Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register
Clusterheadaches.com
 
Search box updated Dec 3, 2011... Search ch.com with Google!
  HomeHelpSearchLoginRegisterEvent CalendarBirthday List  
 





Page Index Toggle Pages: 1
Send Topic Print
Occipital Nerve Stimulation (3 reports) (Read 2184 times)
Bob Johnson
CH.com Alumnus
***
Offline


"Only the educated are
free." -Epictetus


Posts: 5965
Kennett Square, PA (USA)
Gender: male
Occipital Nerve Stimulation (3 reports)
Apr 1st, 2011 at 1:02pm
 
The Lancet 2007; 369:1099-1106

Treatment of medically intractable cluster headache by occipital nerve stimulation: long-term follow-up of eight patients
Brian Burns MRCP a,   Laurence Watkins FRCS b   and   Prof Peter J Goadsby MD  a c

Summary
Background
Cluster headache is a form of primary headache that features repeated attacks of excruciatingly severe headache usually occurring several times a day. Patients with chronic cluster headache have unremitting illness that necessitates daily preventive medical treatment for years. When medically intractable, the condition has previously been treatable only with cranially invasive or neurally destructive methods.

Methods
Eight patients with medically intractable chronic cluster headache were implanted in the suboccipital region with electrodes for occipital nerve stimulation. Other than the first patient, who was initially stimulated unilaterally before being stimulated bilaterally, all patients were stimulated bilaterally during treatment.

Findings
At a median follow-up of 20 months (range 6–27 months for bilateral stimulation), six of eight patients reported responses that were sufficiently meaningful for them to recommend the treatment to similarly affected patients with chronic cluster headache. Two patients noticed a substantial improvement (90% and 95%) in their attacks; three patients noticed a moderate improvement (40%, 60%, and 20–80%) and one reported mild improvement (25%). Improvements occurred in both frequency and severity of attacks. These changes took place over weeks or months, although attacks returned in days when the device malfunctioned (eg, with battery depletion). Adverse events of concern were lead migrations in one patient and battery depletion requiring replacement in four.

Interpretation
Occipital nerve stimulation in cluster headache seems to offer a safe, effective treatment option that could begin a new era of neurostimulation therapy for primary headache syndromes.

Affiliations

a. Headache Group, Institute of Neurology, National Hospital for Neurology and Neurosurgery, London WC1N 3BG, UK
b. Division of Neurosurgery, Institute of Neurology, National Hospital for Neurology and Neurosurgery, London WC1N 3BG, UK
c. Department of Neurology, University of California, San Francisco, CA, USA
===============
Cen Eur Neurosurg. 2011 Mar 29.

Occipital Nerve Stimulation for the Treatment of Chronic Cluster Headache - Lessons Learned from 18 Months Experience.
Mueller OM, Gaul C, Katsarava Z, Diener HC, Sure U, Gasser T.

University Hospital Essen, Neurosurgery, Essen, Germany.

Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Neuromodulation has been recognized as a valuable surgical treatment option for patients with refractory chronic cluster headache (CCH). Due to the small number of afflicted individuals, the knowledge about this specific therapy is limited. In this study, we present our experiences with bilateral occipital nerve stimulation (ONS) in patients with CCH focusing on patient selection, pre- and postoperative evaluation, surgical procedures, and outcome.

PATIENTS AND METHODS: Since December 2008, 10 patients with CCH have been treated with ONS at our department. Patients were recruited and clinically followed by a neurologist and a neurosurgeon. Baseline data records on frequency, intensity, and duration of attacks as well as the use of medication were assessed with a 30-day diary. Standardized questionnaires were used pre- and postoperatively and during the follow-up on a regular basis. Surgical procedure and stimulation parameters were standardized for all patients. Lead implantation was followed by a test period of 30 days prior to implantation of the permanent generator. Mean follow-up time was 12 months (range 3-18).

