Добавил:
Sekretar
kiopkiopkiop18@yandex.ru
t.me/Prokururor I Вовсе не секретарь, но почту проверяю
Опубликованный материал нарушает ваши авторские права? Сообщите нам.
Вуз:
Предмет:
Файл:Ординатура / Хирургия / Библиотека им академика М.И. Перельмана / Книга_5526_Библиотеки_им_академика_М_И_Перельмана.pdf
X
- •Foreword
- •Contents
- •1.1 Introduction
- •1.2 Pathophysiology
- •1.3 Case Presentation
- •1.4 Case Discussion
- •1.5 Clinical Characteristics
- •1.6 Diagnostic Algorithm
- •1.8 Management
- •1.9 Conclusion
- •References
- •2.1 Introduction
- •2.2 Pathophysiology
- •2.3 Case Presentation
- •2.4 Case Discussion
- •2.5 Clinical Characteristics
- •1.7 Differential Diagnosis
- •2.6 Diagnostic Algorithm
- •2.7 Management
- •2.8 Conclusion
- •References
- •3.1 Introduction
- •3.2 Pathophysiology
- •3.3 Case Presentation
- •3.4 Case Discussion
- •3.5 Clinical Characteristics
- •3.6 Diagnostic Algorithm
- •3.7 Management
- •3.8 Conclusion
- •References
- •4.1 Introduction
- •4.2 Pathophysiology
- •4.3 Case Presentation
- •4.4 Case Discussion
- •4.6 Diagnostic Algorithm
- •4.7 Management
- •4.8 Conclusion
- •References
- •5.1 Introduction
- •5.2 Pathophysiology
- •5.3 Case Presentation
- •5.4 Case Discussion
- •5.5 Diagnostic Algorithm
- •5.6 Management
- •5.7 Conclusion
- •References
- •6.1 Introduction
- •6.2 Pathogenesis
- •6.3 Case Presentation
- •6.4 Case Discussion
- •6.5 Diagnostic Algorithm
- •6.6 Management
- •6.7 Conclusion
- •References
- •7.1 Introduction
- •7.2 Pathophysiology
- •7.3 Case Presentation
- •7.5 Differential Diagnosis
- •7.7 The Following Strategies Are Essential
- •7.7.1 Acute Symptom Relief
- •7.7.1.1 Pharmacological Treatment
- •7.7.2.1 Pharmacologic Prophylaxis
- •7.8 Conclusion
- •References
- •8.1 Introduction
- •8.3 Case Study
- •8.4 Case Discussion
- •8.5 Clinical Management
- •8.7 Diagnosis
- •8.8 Treatment
- •8.9 Conclusion
- •References
- •9.1 Introduction
- •9.2 Case Presentation
- •9.4 Diagnosis Algorithm
- •9.5 Secondary SUNCT
- •9.6 Management
- •9.8 Conclusion
- •References
- •10.1 Introduction
- •10.2 Pathophysiology
- •10.3 Case Presentation
- •10.4 Case Discussion
- •10.5 Clinical Characteristics
- •10.6 Diagnostic Algorithm
- •10.7 Management
- •10.8 Conclusion
- •References
- •11.1 Introduction
- •11.2 Pathophysiology
- •11.3 Case Presentation
- •11.4 Case Discussion
- •11.5 Clinical Characteristics
- •11.6 Diagnostic Algorithm
- •11.6.1 Step 1: Detailed Patient History
- •11.8 Management
- •11.9 Conclusions
- •12.2 Pathophysiology
- •12.3 Case Presentation
- •12.4 Case Discussion
- •12.6 Treatment
- •12.7 Conclusion
- •References
- •References
- •12.1 Introduction
- •13.1 Introduction
- •13.2 Pathophysiology
- •13.3 Case Presentation
- •13.4 Case Discussion
- •13.5 Clinical Characteristics
- •13.6 Diagnostic Algorithm
- •13.7 Management
- •13.8 Conclusion
- •References
- •14.1 Introduction
- •14.2 Pathophysiology
- •14.3 Case Presentation
- •14.3.1 Clinical Case 1
- •14.3.2 Clinical Case 2
- •14.4 Case Discussion
- •14.5 Clinical Characteristics
- •14.7 Treatment/Management
- •14.8 Conclusion
- •References
- •15.1 Introduction
- •15.2 Case Presentation
- •15.3 Case Discussion
- •15.4 Diagnostic Algorithm
- •15.5 Pathophysiology
- •15.6 Clinical Presentation
