Evidence Hub

Increased risks of retinal vascular occlusion in patients with migraine and the protective effects of migraine treatment: a population-based retrospective cohort study

Kuan-Yun Ho, Chia-Der Lin, Tzu-Ju Hsu, Yu-han Huang, Fuu-Jen Tsai, Chiao-Ying Liang

Scientific Reports, 2024

628,760 participants · 8 citations

Abstract

Associations between migraine and retinal vascular occlusion have been reported, but there is no large-scale and comprehensive study. Therefore, we aimed to determine risks of retinal vascular occlusion in patients with migraine. Using the Taiwan National Health Insurance Research Database from 2009 to 2020, we enrolled 628,760 patients with migraine and 628,760 matched individuals without migraine. Study outcomes were diagnoses of retinal vascular occlusion, including retinal artery occlusion (RAO) and retinal vein occlusion (RVO). Adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) of retinal vascular occlusion related to migraine was estimated. The cumulative incidences of subsequent retinal vascular occlusion, RAO, and RVO were significantly higher in migraine patients compared with controls (0.31% vs. 0.21%; 0.09% vs. 0.05%; 0.22% vs. 0.17%; all p < 0.001). The hazards of retinal vascular occlusion, RAO, and RVO were significantly greater in the migraine group (aHR, 1.69 [95% CI, 1.57, 1.83], 2.13 [95% CI, 1.84, 2.48] and 1.53 [95% CI, 1.40, 1.68], respectively). Risks of retinal vascular occlusion were significantly higher in migraine both with aura (MA) and without aura (MO) (aHR, 1.77 [95% CI, 1.58, 1.98], and 1.92 [95% CI, 1.64, 2.25]). Among patients with migraine, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, propranolol, and flunarizine significantly reduce their risks of retinal vascular occlusion (aHR, 0.19 [95% CI, 0.16, 0.22], 0.73 [95% CI, 0.62, 0.86], 0.84 [95% CI, 0.76, 0.93]). Migraine,…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 628,760 participants or records.

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