Page 126 - Migraine, the heart and the brain

Chapter 7
preventing optimal closure of the eyelid when the unconditioned stimulus was about to occur (Figure 3c–e). In addition, the mean peak-amplitude of participants with FHM1 was signi cantly smaller (p = 0.045) than the amplitudes in the other three study groups (Figure 3c-f). When looking at percentage of CRs before (block 1) and after training (maximum percentage in block 6, 7 or 8), all three study groups showed a similar signi cant increase (before training between groups p=0.9, one- way ANOVA; after training between groups p=0.8, one-way ANOVA; before training vs after training p all groups <0.001, paired t-test) (Figure 3g). Together these data show no difference in conditioning between controls and participants with migraine. On the other hand, participants with FHM1 learn to make the association between conditioned and unconditioned stimulus (similar CR percentages), but are unable to produce a strong, properly timed eyeblink (Table 5).
Body-sway task. In total 177/282 (63%) participants (71 MA, 53 MO, and 53 controls) completed the bodysway task. Most subjects completed the two-legged stance condition 155/177 (88%), compared to 136 participants (77%) for walking condition and 77 participants (44%) who completed the one-legged stance step condition. The proportions of participants who could complete the separate conditions did not differ among the three study groups; neither did the other body-sway parameters such as roll angle, roll velocity, pitch angle, and pitch velocity (Table 6). This remained so after adjusting for age and BMI.
Brain imaging was available for 174/177 (98%) participants, eight of whom (seven with migraine) had a cerebellar ischaemic lesion. These performed equally well on all sub-tasks of the body-sway test as the participants without such a lesion (data not shown).
124