- •15.6.1 External-Compression Headache (ECH)
- •15.6.2 External-Traction Headache (ETH)
- •15.7 Management
- •15.7.1 Nonpharmacological Strategies
- •15.7.2 Pharmacological Strategies
- •15.7.3 Patient Education and Awareness
- •15.8 Conclusion
- •References
- •16.1 Introduction
- •16.2 Pathophysiology
- •16.3 Case Presentation
- •16.4 Case Discussion
- •16.6 Diagnostic Algorithm
- •16.7 Management
- •16.8 Conclusion
- •References
- •17.1 Introduction
- •17.2 Pathophysiology
- •17.3 Case Presentation
- •17.4 Case Discussion
- •17.5 Clinical Characteristics
- •17.6 Diagnosis
- •17.7 Differential Diagnosis
- •17.8 Treatment
- •17.9 Conclusion
- •References
- •18.1 Introduction
- •18.2 Pathophysiology
- •18.3 Case Presentation
- •18.4 Case Discussion
- •18.5 Clinical Presentation
- •18.6 Diagnosis
- •18.7 Differential Diagnosis
- •18.8 Treatment
- •18.9 Conclusion
- •References
- •19.1 Introduction
- •19.2 Pathophysiology
- •19.3 Case Presentation
- •19.4 Case Discussion
- •19.5 Diagnostic Approach
- •19.6 Management
- •19.7 Conclusion
- •References
- •20.1 Introduction
- •20.3 Case Report
- •20.4 Case Discussion
- •20.6 Clinical Presentation
- •20.7 Diagnostic Algorithm
- •20.8 Conclusion
- •References
- •21.1 Introduction
- •21.2 Case Presentation
- •21.3 Clinical Characteristics
- •21.4 Diagnosis
- •21.5 Treatment
- •References
- •22.1 Introduction
- •22.3 Case Presentation 1
- •22.4 Case Discussion
- •22.5 Case Presentation 2
- •22.6 Case Discussion 2
- •22.7 Clinical Characteristics
- •22.8 Diagnostic Workup
- •22.9 Treatment
- •22.10 Prognosis
- •References
- •23.1 Introduction
- •23.2 Pathophysiology
- •23.3 Case Presentation
- •23.4 Case Discussion
- •23.6 Diagnostic Algorithm
- •23.7 Management
- •23.8 Conclusion
- •References
- •24.1 Introduction
- •24.2 Case Presentation
- •24.3 Case Discussion
- •24.4 Pathophysiology
- •24.6 Clinical Characteristics
- •24.8 Treatment Approaches
- •24.10 Conclusion
- •References
- •25.1 Introduction
- •25.2 Case Presentation
- •25.3 Case Discussion
- •25.4 Conclusion
- •References
- •26.1 Introduction
- •26.2 Pathophysiology
- •26.3 Case Presentation
- •26.4 Case Discussion
- •26.5 Clinical Characteristics
- •26.6 Diagnostic Algorithm
- •26.7 Management
- •26.8 Conclusion
- •References
- •27.1 Introduction
- •27.2 Case Presentations
- •27.3 Clinical Characteristics
- •27.4 Discussion
- •27.5 Conclusion
- •References
- •28.1 Introduction
- •28.2 Case Presentation
- •28.3 Case Discussion
- •28.4 Clinical Characteristics
- •28.5 Diagnosis
- •28.6 Conclusion
- •28.7 Key Messages
- •References
- •29.1 Introduction
- •29.2 Pathophysiology
- •29.3 Case Presentation
- •29.4 Clinical Presentation
- •29.5 Diagnosis
- •29.6 Treatment
- •29.7 Conclusion
- •References
- •30.1 Introduction
- •30.2 Clinical Case
- •30.3 Clinical Presentation
- •30.4 Differential Diagnosis
- •30.5 Diagnosis
- •30.6 Treatment
- •30.7 Conclusion
- •References
- •31.1 Introduction
- •31.2 Pathophysiology
- •31.3 Case Presentation
- •31.4 Case Discussion
- •31.5 Clinical Presentation
- •31.7 Conclusion
- •References
- •32.1 Introduction
- •32.2 Pathophysiology
- •32.3 Case Presentation
- •32.4 Case Discussion
- •32.6 Diagnosis
- •32.7 Additional Diagnostic Evaluations