RESULTS: All patients responded to the stimulation treatment. Frequency, duration, and severity of the cluster attacks were reduced in 90% of the patients. One patient had a significant reduction of his concomitant tension headache. 70 % of the patients needed less medication during the attacks. All patients reported an improvement in their quality of life. The SF-36 showed a tendency toward objective improvement in the field of psychological comfort. As a major adverse event, one generator had to be exchanged due to a local infection. Another patient had to be reoperated due to a scar tissue formation around the thoracic connector.

CONCLUSIONS: ONS is a valuable tool in the treatment of patients with refractory CCH. According to our data, the potential side effects and complication rates of the operation are small. With a meticulous selection of patients by an interdisciplinary team, CCH can bed improve in the majority of the patients. Yet, the optimal parameters for the stimulation regarding pulse width and frequency remain unclear. For this reason, we started a prospective single-center observational trial at our center in October 2009, including patients with ONS, to identify the best stimulation parameters.

PMID: 21448856 [PubMed]
======
Neurology. 2009 Jan 27;72(4):341-5.
Treatment of intractable chronic cluster headache by occipital nerve stimulation in 14 patients.

Burns B, Watkins L, Goadsby PJ.

Headache Group, Department of Neurology, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA 19143-0114, USA.

BACKGROUND: Cluster headache is a primary headache involving repeated attacks of excruciatingly severe headache usually occurring several times a day. Most patients with chronic cluster headache (CCH) have an unremitting illness requiring daily preventive therapy for years. OBJECTIVE: To describe the clinical outcome of occipital nerve stimulation (ONS) for 14 patients with intractable CCH. METHODS: Fourteen patients with medically intractable CCH were implanted with bilateral electrodes in the suboccipital region for ONS and a retrospective assessment of their clinical outcome obtained. RESULTS: At a median follow-up of 17.5 months (range 4-35 months), 10 of 14 patients reported improvement and 9 of these recommend ONS. Three patients noticed a marked improvement of 90% or better (90%, 90%, and 95%), 3 a moderate improvement of 40% or better (40%, 50%, and 60%), and 4 a mild improvement of 20-30% (20%, 20%, 25%, and 30%). Improvement occurred within days to weeks for those who responded most and patients consistently reported their attacks returned within hours to days when the device was off. One patient found that ONS helped abort acute attacks. Adverse events of concern were lead migrations and battery depletion. CONCLUSION: Intractable chronic cluster headache (CCH) is a devastating, disabling condition that has traditionally been treated with cranially invasive or neurally destructive procedures. ONS offers a safe, effective option for some patients with CCH. More work is required to evaluate and understand this novel therapy.

PMID: 19171831 [PubMed]
Back to top
  

Bob Johnson
 
IP Logged
 
mrs mac
CH.com Old Timer
****
Offline


I love YaBB 1G - SP1!


Posts: 304
x0|tobermory|Scotland||0|0|
Gender: female
Re: Occipital Nerve Stimulation (3 reports)
Reply #1 - Apr 1st, 2011 at 6:27pm
 
my hubby had this procedure last august and has had a 90% improvement, and has got his life back!!!!

Back to top
  
 
IP Logged
 
wimsey1
CH.com Alumnus
***
Offline


I Love CH.com!


Posts: 2457
MA
Gender: male
Re: Occipital Nerve Stimulation (3 reports)
Reply #2 - Apr 5th, 2011 at 8:10am
 
OK then...that goes into my "life doesn't have to end" bag o'tricks for future reference. Thanks for the report! lance
Back to top
  
 
IP Logged
 
haubels
CH.com Newbie
*
Offline


Learning to live with
CH


Posts: 16
|USA|Ca |LA|210|CA,California
Gender: male
Re: Occipital Nerve Stimulation (3 reports)
Reply #3 - Aug 14th, 2011 at 2:31am
 
