This paper provides an up-to-date review of the management and outcome of accidental hypothermia patients with and without cardiac arrest. The authors reviewed the relevant literature in their specialist field. Summaries were merged, discussed and approved to produce this narrative review. The hospital use of minimally-invasive rewarming for non-arrested, otherwise healthy, patients with primary hypothermia and stable vital signs has the potential to substantially decrease morbidity and mortality for these patients. Extracorporeal life support (ECLS) has revolutionised the management of hypothermic cardiac arrest, with survival rates approaching 100 % in some cases. Hypothermic patients with risk factors for imminent cardiac arrest (temperature <28 °C, ventricular arrhythmia, systolic blood pressure <90 mmHg), and those who have already arrested, should be transferred directly to an ECLS-centre. Cardiac arrest patients should receive continuous cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) during transfer. If prolonged transport is required or terrain is difficult, mechanical CPR can be helpful. Delayed or intermittent CPR may be appropriate in hypothermic arrest when continuous CPR is impossible. Modern post-resuscitation care should be implemented following hypothermic arrest. Structured protocols should be in place to optimise pre-hospital triage, transport and treatment as well as in-hospital management, including detailed criteria and protocols for the use of ECLS and post-resuscitation care. Based on new evidence, additional clinical experience and clearer management guidelines and documentation, the treatment of accidental hypothermia has been refined. ECLS has substantially improved survival and is the treatment of choice in the patient with unstable circulation or cardiac arrest.

Background and Purpose—We sought to study the effectiveness and safety of endovascular cooling to maintain prophylactic normothermia in comparison with standardized, stepwise, escalating fever management to reduce fever burden in patients with severe cerebrovascular disease.Methods—This study was a prospective, randomized, controlled trial with a blinded neurologic outcome evaluation comparison between prophylactic, catheter-based normothermia (CoolGard; ie, body core temperature 36.5°C) and conventional, stepwise fever management with anti-inflammatory drugs and surface cooling. Patients admitted to 1 of the 2 neurointensive care units were eligible for study inclusion when they had a (1) spontaneous subarachnoid hemorrhage with Hunt & Hess grade between 3 and 5, (2) spontaneous intracerebral hemorrhage with a Glasgow Coma Scale score ≤10, or (3) complicated cerebral infarction requiring intensive care unit treatment with a National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score ≥15.Results—A total of 102 patients (56 female) were enrolled during a 3.5-year period. Fifty percent had a spontaneous subarachnoid hemorrhage, 40% had a spontaneous intracerebral hemorrhage, and 10% had a complicated cerebral infarction. Overall median total fever burden during the course of treatment was 0.0°C hour and 4.3°C hours in the catheter and conventional groups, respectively (P<0.0001). Prophylactic normothermia did not lead to an increase in the number of patients who experienced a major adverse event. No significant difference was found in mortality and neurologic long-term follow-up.Conclusions—Long-term, catheter-based, prophylactic normothermia significantly reduces fever burden in neurointensive care unit patients with severe cerebrovascular disease and is not associated with increased major adverse events.

Subcutaneous erenumab reduced monthly migraine days and increased the likelihood of achieving a ≥ 50% reduction at all monthly assessment points tested in 2 pivotal trials in episodic migraine (EM) and chronic migraine (CM). Early efficacy of migraine preventive medications is an important treatment characteristic to patients. Delays in achievement of efficacy can result in failed adherence. The objective of these post-hoc analyses were to evaluate efficacy in the first 4 weeks after initial subcutaneous administration of erenumab 70 mg, erenumab 140 mg, or placebo. There is no generally accepted methodology to measure onset of action for migraine preventive medications. We used a comprehensive approach with data from both studies to evaluate change from baseline in weekly migraine days (WMD), achievement of ≥ 50% reduction in WMD, and proportion of patients experiencing migraine measured on a daily basis. The 7-day moving averages were overlaid with observed data. In both studies (EM: N = 955; CM: N = 667), there was evidence of onset of efficacy of erenumab vs. placebo during the first week of treatment, which in some cases reached nominal significance. For EM the changes in WMD were (least squares mean [LSM] [95% CI]): placebo, − 0.1 (− 0.3, 0.0); erenumab 70 mg, − 0.3 (− 0.5, − 0.2) p = 0.130; erenumab 140 mg, − 0.6 (− 0.7, − 0.4) p < 0.001. For CM the changes were: placebo, − 0.5 (− 0.8, − 0.3); erenumab 70 mg, − 0.9 (− 1.2, − 0.7) p = 0.047; erenumab 140 mg, − 0.8 (− 1.1, − 0.5) p = 0.18. Achievement of ≥ 50% reduction in WMD was observed as early as Week 1 (adjusted OR [95% CI] erenumab vs placebo) in EM: erenumab 70 mg, 1.3 (1.0, 1.9) p = 0.097; erenumab 140 mg, 2.0 (1.4, 2.7) p < 0.001. A similar outcome was observed for CM: erenumab 70 mg, 1.8 (1.1, 2.8) p = 0.011; erenumab 140 mg, 1.9 (1.2, 2.9) p = 0.009. Seven-day moving averages of observed data showed each treatment arm differed from placebo by Week 1 (OR [95% CI]): in EM Day 3 for erenumab 140 mg, 0.7 (0.5, 1.0) p = 0.031 and at Day 7 for 70 mg, 0.6 (0.4, 0.8) p = 0.002; in CM: Day 6 for erenumab 70 mg, 0.6 (0.4, 0.9) p = 0.022 and at Day 7 for 140 mg, 0.7 (0.4, 1.0); p = 0.038. Erenumab showed early onset of efficacy with separation from placebo within the first week of treatment in both chronic and episodic migraine patients.

