrane risk of bias (RoB) tool. For the level of evidence, we used the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach (GRADE). We identified a total of 10 RCTs, 7 of which were included into the meta-analysis. For HIT-6 scale, meta-analysis showed statistically significant differences in favour to manual therapy both after treatment (mean difference (MD) − 3.67; 95% CI from − 5.71 to − 1.63) and at follow-up (MD − 2.47; 95% CI from − 3.27 to − 1.68). For HDI scale, meta-analysis showed statistically significant differences in favour to manual therapy both after treatment (MD − 4.01; 95% CI from − 5.82 to − 2.20) and at follow-up (MD − 5.62; 95% CI from − 10.69 to − 0.54). Other scales provided inconclusive results. Summary Manual therapy should be considered as an effective approach in improving the quality of life in patients with TTH and MH, while in patients with CGH, the results were inconsistent. Those positive results should be considered with caution due to the very low level of evidence. Researchers should in future design primary studies using valid and reliable disease-specific outcome measures.

Purpose of Review Many patients with migraine report their attacks are triggered by various weather anomalies. Studies have shown mixed results regarding the association of migraine to weather changes. The purpose of the current review is to compile the most up-to-date research studies on how weather may affect migraine. In addition, we explore the association between weather and other inflammatory disease states as well as neurotransmitters. Recent Findings Migraine attacks can be related to weather variables such as barometric pressure, humidity, and wind. However, the results of recent studies are inconsistent; weathers’ effect on migraine attacks is around 20%. However, very strong weather factors have a more significant effect on migraine attack variables. Summary Many individuals identify weather as a migraine attack trigger, yet we see no causative relationship between weather and migraine patterns. The outcomes of studies indicate mixed results and reflect individual variation in how weather can impact migraine patterns. Similar relationships can be seen with other rheumatologic and pain conditions in general. Overall, the combination of weather plus other factors appears to be a more significant migraine trigger.

Purpose of Review Discogenic low back pain (DLBP) stems from pathology in one or more intervertebral discs identified as the root cause of the pain. It is the most common type of chronic low back pain (LBP), representing 26–42% of attributable cases. Recent Findings The clinical presentation of DLBP includes increased pain when sitting, coughing, or sneezing, and experiencing relief when standing or ambulating. Dermatomal radiation of pain to the lower extremity and neurological symptoms including numbness, motor weakness, and urinary or fecal incontinence are signs of advanced disease with disc prolapse, nerve root compression, or spinal stenosis. Degenerative disc disease is caused by both a decrease in disc nutrient supply causing decreased oxygen, lowered pH, and lessened ability of the intervertebral disc (IVD) to respond to increased load or injury; moreover, changes in the extracellular matrix composition cause weakening of the tissue and skewing the extracellular matrix’s (ECM) harmonious balance between catabolic and anabolic factors for cell turnover in favor of catabolism. Thus, the degeneration of the disc causes a shift from type II to type I collagen expression by NP cells and a decrease in aggrecan synthesis leads to dehydrated matrix cells ultimately with loss of swelling pressure needed for mechanical support. Cell-based therapies such as autologous nucleus pulposus cell re-implantation have in animal models and human trials shown improvements in LBP score, retention of hydration in IVD, and increased disc height. Percutaneously delivered multipotent mesenchymal stem cell (MSC) therapy has been proposed as a potential means to uniquely ameliorate discogenic LBP holistically through three mechanisms: mitigation of primary nociceptive disc pain, slow or reversal of the catabolic metabolism, and restoration of disc tissue. Embryonic stem cells (ESCs) can differentiate into cells of all three germ layers in vitro, but their use is hindered related to ethical concerns, potential for immune rejection after transplantation, disease, and teratoma formation. Another similar approach to treating back pain is transplantation of the nucleus pulposus, which, like stem cell therapy, seeks to address the underlying cause of intervertebral disc degeneration by aiming to reverse the destructive inflammatory process and regenerate the proteoglycans and collagen found in healthy disc tissue. Summary Preliminary animal models and clinical studies have shown mesenchymal stem cell implantation as a potential therapy for IVD regeneration and ECM restoration via a shift towards favorable anabolic balance and reduction of pain.

Purpose of Review This review aims to summarize current knowledge on the pathophysiology of pain and the role of neuro-immune crosstalk in the development of acute and chronic pain (CP). Specifically, the review focuses on the role of immune cells involved in the innate and acquired immune response, emphasizing their bidirectional interactions with the nervous systems and discussing the implications of this crosstalk on acute and CP management. Recent Findings In the last two decades, multiple studies have uncovered the important role of the immune system in initiating, maintaining, and resolving pain stimuli. Furthermore, researchers discovered that the immune system interacts tightly with the nervous system, creating a bidirectional crosstalk in which immune cells influence the response of peripheral and central nerve fibers while neurotransmitters and neuropeptides released by nociceptors directly and indirectly modulate the immune response. Summary The neuro-immune crosstalk in acute and CP is a complex and not fully understood process that comprise the interactions of multiple diverse molecules, bidirectional interferences, and numerous redundant processes. Despite the complexity, important steps have been taken in recent years toward explaining the specific roles of each immune cell type and molecule in the initiation, maintenance and resolution of pain. These findings may set the basis for innovative therapeutic options that target the immune system, overcoming the limitations of current treatments in providing pain relief and the disadvantages associated with opioid therapy.

Purpose of Review The care of patients with complex postsurgical pain can be challenging and burdensome for the healthcare system. Transitional pain service (TPS) is a relatively new concept and has not been widely adopted in the USA. This article explores the benefits and barriers of transitional pain services and describes the development of a TPS at our institution. Recent Findings Evidence from a few institutions that have adopted TPS has shown decreased postsurgical opioid consumption for patients on chronic opioids and decreased incidence of chronic postsurgical opioid use for opioid-naïve patients. The development of a transitional pain service may improve outcomes for these complex patients by providing longitudinal and multidisciplinary perioperative pain care. Summary In this article, we describe the implementation of a TPS at a tertiary medical center. Our TPS model involves a multidisciplinary team of anesthesiologists, pain psychologists, surgeons, and advanced practice providers. We provide longitudinal care, including preoperative education and optimization; perioperative multimodal analgesic care; and longitudinal follow-up for 90 days post-procedure. With our TPS service, we aim to reduce long-term opioid use and improve functional outcomes for our patients.