4.4 Article

Prevalence and characteristics of migraine in CADASIL

Journal

CEPHALALGIA
Volume 36, Issue 11, Pages 1038-1047

Publisher

SAGE PUBLICATIONS LTD
DOI: 10.1177/0333102415620909

Keywords

CADASIL; migraine; aura; cortical spreading depression; small vessel disease

Funding

  1. French Ministry of Health (Regional and National PHRC AOR) [02-001]
  2. ARNEVA (Association de Recherche en NEurologie Vasculaire)
  3. Vascular Dementia Research Foundation
  4. Fondation Leducq (Transatlantic Network of Excellence on the Pathogenesis of Small Vessel Disease of the Brain)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background and objective Migraine with aura (MA) is a major symptom of cerebral autosomal dominant arteriopathy with subcortical infarcts and leukoencephalopathy (CADASIL). We assessed the spectrum of migraine symptoms and their potential correlates in a large prospective cohort of CADASIL individuals. Methods A standardized questionnaire was used in 378 CADASIL patients for assessing headache symptoms, trigger factors, age at first attack, frequency of attacks and associated symptoms. MRI lesions and brain atrophy were quantified. Results A total of 54.5% of individuals had a history of migraine, mostly MA in 84% of them; 62.4% of individuals with MA were women and age at onset of MA was lower in women than in men. Atypical aura symptoms were experienced by 59.3% of individuals with MA, and for 19.7% of patients with MA the aura was never accompanied by headache. MA was the inaugural manifestation in 41% of symptomatic patients and an isolated symptom in 12.1% of individuals. Slightly higher MMSE and MDRS scores and lower Rankin score were detected in the MA group. Conclusion MA is observed in almost half of all CADASIL patients. Atypical aura symptoms are reported by more than one in two of them. MA is often inaugural, can remain isolated and is not associated with the severity of the disorder.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available