Back

Effectiveness of Carotid Sinus Massage in Modified Trendelenburg Position for Rapid and Lasting Relief of Acute Headache Episodes: A Pilot Study

Anaya, P.; Suarez-Roca, H.

2025-02-13 pain medicine
10.1101/2025.02.11.25321880 medRxiv
Show abstract

IntroductionHeadaches significantly impair quality of life, and primary headaches are among the most common neurological complaints. Stimulating carotid baroreceptors via carotid sinus massage (CSM) combined with modified Trendelenburg positioning may modulate autonomic activity and alleviate acute headache symptoms. Thus, this study evaluated the effectiveness and safety of this combined approach (CSM+T). MethodsSeventeen patients (14 females; ages 16-64) with tension-type headaches (6), chronic migraines (10), or mixed-headaches (1) and various comorbidities received up to three 15-second CSM+T applications at one-minute intervals. Pain was assessed using a 10-point visual analog scale (VAS), while heart rate (HR), blood pressure (BP), and oxygen saturation (SpO2) were recorded before and after the intervention. A 24-hour follow-up evaluated headache recurrence and adverse effects. ResultsSixteen patients experienced significant pain reduction (median decrease: 9 VAS points; p < 0.0001) without complications. Pain relief persisted 24 hours without the need for additional medication or adverse effects. HR, BP, and SpO2 decreased following CSM+T. A negative correlation was observed between HR reduction and pain relief. Among responders, migraine patients had a smaller mean HR decrease than tension-type headache patients, yet both groups achieved similar median pain relief. These results suggest that a more pronounced cardiovagal response does not necessarily confer greater analgesia, implying additional central or multifactorial mechanisms. ConclusionCSM+T appears to be a safe and effective non-pharmacological intervention for rapid headache relief in a heterogeneous patient population. Larger, controlled trials are warranted to confirm these findings and refine clinical protocols.

Matching journals

The top 7 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
BMC Neurology
12 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
12.7%
2
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 20%
9.4%
3
Pain
70 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
7.0%
4
The Journal of Headache and Pain
10 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
7.0%
5
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 16%
6.5%
6
Neurotherapeutics
11 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
5.0%
7
Frontiers in Neurology
91 papers in training set
Top 1%
4.7%
50% of probability mass above
8
Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics
25 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.1%
9
British Journal of Anaesthesia
14 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
3.7%
10
Blood Advances
54 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
3.7%
11
Clinical and Translational Science
21 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
3.2%
12
JMIR Formative Research
32 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
3.0%
13
Journal of Medical Internet Research
85 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.4%
14
The Journal of Pain
26 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
2.1%
15
Cureus
67 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.9%
16
BMJ Open
554 papers in training set
Top 9%
1.7%
17
Frontiers in Immunology
586 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.7%
18
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
67 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.5%
19
Brain Stimulation
112 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
1.4%
20
Journal of the Neurological Sciences
17 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.4%
21
Neurology
44 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
1.4%
22
Journal of Neuroscience Methods
106 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.3%
23
Brain Sciences
52 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.7%
24
Journal of Clinical Medicine
91 papers in training set
Top 8%
0.5%
25
Brain
154 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.5%
26
Frontiers in Medicine
113 papers in training set
Top 9%
0.5%