Well, I'm happy for those people who have had a good experience with the ONS but I'll bet there are plenty of us that have had less than favorable results.
In my case the whole ONS experience was a nightmare. For those considering having this procedure I would not recommend the UCLA Pain Management Clinic in California.
First of all the doctor who performs the ONS at UCLA Pain Management Clinic never asked for my cluster calendar to evaluate my need and to determine if I was in an "episode". Without this knowledge the temporary ONS trial can't be accurate at determining the ONS effectiveness. Then when 4 days of the trial had passed the leads migrated so I was not getting coverage. With the dressing falling off the back of my shaved head and the recent wounds exposed I went back to the doctor for his recommendation. Without seeing me the doctor told his nurse to ask me what % of relief I was getting from the Medtronics device. Even though I told her that I didn't really know but that I thought the device had relieved 1 or 2 Cluster Headaches the doctor told the nurse that 4 days was adequate time for the trial and if the device had stopped one attack it was a success. I declined to have the trial terminated so soon and refused to let the nurse remove the leads. Now I am in their office with the dressing falling off and they did not even attend to the dressing; they just acted angry that I wanted the trial to last the 10 Days the doctor had told me the trial would last. I had to drive to my daughter's (an RN) home to have her redress the wound.
During the following week I tried to use a medication trigger that always seemed to bring on an attack. When the drug didn't cause an attack I believed the three doctors who were all saying that if it stops one attack it is effective so I agreed to have the ONS implanted in me permanently. Once the device was implanted it became obvious that the doctor did not have the experience with the Medtronics device to even make a recommendation of keeping the device on constant or turning it on at the onset of an attack. He left that up to me.
I tried many settings on the device with the help of the Medtronics Rep. and still the attacks came. After 6 months of trying many different combinations of settings it was obvious that the device did not work for me and should be removed.
Totally frustrated by the lack of success I started to question the decision to implant the device. I remembered that the doctor’s assistant had told me that insurance approval would take months but then she called me back in an hour and said I was approved and could have the procedure in 5 days due to a patient cancellation in the doctor's operating schedule.
I was to find out later that the approval that had been submitted by the UCLA Pain Management Clinic for my ONS was for an Implant of a Spinal Nerve Stimulator, a procedure not used for Cluster Headaches. My insurance carrier (Anthem Blue Cross) would not approve an ONS so the Clinic asked for the Spinal Nerve Stimulator that they (Anthem) would approve. After the realization that a fraud had been committed I did not want to trust this doctor with the removal of the ONS.
I have now fought for over two years to get another doctor at UCLA to even review my options. The clinic no longer has a doctor qualified (and I use the term loosely) other than the one doctor but even when they did they would not allow me access to any doctor other than the one who implanted the devise. Now more than 30 months after the procedure I have a stitch that has appeared at the back of my head that feels like a needle poking me and continually leaks. The entire area where the leads attach at the Occipital nerve has become swollen and inflamed and feels like an open wound. I can't even lie down on a soft pillow without extreme pain.
Still the UCLA clinic insists that I must see the doctor who implanted the devise. After viewing the now exposed and inflamed stitch the doctor asked me if I touch it. The stitch is on the back of my head where I comb and shampoo my hair so I thought this was a strange question but I left the office with no explanation of the stitch other than "it's there to keep things together".
One month later I complained to my primary doctor who viewed the area and said it "shouldn't be that way" and said he would E-mail the doctor. I would later receive a call from the clinic saying they had an appointment for me to see their doctor who was of course the same one who implanted the devise.
Upon inspection of the inflamed area and seeing the exposed stitch the doctor told me he could numb the area and remove the stitch as if he was asking me if he should do this. I told him "you're the doctor, what should I do? I had mentioned to his "Fellow" that perhaps they should do a cat scan of the painful area and the doctor now asked me if I wanted the CAT scan. I had the CAT scan and I'm waiting for the doctor's recommendation.
My recommendation; before you consider an ONS be sure you know the steps involved with making an informed decision and I'd pass on the UCLA Pain Management Clinic.

Back to top
« Last Edit: Aug 14th, 2011 at 2:40am by haubels »  
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1
Send Topic Print

DISCLAIMER: All information contained on this web site is for informational purposes only.  It is in no way intended to be used as a replacement for professional medical treatment.   clusterheadaches.com makes no claims as to the scientific/clinical validity of the information on this site OR to that of the information linked to from this site.  All information taken from the internet should be discussed with a medical professional!