Evidence Hub

Exploring the spectrum of headaches in neurocysticercosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Garg RK, Rizvi I, Mahdi RA, Uniyal R, Suresh V

Transactions of the Royal Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene, 2025

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Understanding the prevalence, characteristics, diagnosis and management of headaches associated with neurocysticercosis (NCC) is essential for optimizing patient care.

METHODS: This systematic review and meta-analysis followed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. We examined case reports, case series and cohort studies that explored headaches in NCC patients. The review protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42024530164).

RESULTS: A total of 53 isolated NCC cases presenting with headache and 8 cohort studies were included. Severe or progressive headaches, often resembling migraines, were most prevalent (35.2%). Brain parenchymal cysts were the most frequently observed lesion type (39.6%), followed by ventricular cysts (28.3%). Treatment primarily consisted of cysticidal therapy (66.2%), with surgical intervention required in 25.4% of cases. The majority of patients (96.2%) experienced clinical improvement. The meta-analysis addressed three key questions. Patients with primary headaches exhibited a significantly higher prevalence of calcified NCC (odds ratio [OR] 2.82, I2=0%). Likewise, primary headaches were more common in individuals with calcified NCC (OR 2.82, I2=0%). However, headache frequency (mean difference=1.93, I2=86%) and severity (mean difference=4.45, I2=99%) did not differ significantly.

CONCLUSIONS: Brain parenchymal cysts, particularly ring or disk-enhancing colloidal cysts, may present with new-onset…

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