Search

INTRODUCTION. Flunarizine, with level of evidence A, and nadolol, with evidence level C, would be indicated as preventive treatment of migraine. Yet, no previous studies have been conducted to compare the effectiveness of the two drugs. AIM. To compare the effectiveness parameters in independent groups of patients treated preventively with one of the pharmaceuticals from the study, the same protocol being applied in both cases. PATIENTS AND METHODS. The subjects selected for the study were patients with episodic migraine (according to 2004 International Headache Society criteria) who had undergone preventive treatment for the first time, with flunarizine (5 mg/day) or nadolol (20-40 mg/day). The main effectiveness variables (reduction in the number of seizures at four months of treatment and responder rates) were analysed. RESULTS. The study included 227 patients who intended to receive treatment: 155 with flunarizine (80.5% females; mean age: 38.3 ± 12.1 years) and 72 with nadolol (63.8% females; mean age: 37.1 ± 12.0 years). The mean number of seizures prior to treatment was 6.09 ± 2.6 in the flunarizine group and 5.1 ± 1.7 in the nadolol group (p = 0.0079); at four months of treatment it was 2.61 ± 2.4 in the flunarizine group and 2.77 ± 2.4 in the nadolol group (p = NS). Percentage of reduction of migraines: 55.2% with flunarizine and 50.4% with nadolol (p = NS). The responder rate was 69% with flunarizine and 67% with nadolol (p = NS). The excellent response rate (reduction in the number of seizures by 75% or more) was 52.2% with flunarizine and 36.1% with nadolol (p = 0.0077). Percentage of adverse side effects: 48.3% with flunarizine and 25% with nadolol (p = 0.0009). The satisfaction rate was similar in both groups, 68%. CONCLUSIONS. Both flunarizine and nadolol proved to be effective in the preventive treatment of episodic migraine. Flunarizine is used more often in our milieu and was less well tolerated.

Patients with chronic migraine (CM) and medication abuse are difficult to treat, and have a greater tendency towards chronification and a poorer quality of life than those with other types of headache.To evaluate whether the presence of medication abuse lowers the effectiveness of topiramate.A series of patients with CM were grouped according to whether they met abuse criteria or not. They were advised to stop taking the drug that they were abusing. Treatment was adjusted to match their crises and preventive treatment with topiramate was established from the beginning. The number of days with headache and intense migraine in the previous month and at four months of treatment was evaluated.In all, 262 patients with CM criteria were selected and 167 (63.7%) of them fulfilled abuse criteria. In both groups there was a significant reduction in the number of days with headache/month and number of migraine attacks/month at the fourth month of treatment with topiramate. The percentage of reduction in the number of days with headache/month in CM without abuse was 59.3 ± 36.1%, and with abuse, 48.7 ± 41.7% (p = 0.0574). The percentage of reduction in the number of days with intense migraine/month in CM without abuse was 61.2%, and with abuse, 50% (p = 0.0224). Response rate according to the number of days with headache/month in CM without abuse was 69%, and with abuse, 57%. Response rate according to the number of intense migraines/month in CM without abuse was 76.8%, and in CM with abuse, 61% (p = 0.0097).Topiramate was effective in patients with CM with and without medication abuse, although effectiveness is lower in the latter case.El abuso de farmacos en pacientes con migraña cronica influye en la efectividad del tratamiento preventivo con topiramato?Introduccion. Los pacientes con migraña cronica (MC) y abuso de medicacion son dificiles de tratar y tienen peor calidad de vida que otros pacientes con migrañas. Objetivo. Valorar si la presencia de abuso de farmacos disminuye la efectividad del topiramato. Pacientes y metodos. Una serie de pacientes con MC fueron agrupados segun presentasen criterios de abuso o no abuso de farmacos. Se les aconsejo la supresion del farmaco del cual abusaban. Se ajusto el tratamiento de sus crisis y se inicio tratamiento preventivo desde el principio con topiramato. Se valoro el numero dias con cefalea y migrañas intensas en el mes previo y al cuarto mes de tratamiento. Resultados. Fueron seleccionados 262 pacientes con criterios de MC, y de ellos 167 (63,7%) cumplieron criterios de abuso. En ambos grupos hubo una reduccion significativa del numero de dias con cefalea/mes y numero de crisis de migraña/mes al cuarto mes de tratamiento con topiramato. Porcentaje de reduccion de dias con cefalea/mes en MC sin abuso, 59,3 ± 36,1%; y con abuso, 48,7 ± 41,7% (p = 0,0574). Porcentaje de reduccion de migrañas intensas/mes en MC sin abuso, 61,2%; y con abuso, 50% (p = 0,0224). Tasa de respondedores segun numero de dias con cefalea/mes en MC sin abuso, 69%; y con abuso, 57%. Tasa de respondedores segun numero de migrañas intensas/mes en MC sin abuso, 76,8%; y en MC con abuso, 61% (p = 0,0097). Conclusiones. El topiramato fue efectivo en pacientes con MC sin y con abuso de farmacos, aunque con menor efectividad en estos ultimos.