- •32.8 Apply ICHD-3 Diagnostic Criteria [9]
- •32.10 Management
- •32.11 Conclusion
- •References
- •33.1 Introduction
- •33.2 Pathophysiology
- •33.3 Case Presentation
- •33.4 Clinical Characteristics
- •33.5 Diagnostic Algorithm
- •33.6 Treatment
- •33.7 Conclusion
- •References
- •34.1 Introduction
- •34.2 Pathophysiology
- •34.3 Case Presentation
- •34.4 Case Discussion
- •34.6 Diagnostic Algorithm
- •34.7 Treatment
- •34.8 Conclusion
- •References
- •35.1 Introduction
- •35.3 Case Presentation
- •35.4 Case Discussion
- •35.7 Treatment
- •35.7.1 Oxygen Therapy (100% Oxygen)
- •35.8 Conclusion
- •References
- •36.1 Introduction
- •36.2 Pathophysiology
- •36.3 Case Presentation
- •36.5 Diagnostic Algorithm
- •36.6 Treatment
- •36.7 Conclusion
- •References
- •37.1 Introduction
- •37.2 Pathophysiology
- •37.3 Case Presentation
- •37.4 Headache Characteristics
- •37.5 Case Discussion
- •37.6 Treatment
- •37.7 Conclusion
- •References
- •38.1 Introduction
- •38.2 Pathophysiology
- •38.3 Case Presentation
- •38.4 Clinical Presentation
- •38.5 Diagnostic Algorithm
- •38.6 Treatment
- •38.7 Conclusion
- •References
- •39.1 Introduction
- •39.3 Case Presentation
- •39.4 Case Discussion
- •39.6 ICHD-3 Diagnostic Criteria [28]
- •39.6.1 Diagnostic Criteria
- •39.7 Diagnostic Algorithm
- •39.9 Conclusion
- •References
- •40.1 Introduction
- •40.3 Case Presentation
- •40.4 Case Discussion
- •40.5.1 Diagnostic Algorithm
- •40.6 Treatment
- •40.7 Conclusion
- •References
- •41.1 Introduction
- •41.3 Case Presentation
- •41.4 Clinical Presentation
- •41.5 Differential Diagnosis
- •41.6 Conclusion
- •41.7 Key Messages
- •References
- •42.1 Introduction
- •42.2 Pathophysiology
- •42.3 Case Presentation
- •42.5 Case Discussion
- •42.6 Clinical Presentation
- •42.7 Diagnostic Algorithm [9]
- •42.8 Preeclampsia
- •42.9 Eclampsia
- •42.10 Fetal Assessment
- •42.11 Treatment
- •42.12 Antihypertensive Management [8]
- •42.14 Conclusion
- •References
- •43.1 Introduction
- •43.2 Pathophysiology
- •43.3 Case Presentation
- •43.4 Case Discussion
- •43.5 Clinical Manifestations
- •43.6 Diagnosis
- •43.7 Treatment
- •43.8 Conclusion
- •References
- •44.1 Introduction
- •44.2 Pathophysiology
- •44.3 Case Presentation
- •44.4 Case Discussion
- •44.6 Diagnostic Approach
- •44.7 Management
- •44.8 Conclusion
- •References
- •45.1 Introduction
- •45.2 Pathophysiology
- •45.3 Case Presentation
- •45.6 Treatment
- •45.7 Conclusion
- •References
- •46.1 Introduction
- •46.2 Pathophysiology
- •46.3 Case Presentation
- •46.4 Clinical Characteristics
- •46.5 Differential Diagnosis
- •46.6 Treatment
- •46.7 Conclusion
- •References
- •47.1 Introduction
- •47.2 Pathophysiology
- •47.3 Case Presentation
- •47.4 Case Discussion
- •47.5 Clinical Presentations
- •47.6 Diagnostic Algorithm
- •47.7 Differential Diagnosis
- •47.8 Treatment
- •47.9 Conclusion
- •References
- •48.1 Introduction
- •48.2 Pathophysiology
- •48.3 Case Presentation
- •48.4 Case Discussion
- •48.5 Clinical Characteristics
- •48.7 Treatment
- •48.8 Conclusion
- •References
- •49.1 Introduction
- •49.2 Pathophysiology
- •49.3 Case Presentation
- •49.4 Clinical Presentation
- •49.5 Diagnosis
- •49.6 Treatment
- •49.7 Conclusion
- •References
- •50.1 Introduction
