BackgroundWe report outcomes of spontaneous intracranial hypotension (SIH) patients who underwent transvenous embolization of cerebrospinal fluid-venous fistulas (CSFVFs) confirmed on digital subtraction myelography (DSM) performed at our institution.MethodsThis is a retrospective evaluation of a prospectively collected database of SIH patients who underwent transvenous embolization of CSFVFs. Only patients who had fistulas confirmed on DSM performed at our institution were included. All patients had a baseline MRI and an MRI performed at least 90 days post-embolization, as well as clinical evaluation using the six item Headache Impact Test (HIT-6) and the Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) scales. Paired t-test was used to report changes in Bern MRI scores and HIT-6 scores at follow-up.Results40 patients were included (29 female, 11 male). Mean age was 57.4±10.3 years. Mean Bern score improved from 5.7±3.0 at baseline to 1.3±2.0 at follow-up (p<0.0001). Mean HIT-6 score at baseline was 67.2±11.1 and at follow-up was 41.5±10.1 (p<0.0001). Median PGIC was 1, with 36 patients (90.0%) reporting at least minimal improvement and 32 patients (82.5%) reporting much or very much improvement. Complications included persistent local site pain in 12 patients (30%), suspected rebound intracranial hypertension requiring medical intervention in 7 patients (17.5%), and asymptomatic tiny Onyx emboli to the lungs in 3 patients (7.5%).ConclusionsTransvenous embolization of CSFVFs using Onyx is safe and effective, resulting in significant improvement in headache and overall clinical outcomes in nearly 90% of patients, and substantial improvements in brain MRI abnormalities.

BackgroundMigraine is a common and disabling disorder. Fibromyalgia has been shown to be commonly comorbid in patients with migraine and can intensify disability. The aim of this study was to determine if patients with co-morbid fibromyalgia and migraine report more depressive symptoms, have more headache related disability, or report higher intensity of headache as compared to patients with migraine only. Cases of comorbid fibromyalgia and migraine were identified using a prospectively maintained headache database at Mayo Clinic Rochester. One-hundred and fifty seven cases and 471 controls were identified using this database and the Mayo Clinic electronic medical record.FindingsDepressive symptoms as assessed by PHQ-9, intensity of headache, and migraine related disability as assessed by MIDAS were primary measures used to compare migraine patients with comorbid fibromyalgia versus those without. Patients with comorbid fibromyalgia reported significantly higher PHQ-9 scores (OR 1.08, p < .0001) and headache intensity scores (OR 1.149, p = .007). There was no significant difference in migraine related disability (OR 1.002, p = .075). Patients with fibromyalgia were more likely to score in a higher category of depression severity (OR 1.467, p < .0001) and more likely to score in a higher category of migraine related disability (OR 1.23, p = .004).ConclusionPatients with comorbid fibromyalgia and migraine report more depressive symptoms, higher headache intensity, and are more likely to have severe headache related disability as compared to controls without fibromyalgia. Clinicians who care for patients with migraine may consider screening for comorbid fibromyalgia particularly in patients with moderate to severe depressive symptoms, high headache intensity and/or high headache related disability. This is the first matched study to look at these characterisitcs, and it replicates previous findings from unmatched studies.

Objective To summarize the current literature on non‐steroidal anti‐inflammatory drug and corticosteroid use during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) pandemic, recognizing that these are commonly used treatments in the field of headache medicine. Background The use of non‐steroidal anti‐inflammatory drugs and corticosteroids in patients during the COVID‐19 pandemic has been a controversial topic within the medical community and international and national health organizations. Lay press and social media outlets have circulated opinions on this topic despite the fact that the evidence for or against the use of these medications is sparse. In the field of headache medicine, these medications are used commonly and both patients and clinicians may have questions or hesitations pertaining to their use during the COVID‐19 pandemic. Methods A detailed search of the scientific and popular literature was performed. Results There is limited literature pertaining to the safety of non‐steroidal anti‐inflammatory drugs and corticosteroids during the COVID‐19 pandemic. To date, there are no clear scientific data that preclude the use of non‐steroidal anti‐inflammatory drugs in the general population who may acquire COVID‐19 or in those acutely infected with the virus. Several health organizations have concluded that treatment with corticosteroids during active infection should be avoided due to concerns of prolonged viral shedding in the respiratory tract and the lack of survival benefit based on the data from past coronaviruses and influenza virus; specific exceptions exist including treatment for underlying asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, septic shock, and acute respiratory distress syndrome. Conclusion Scientific information regarding the COVID‐19 pandemic is constantly evolving, and limited or contradictory information can lead to confusion for both patients and clinicians. It is recommended that prior to prescribing non‐steroidal anti‐inflammatory drugs and steroids for the treatment of headache, clinicians have open discussions with their patients about the potential risks and benefits of using these medications during the COVID‐19 pandemic. This manuscript summarizes the currently available evidence and understanding about these risks and benefits to help clinicians navigate such discussions.

No abstract