Background: The approval of monoclonal antibodies for prevention of migraine has revolutionized treatment for patients. Oral preventatives are still considered first line treatments as head-to-head trials comparing them with antibodies are lacking. Methods: The main purpose of this study was to provide a comparative overview of the efficacy of three commonly prescribed migraine preventative medication classes. For this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched the databases CENTRAL, EMBASE, and MEDLINE until 20 March 2020. We included RCTs reporting the 50% response rates for topiramate, Botulinum Toxin Type A and monoclonal antibodies against CGRP(r). Studies were excluded if response rates were not reported, treatment allocation was unclear, or if study quality was insufficient. Primary outcome measure were the 50% response rates. The pooled odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals were calculated with the random effects model. The study was registered at PROSPERO (CRD42020222880). Findings: We identified 6552 reports. Thirty-two were eligible for our review. Studies assessing monoclonal antibodies included 13,302 patients and yielded pooled odds ratios for the 50% response rate of 2.30 (CI: 2.11–2.50). Topiramate had an overall effect estimate of 2.70 (CI: 1.97–3.69) with 1989 included patients and Botulinum Toxin Type A achieved 1.28 (CI: 0.98–1. 67) with 2472 patients included. Interpretation: Topiramate, botulinum toxin type A and monoclonal antibodies showed higher odds ratios in achieving a 50% response rate compared to placebo. Topiramate numerically demonstrated the greatest effect size but also the highest drop-out rate.

To analyze survival, mortality, and long-term functional disability outcome and to determine predictors of unfavorable outcome in critically ill patients admitted to a neurologic intensive care unit (neuro-ICU). Retrospective cohort study with post–neuro-ICU health-related evaluation of functional long-term outcome. Ten-bed neuro-ICU in a tertiary care university hospital. A consecutive cohort of 1,155 patients admitted to a neuro-ICU during a 36-month period. None. A total of 1,155 consecutive patients, of whom 41% were women, were enrolled in the study. The predominant reasons for neuro-ICU care were cerebrovascular diseases, such as intracerebral hemorrhage (20%), subarachnoid hemorrhage (16%), and complicated, malignant ischemic stroke (15%). A total of 213 patients (18%) died in the neuro-ICU. The Glasgow Outcome Scale and modified Rankin scale were dichotomized into two groups determining unfavorable vs. favorable outcome (Glasgow Outcome Scale scores 1–3 vs. 4–5 and modified Rankin scale scores 2–6 vs. 0–1). Factors associated with unfavorable outcome in the unselected cohort according to logistic regression analysis were admission diagnosis, age (p < .01), and a higher score in the simplified Therapeutic Intervention Scoring System (TISS-28) at time of admission (p < .01). Functional long-term outcome was evaluated by telephone interview for 662 patients after a median follow-up of approximately 2.5 yrs by evaluating modified Rankin scale and Glasgow Outcome Scale scores. Factors associated with unfavorable functional long-term outcome were admission diagnosis, sex, age of >70 yrs (odds ratio, 8.45; 95% confidence interval, 4.52–15.83; p < .01), TISS-28 of >40 points at admission (odds ratio, 4.05; 95% confidence interval, 2.54–6.44; p < .01), TISS-28 of >40 points at discharge from the neuro-ICU (odds ratio, 3.50; 95% confidence interval, 1.51–8.09; p < .01), and length of stay (odds ratio, 1.01; 95% confidence interval, 1.00–1.03; p = .02). We found admission diagnosis, age, length of stay, and TISS-28 scores at admission and discharge to be independent predictors of unfavorable long-term outcome in an unselected neurocritical care population.

Recurrent and especially chronic headaches are associated with psychiatric comorbidities such as depression and anxiety. Only few studies examined the impact of depression and anxiety on episodic (EH) and chronic headache (CH), and data for Austria are missing at all. Therefore, the aim of the present study was to assess the impact of depression and anxiety on burden and management of EH and CH in patients from eight Austrian headache centres. We included 392 patients (84.1 % female, mean age 40.4 ± 14.0 years) who completed the Eurolight questionnaire. The treating physician recorded details about ever-before prophylactic medications. We used Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale to assess depression and anxiety and compared patients with anxiety and/or depression to those without. Depression and anxiety were more common in CH than in EH (64 % vs. 41 %, p < 0.0001). Presence compared to absence of depression and anxiety increased the prevalence of poor or very poor quality of life from 0.7 % to 13.1 % in EH and from 3.6 % to 40.3 % in CH (p = 0.001; p < 0.0001). Depression and anxiety had a statistically significant impact on employment status and on variables related to the burden of headache such as reduced earnings, being less successful in career, or feeling less understood. Neither in EH nor in CH health care use and the ever-before use of prophylactic medication was correlated with anxiety and/or depression. Depression and anxiety have a significant impact on quality of life and increase the burden in patients with EH and CH. Improved multidimensional treatment approaches are necessary to decrease disability on the personal, social and occupational level in these patients.