- •50.2 Pathophysiology
- •50.3 Case Presentation
- •50.4 Case Discussion
- •50.5 Clinical Characteristics
- •50.6 Diagnosis
- •50.7 Treatment
- •50.8 Conclusion
- •References
- •51.1 Introduction
- •51.2 Case Presentation
- •51.3 Clinical Characteristics
- •51.4 Diagnosis
- •51.5 Treatment
- •51.6 Conclusion
- •References
- •52.1 Introduction
- •52.2 Pathophysiology
- •52.3 Case Presentation
- •52.4 Case Discussion
- •52.5 Clinical Characteristics
- •52.6 Diagnosis
- •52.6.1 Cervicogenic Headache
- •52.6.2 Migraine
- •52.6.3 Neck Pain
- •52.6.4 Demyelinating Lesions
- •52.6.5 Cervical Myelitis
- •52.6.6 Occipital Allodynia
- •52.6.7 Cervical Muscle Spasms
- •52.7 Treatment
- •52.7.2 Acupuncture
- •52.7.3 Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulations (TENS)
- •52.8 Minimally Invasive Treatment
- •52.8.1 Nerve Blocks
- •52.8.2 Botulinum Toxin A
- •52.8.3 Radio Frequency
- •52.8.4 Occipital Nerve Stimulation
- •52.9 Surgical Treatments
- •52.10 Conclusions
- •References
- •53.1 Introduction
- •53.2 Pathophysiology
- •53.3 Characteristics of Pain
- •53.4 Case Presentation
- •53.5 Case Discussion
- •53.6 Clinical Characteristics
- •53.8 Treatment
- •53.9 Conclusion
- •References
- •54.1 Introduction
- •54.2 Pathophysiology
- •54.3 Case Presentation
- •54.4 Case Discussion
- •54.5 Clinical Characteristics
- •54.6 Diagnostic Algorithm
- •54.7 Management
- •54.8 Conclusion
- •References
- •55.1 Introduction
- •55.2 Pathophysiology
- •55.3 Case Presentation

25 Headache Attributed toReversible Cerebral Vasoconstriction Syndrome
Fig. 25.2 MR angiography of the intracranial arteries and branches of the external carotid artery
showing multiple constrictions or vascular lumen narrowing (arrows), predominantly affecting the
posterior cerebral, middle cerebral, anterior cerebral, and left vertebral arteries. Note the signicant occlusion of the left posterior cerebral artery (arrowhead), corresponding to the infarct
observed in the left cerebral hemisphere within the posterior cerebral artery territory (see Fig.25.1)
Fig. 25.3 Intraoperative
image of posterior fossa
craniectomy at the moment
of dura mater opening,
showing the spontaneous
extrusion of softened
ischemic cerebellar tissue
due to severe intracranial
hypertension
243
Years later, she continues to experience right homonymous hemianopia and
behavioral disturbances, including irritability and reduced spontaneity.
25.3 Case Discussion
This case illustrates several important aspects of RCVS: (1) Triggering Factors: The
patient had a history of medication overuse and recent exposure to fexofenadine, a
medication with sympathomimetic properties. Additionally, the surgical procedure
itself may have contributed to endothelial dysfunction and subsequent vasoconstriction. (2) Neurological Complications: While RCVS is often self-limiting, severe

244
M. Valença and L. P. A. de Andrade-Valença
cases can lead to extensive ischemic damage, intracranial hypertension, and brainstem compression requiring surgical intervention. (3) Recovery and Sequelae:
Despite signicant initial decits, the patient demonstrated substantial recovery,
albeit with persistent visual and behavioral impairments. This highlights the variability in RCVS prognosis.
