Evidence Hub

Human assumed central sensitization in interictal migraine: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Cnockaert E, Meeus M, Cagnie B, Chys M, Steverlynck C, Moerkerke M, Van Oosterwijck J

Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology, 2026

1 citation

Abstract

Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the presence of human assumed central sensitization in interictal episodic and chronic migraine patients.

Method: A comprehensive literature search was conducted in September 2024 across three databases. Studies evaluating human assumed central sensitization using static or dynamic quantitative sensory testing in adults with interictal migraine were included. Two independent, blinded reviewers performed study selection, data extraction, and assessments of risk of bias and evidence quality. Meta-analyses were conducted using Review Manager. Sixty-two studies were included in the qualitative synthesis, with 37 contributing to the meta-analysis.

Results: Findings, categorized by headache frequency and testing modality, revealed reduced pressure pain thresholds in trigeminal, extra-trigeminal, and pain-free areas in episodic and chronic migraine patients. Other static sensory testing outcomes were inconsistent. Altered defensive reflexes were observed in both groups. No significant differences were found between episodic and chronic migraine regardless of testing method used.

Conclusion: These findings support the presence of human assumed central sensitization in interictal episodic and chronic migraine, highlighting the potential benefit of multimodal treatment approaches aimed at central nervous system desensitization. Although different quantitative sensory testing profiles may influence the development of human assumed central…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free