This is by far the largest AH case series ever reported in the literature. The diagnostic criteria that we previously proposed proved to be valid when applied to a large number of patients suffering from this condition. We support its recognition as a new form of headache, to be included in the forthcoming update of the International Headache Society Classification, within '10. Headache attributed to disorder of homoeostasis'. Its formal validation would favour further studies aimed at improving the understanding of its pathophysiology and implementing preventative measures.

The objective of this study was to assess patient satisfaction with acute treatment of migraine with frovatriptan or rizatriptan by preference questionnaire. 148 subjects with a history of migraine with or without aura (IHS 2004 criteria), with at least one migraine attack per month in the preceding 6 months, were enrolled and randomized to frovatriptan 2.5 mg or rizatriptan 10 mg treating 1–3 attacks. The study had a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, cross-over design, with treatment periods lasting <3 months. At the end of the study, patients assigned preference to one of the treatments using a questionnaire with a score from 0 to 5 (primary endpoint). Secondary endpoints were pain-free and pain relief episodes at 2 h, and recurrent and sustained pain-free episodes within 48 h. 104 of the 125 patients (83%, intention-to-treat population) expressed a preference for a triptan. The average preference score was not significantly different between frovatriptan (2.9 ± 1.3) and rizatriptan (3.2 ± 1.1). The rates of pain-free (33% frovatriptan vs. 39% rizatriptan) and pain relief (55 vs. 62%) episodes at 2 h were not significantly different between the two treatments. The rate of recurrent episodes was significantly (p < 0.001) lower under frovatriptan (21 vs. 43% rizatriptan). No significant differences were observed in sustained pain-free episodes (26% frovatriptan vs. 22% rizatriptan). The number of patients with adverse events was not significantly different between rizatriptan (34) and frovatriptan (25, p = NS). The results suggest that frovatriptan has a similar efficacy to rizatriptan, but a more prolonged duration of action.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s10194-010-0243-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

The objective of this study was to evaluate patients’ satisfaction with acute treatment of migraine with frovatriptan or almotriptan by preference questionnaire. One hundred and thirty three subjects with a history of migraine with or without aura (IHS 2004 criteria), with at least one migraine attack in the preceding 6 months, were enrolled and randomized to frovatriptan 2.5 mg or almotriptan 12.5 mg, treating 1–3 attacks. The study had a multicenter, randomized, double blind, cross-over design, with treatment periods lasting <3 months. At study end patients assigned preference to one of the treatments using a questionnaire with a score from 0 to 5 (primary endpoint). Secondary endpoints were pain free and pain relief episodes at 2 and 4 h, and recurrent and sustained pain free episodes within 48 h. Of the 133 patients (86%, intention-to-treat population) 114 of them expressed a preference for a triptan. The average preference score was not significantly different between frovatriptan (3.1 ± 1.3) and almotriptan (3.4 ± 1.3). The rates of pain free (30% frovatriptan vs. 32% almotriptan) and pain relief (54% vs. 56%) episodes at 2 h did not significantly differ between treatments. This was the case also at 4 h (pain free: 56% vs. 59%; pain relief: 75% vs. 72%). Recurrent episodes were significantly (P < 0.05) less frequent under frovatriptan (30% vs. 44%), also for the attacks treated within 30 min. No significant differences were observed in sustained pain free episodes (21% vs. 18%). The tolerability profile was similar between the two drugs. In conclusion, our study suggests that frovatriptan has a similar efficacy of almotriptan in the short-term, while some advantages are observed during long-term treatment.

A new form of headache, whose attacks seem to be stereotyped, has been recently reported; because of the peculiarity of its onset, strictly related to airplane travel, the name of "Airplane headache" was proposed. A total of 7 cases have been published. Here we present the first Italian one. Furthermore the revision of the clinical characteristics of each patient leads us to propose provisional diagnostic criteria.

No abstract

The headache attributed to airplane travel, also named "airplane headache", is characterized by the sudden onset of a severe head pain exclusively in relation to airplane flights, mainly during the landing phase. Secondary causes, such as upper respiratory tract infections or acute sinusitis, must be ruled out. Although its cause is not thoroughly understood, sinus barotrauma should be reasonably involved in the pathophysiological mechanisms. Furthermore, in the current International Classification of Headache Disorders, rapid descent from high altitude is not considered as a possible cause of headache, although the onset of such pain in airplane travellers or aviators has been well known since the beginning of the aviation era. On the basis of a survey we conducted with the courteous cooperation of people who had experienced this type of headache, we proposed diagnostic criteria to be added to the forthcoming revision of the International Classification of Headache Disorders. Their formal validation would favour further studies aimed at improving knowledge of the pathophysiological mechanisms involved and at implementing preventative measures.

The objectives of this study are to assess the efficacy and safety of frovatriptan, and rizatriptan in the subgroup of women with menstrually related migraine of a multicenter, randomized, double blind, cross-over study. Each patient received frovatriptan 2.5 mg or rizatriptan 10 mg in a randomized sequence: after treating 3 episodes of migraine in not more than 3 months with the first treatment, the patient had to switch to the other treatment. Menstrually related migraine was defined according to the criteria listed in the Appendix of the last IHS Classification of Headache disorders. 99 out of the 125 patients included in the intention-to-treat analysis of the main study were of a female gender: 93 had regular menstrual cycles and were, thus, included in this analysis. A total of 49 attacks classified as menstrually related migraine were treated with frovatriptan and 59 with rizatriptan. Rate of pain relief at 2 h was 58% for frovatriptan and 64% for rizatriptan (p = NS), while rate of pain free at 2 h was 31 and 34% (p = NS), respectively. At 24 h, 67 and 81% of frovatriptan-treated, and 61 and 74% of rizatriptan-treated patients were pain free and had pain relief, respectively (p = NS). Recurrence at 24 h was significantly (p < 0.01) lower with frovatriptan (10 vs. 32% rizatriptan). Frovatriptan was as effective as rizatriptan in the immediate treatment of menstrually related migraine attacks while showing a favorable sustained effect with a lower rate of migraine recurrence. These results need to be confirmed by randomized, double-blind, prospective, large clinical trials.

We report the case of a patient suffering from migraine with and without aura who had a complete remission of both during warfarin treatment for pulmonary embolism; the attacks reappeared promptly during two treatment withdrawals. We highlight warfarin as prophylactic drug in migraine prophylaxis and discuss about new, safer and more specific anticoagulants that could be used in migraine treatment. Their use could also clarify literature's conflicting data about anticoagulants' efficacy in migraine prophylaxis and clear if their efficacy in migraine treatment could be related aspecifically to anticoagulation's effect or to a particular mechanism in the coagulation cascade.