RCVS is thought to result from transient dysfunction of cerebrovascular tone,
possibly triggered by endothelial injury, autonomic dysregulation, or vasoactive
substances. The hallmark feature is the reversible nature of arterial constrictions,
which typically resolve within 3months.
RCVS shares overlapping features with other conditions, necessitating careful
differentiation:
• Primary Thunderclap Headache: Unlike RCVS, these headaches do not involve
arterial vasoconstriction.
• Subarachnoid Hemorrhage (SAH): RCVS can mimic SAH, but neuroimaging
typically lacks hemorrhagic features.
• Posterior Reversible Encephalopathy Syndrome (PRES): Both conditions can
present with similar imaging ndings, but PRES is more commonly associated
with hypertension and edema without arterial narrowing.
• Eclampsia: RCVS in pregnant women must be distinguished from eclampsia,
which typically presents with proteinuria and hypertension.
RCVS diagnosis relies on clinical and radiological ndings:
• Sudden-onset thunderclap headache, often recurrent.
• Multifocal segmental arterial narrowing on MR angiography or conventional
angiography.
• Absence of aneurysmal SAH or other clear vascular pathology.
• Resolution of vasoconstriction within 3months.
There is no specic treatment for RCVS, but supportive care includes:
• Pain management: Nonsteroidal anti-inammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and calcium
channel blockers (e.g., nimodipine) may help reduce headache frequency.
• Blood pressure control: Avoidance of excessive hypotension or hypertension.
• Withdrawal of vasoactive substances: Discontinuing triggers such as sympatho-
mimetics, triptans, or serotonergic agents.
• Close monitoring: In severe cases, intensive care may be required to manage
complications like ischemia or brain edema.
25.4 Conclusion
RCVS remains an underrecognized yet clinically signicant cause of thunderclap
headache. This case underscores the importance of identifying potential triggers,
recognizing severe neurological complications, and providing timely intervention.

25 Headache Attributed toReversible Cerebral Vasoconstriction Syndrome
245
References
1. Ducros A, Boukobza M, Porcher R, Sarov M, Valade D, Bousser MG.The clinical and radiological spectrum of reversible cerebral vasoconstriction syndrome. A prospective series of 67
patients. Brain. 2007;2007(130):3091–101.
2. Singhal AB.Thunderclap headache, reversible cerebral arterial vasoconstriction, and unruptured aneurysms. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2002;2002(73):96; author reply –7.
3. Dodick DW.Thunderclap headache. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2002;2002(72):6–11.
4. Postolowski M, Shakil O, Ramachandran L, Rao CV. Reversible cerebral vasoconstriction
syndrome secondary to escitalopram. Clin Med Res. 2024;22(2024):222–6.
5. Wang C, Iftekharuddin A, Fipps DC.Management of psychiatric diagnoses in reversible cerebral vasoconstriction syndrome: the dangers of worsening pathology with serotonergic medications: a case report and literature review. J Psychiatr Pract. 2024;30(2024):379–84.
6. Montarello NL, Irvine I, Warner V, Hare J, Kaye D, Cloud GC. Reversible cerebral vasoconstriction syndrome post-cardiac transplantation: a therapeutic dilemma: case report. BMC
Neurol. 2024;2024(24):277.
7. Soh RJH, Lim GZ, Vijayan J, Tan K.Reversible cerebral vasoconstriction syndrome after
intravenous immunoglobulin: a rare cause of headache and sudden onset weakness in a patient
with Guillain-Barre syndrome. BMJ Case Rep. 2024;17(2024)
8. Wei C, Zhai F, Jia C, Zhang W, Zhou D, Zhang Y.Immunochemotherapy triggered reversible
cerebral vasoconstriction syndrome in a patient with intravascular large B-cell lymphoma.
Leuk Lymphoma. 2024;2024(65):848–51.
9. Osmont MN, Malrain C, Ruellan AL, Benchikh A, Herlem E, Polard E, Scailteux
LM.Reversible cerebral vasoconstriction syndrome in a methylphenidate-treated patient: a
case report. BMC Neurol. 2024;24(2024):494.
10. Roa CH, Rodriguez LC, Bastidas N, Vergara S, Borda S, Osorio G, etal. Reversible cerebral
vasoconstriction syndrome secondary to chronic cocaine abuse: case report. Radiol Case Rep.
2025;20(2025):597–601.
11. Santos Neto EPD, Sousa IA, Ricarte IF, Pontes-Neto OM.Reversible cerebral vasoconstriction syndrome and bromuscular dysplasia: an epiphenomenon or a causal relationship? Acta
Neurol Taiwan. 2024;33(3):122–6.
12. Senthilkumaran S, Williams J, Almeida JR, Williams HF, Patel K, Thirumalaikolundusubramanian
P, Vaiyapuri S. Snakebite-induced reversible cerebral vasoconstriction syndrome: Report of
three cases. Toxicon. 2024;251(2024):108161.
13. Seok HY, Eun MY, Kim S, Lee JJ, Oh GR, Kim GY, Sohn SI.Reversible cerebral vasoconstriction syndrome in Guillain-Barre syndrome: a case report and literature review. Neurol Sci.
2024;45(2024):101–7.
14. Shimura M, Fujikawa H, Yazawa M, Matsumoto Y, Yamada M.An autopsy case of reversible
cerebral vasoconstriction syndrome after a severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2
vaccination. Cureus. 2024;2024(16):e59311.
15. Li S, Yang Y, Zuo J, Du N, Kou G.Reversible cerebral vasoconstriction syndrome following
intracranial hypotension in a postpartum patient: a case report and literature review. Front
Neurol. 2023;2023(14):1281074.
16. Valenca MM, Andrade-Valenca LP, Bordini CA, Speciali JG.Thunderclap headache attributed to
reversible cerebral vasoconstriction: view and review. J Headache Pain. 2008;2008(9):277–88.
17. Nelson SE.Reversible cerebral vasoconstriction syndrome and female sex: a narrative review.
Stroke. 2024;2024(55):1113–7.
18. Pelham-Webb B, Guo Y, Ramirez A, Waldron E, Emmanuele V, Vargas W, Kahn J, Stone
EF.When transfusion causes a splitting headache: a case report and rapid review of transfusionassociated reversible cerebral vasoconstriction syndrome. Transfusion. 2024;64(11):2038–42.
https://doi.org/10.1111/trf.17984.
19. Verma A, Sharma G, Singh A, Gupta H, Singh DP, Gaidhane AM, Khatib MN, Bushi G, Sah
S, Ndabashinze R.Reversible cerebral vasoconstriction syndrome following blood transfusion

246
in a patient with chronic anemia: a case report. Clin Case Rep. 2024;12(12):e9618. https://doi.
org/10.1002/ccr3.9618.
20. Valenca MM, Valenca LP, Bordini CA, da Silva WF, Leite JP, Antunes-Rodrigues J, Speciali
JG.Cerebral vasospasm and headache during sexual intercourse and masturbatory orgasms.
Headache. 2004;44(2004):244–8.
21. Valença MM, Costa J, Silva WF, Andrade-Valença LPA, Wichert-Ana L, Leite JP.Cerebral
arterial narrowing: differential diagnosis, pathophysiology and correlation with headache syndromes. Neurobiologia. 2002;65(2002):3–12.
M. Valença and L. P. A. de Andrade-Valença

Chapter 26
Cerebral Autosomal Dominant
Arteriopathy andSubcortical Infarcts
Leukoencephalopathy (CADASIL)
Attributed Headache
UtkuTopbaş , NevraÖksüz , andAynurÖzge
26.1 Introduction
Cerebral Autosomal Dominant Arteriopathy with Subcortical Infarcts and
Leukoencephalopathy (CADASIL) is a hereditary condition characterized by progressive degeneration of smooth muscle cells in the walls of small arteries. This
leads to recurring strokes, cognitive decline, and characteristic white matter changes
in the brain. One of the primary symptoms experienced by CADASIL patients is
migraine, often with aura, which can precede other neurological manifestations by
many years [1, 2]. By exploring the nuances of headaches attributed to CADASIL,
this chapter aims to elucidate the implications of these ndings for clinical practice
and future investigations, providing a comprehensive overview of the challenges
and potential strategies for managing this complex condition.
26.2 Pathophysiology
CADASIL is caused by mutations in the NOTCH3 gene, leading to abnormal protein accumulation in blood vessels. The resultant arteriopathy is characterized by
thickening of vessel walls, luminal narrowing, and ultimately, reduced cerebral
blood ow. This vascular pathology underlies the occurrence of migraines, which
are prevalent in up to 40% of CADASIL patients. Migraines in CADASIL are often
U. Topbaş · N. Öksüz
School of Medicine, Mersin University, Mersin, Turkey
A. Özge (
Mersin State Hospital, Mersin, Turkey
Switzerland AG 2026
D. Uludüz et al. (eds.), Rare Causes of Headache Disorders, Headache,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-032-10242-3_26
*)
247© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature

248
Fig. 26.1 Mechanism of CADASIL white matter intensities (WMI) causes clinical presentation
U. Topbaş et al.
accompanied by aura and may evolve into chronic daily headaches. The headaches
are typically severe and can signicantly impact the quality of life of affected individuals. The presence of white matter hyperintensities (WMHs) on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is a hallmark of CADASIL and correlates with the frequency
and intensity of migraine attacks [3–5].
Figure 26.1 visually summarizes the complex pathophysiology of CADASIL to
understand the direct link between the genetic mutation and the clinical manifestations, particularly headaches.
26.3 Case Presentation
Ayşe, a 44-year-old woman, presented with a history of chronic migraines that had
progressively worsened over the years. Her headaches were primarily characterized
by migraine with aura, manifesting as severe, throbbing pain accompanied by visual
disturbances such as ashing lights and blind spots, along with sensory changes,
including tingling sensations in her limbs. These episodes often lasted several hours
and were resistant to conventional migraine therapies. Over time, her migraines
evolved into more persistent headaches, eventually occurring on a near-daily basis.
In addition to the headaches, Ayşe experienced cognitive decline, gait disturbances, and episodic speech difculties, further complicating her clinical picture.

26 Cerebral Autosomal Dominant Arteriopathy and Subcortical Infarcts…
Fig. 26.2 EEG revealed diffuse slowing, consistent with an underlying encephalopathy, and intermittent temporal epileptiform discharges, particularly in the left temporal lobe
249
The persistence and progression of her headaches, combined with the presence of
other neurological symptoms and a signicant family history of dementia, strongly
suggested an underlying genetic disorder. A routine electroencephalography (EEG)
was performed, revealing diffuse slowing, consistent with an underlying encephalopathy, and intermittent temporal epileptiform discharges, particularly in the left
temporal lobe (Fig.26.2). These ndings suggested an increased cortical irritability,
which could explain some of her complex partial seizures and further supported the
suspicion of a neurodegenerative or vascular etiology. The persistence and progression of her headaches, combined with the presence of other neurological symptoms,
a signicant family history of dementia, and these EEG ndings, strongly suggested
an underlying genetic disorder.
Brain MRI revealed characteristic white matter hyperintensities, particularly in
the periventricular regions and corpus callosum, which, along with the identication
of a pathogenic mutation in the NOTCH3 gene, conrmed the diagnosis of
CADASIL (Fig. 26.3). Ayşe’s headache characteristics, especially the chronic
migraines with aura that were unresponsive to treatment and associated with cognitive and motor symptoms, were pivotal in prompting the consideration of CADASIL
as a diagnosis.
Over time, her condition progressed to include secondary parkinsonism, polyneuropathy, complex partial epilepsy, and increasing disability. Despite medical
interventions, her condition deteriorated, with recurrent falls, bradykinesia, and
severe motor impairments leading to a reliance on a wheelchair.

250
U. Topbaş et al.
Fig. 26.3 MRI ndings of our case show white matter hyperintensities, especially in the corpus
callosum, and mild atrophy in the frontoparietal regions
26.4 Case Discussion
Ayşe’s case illustrates the progressive nature of CADASIL, with initial manifesta-
tions of migraine evolving into more severe neurological decits. Her clinical
course highlights the importance of early diagnosis and comprehensive

26 Cerebral Autosomal Dominant Arteriopathy and Subcortical Infarcts…
management in CADASIL patients, emphasizing the need for genetic testing in
individuals with a family history of stroke or dementia and atypical migraine [5].
251
26.5 Clinical Characteristics
Headaches in CADASIL are predominantly characterized by migraine with aura,
often presenting before other neurological symptoms. These migraines are typically
severe, featuring visual disturbances, sensory changes, and sometimes motor symptoms, and they may be resistant to conventional therapies [1]. As CADASIL progresses, migraines can evolve into chronic daily headaches, with tension-type
headaches also emerging in later stages due to cerebral microangiopathy [5].
Migraine disorders occur in 20–40% of CADASIL patients, with some cases involving status migrainous and persistent aura, highlighting the complex relationship
between CADASIL and migraine [6]. The high prevalence of right-to-left shunt in
CADASIL patients with migraines underscores the hereditary nature of the condition and its pathophysiological links to headaches [5, 6]. Genetic mutations, particularly in the NOTCH3 gene, are closely tied to the manifestation of chronic headaches
in CADASIL, emphasizing the importance of genetic screening [7]. Understanding
these genetic factors is crucial for advancing diagnostic and therapeutic strategies,
as CADASIL’s headache phenotype shares similarities with but diverges from typical migraine with aura [7, 8]. Additionally, acute confusional migraine (ACM) may
serve as an early indicator of CADASIL, often preceding diagnosis by several years
[1, 2]. Current research underscores the need to reevaluate how CADASIL-related
headaches are classied, advocating for a more nuanced approach considering the
genetic mechanisms underlying these headaches [1].
26.6 Diagnostic Algorithm
Step 1: Clinical Suspicion
• Identify Key Symptoms:
– Migraine with aura
– Family history of stroke or dementia
Step 2: Initial Diagnostic Workup
• Perform Brain MRI:
– Assess for White Matter Hyperintensities (WMHs):
• Anterior temporal lobes
• External capsules
• Periventricular regions

252
U. Topbaş et al.
Step 3: Genetic Testing
• Conduct Genetic Testing:
– Test for NOTCH3 gene mutations
Step 4: Additional Diagnostic Evaluations
• Perform EEG:
– Look for signs of encephalopathy and temporal epileptiform discharges
• Neuropsychological Testing:
– Assess cognitive function to identify possible cognitive decline
• Cerebrospinal Fluid Analysis:
– Exclude other differential diagnoses
Step 5: Apply ICHD-3 Diagnostic Criteria [9]
A. Typical, hemiplegic, or recurrent migraine attacks with prolonged aura
B. Presence of subcortical infarcts and leukoencephalopathy (conrmed by MRI)
C. Fulll at least two of the following:
First detection of migraine with aura.
Migraine attacks with aura combined with other CADASIL manifestations
(e.g., ischemic stroke, mood disorders, cognitive dysfunction).
D. Exclude more suitable diagnoses according to ICHD-3 criteria.
Step 6: Conrm Diagnosis
• Conrm CADASIL diagnosis:
– NOTCH3 antibody testing (via immunohistochemical staining or biopsy)*
Step 7: Classication Re-evaluation
• Reassess headache classication:
– Consider genetic mechanisms in the classication within the context of
vascular disorders
*The diagnosis of this disorder is based on NOTCH3 antibodies by immunohisto-
chemical staining or extracellular granular osmiophilic in arterial media elec-
tron for material evaluation a simple deep microscopy of the skin NOTCH3
mutations using biopsy is detected by scanning [9].
Other investigations: EEG, neuropsychological testing, and cerebrospinal uid
analysis may aid in excluding other differential diagnoses [4, 7].
The classication of headaches associated with genetic disorders, particularly
CADASIL, requires a critical re-evaluation, as highlighted by Sacco etal. [1]. Their
examination of the International Classication of Headache Disorders suggests that
Соседние файлы в папке Библиотека им академика М.И. Перельмана
