Abstract:Background: High altitude illness (HAI) is a term used to describe a group of cerebral and pulmonary syndromes that can occur during travel to elevations above 2500 metres (8202 feet). Acute hypoxia, acute mountain sickness (AMS), high altitude cerebral oedema (HACE) and high altitude pulmonary oedema (HAPE) are reported as potential medical problems associated with high altitude. In this review, the first in a series of three about preventive strategies for HAI, we assess the effectiveness of six of the most recommended classes of pharmacological interventions. Objectives: To assess the clinical effectiveness and adverse events of commonly-used pharmacological interventions for preventing acute HAI. Search methods: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE (OVID), Embase (OVID), LILACS and trial registries in January 2017. We adapted the MEDLINE strategy for searching the other databases. We used a combination of thesaurus-based and free-text terms to search. Selection criteria: We included randomized-controlled and cross-over trials conducted in any setting where commonly-used classes of drugs were used to prevent acute HAI. Data collection and analysis: We used standard methodological procedures as expected by Cochrane. Main results: We included 64 studies (78 references) and 4547 participants in this review, and classified 12 additional studies as ongoing. A further 12 studies await classification, as we were unable to obtain the full texts. Most of the studies were conducted in high altitude mountain areas, while the rest used low pressure (hypobaric) chambers to simulate altitude exposure. Twenty-four trials provided the intervention between three and five days prior to the ascent, and 23 trials, between one and two days beforehand. Most of the included studies reached a final altitude of between 4001 and 5000 metres above sea level. Risks of bias were unclear for several domains, and a considerable number of studies did not report adverse events of the evaluated interventions. We found 26 comparisons, 15 of them comparing commonly-used drugs versus placebo. We report results for the three most important comparisons: Acetazolamide versus placebo (28 parallel studies; 2345 participants)The risk of AMS was reduced with acetazolamide (risk ratio (RR) 0.47, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.39 to 0.56; I2 = 0%; 16 studies; 2301 participants; moderate quality of evidence). No events of HAPE were reported and only one event of HACE (RR 0.32, 95% CI 0.01 to 7.48; 6 parallel studies; 1126 participants; moderate quality of evidence). Few studies reported side effects for this comparison, and they showed an increase in the risk of paraesthesia with the intake of acetazolamide (RR 5.53, 95% CI 2.81 to 10.88, I2 = 60%; 5 studies, 789 participants; low quality of evidence). Budenoside versus placebo (2 parallel studies; 132 participants)Data on budenoside showed a reduction in the incidence of AMS compared with placebo (RR 0.37, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.61; I2 = 0%; 2 studies, 132 participants; low quality of evidence). Studies included did not report events of HAPE or HACE, and they did not find side effects (low quality of evidence). Dexamethasone versus placebo (7 parallel studies; 205 participants)For dexamethasone, the data did not show benefits at any dosage (RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.36 to 1.00; I2 = 39%; 4 trials, 176 participants; low quality of evidence). Included studies did not report events of HAPE or HACE, and we rated the evidence about adverse events as of very low quality. Authors' conclusions: Our assessment of the most commonly-used pharmacological interventions suggests that acetazolamide is an effective pharmacological agent to prevent acute HAI in dosages of 250 to 750 mg/day. This information is based on evidence of moderate quality. Acetazolamide is associated with an increased risk of paraesthesia, although there are few reports about other adverse events from the available evidence. The clinical benefits and harms of other pharmacological interventions such as ibuprofen, budenoside and dexamethasone are unclear. Large multicentre studies are needed for most of the pharmacological agents evaluated in this review, to evaluate their effectiveness and safety.

Can acute high-altitude sickness be predicted in advance?

Research advances in pathogenesis and prophylactic measures of acute high altitude illness

Recent advances in predicting acute mountain sickness: from multidimensional cohort studies to cutting-edge model applications

Flying to high-altitude destinations: Is the risk of acute mountain sickness greater?

Potential plasma biomarkers at low altitude for prediction of acute mountain sickness

[Research progress of traditional Chinese and Western medicine non-pharmacological prevention strategies for acute high altitude disease]

A trek to the top: a review of acute mountain sickness

Altitude illnesses

High altitude exercise stress echocardiograph for identification of susceptibility to acute mountain sickness

Acute high-altitude sickness

Predictive Capacity of Pulmonary Function Tests for Acute Mountain Sickness

Basic medical advice for travelers to high altitudes

Interventions for preventing high altitude illness: Part 1. Commonly-used classes of drugs

The usefulness of prophylactic use of acetazolamide in subjects with acute mountain sickness

IL-2, IL-17A and TNF-α hold potential as biomarkers for predicting acute mountain sickness prior to ascent

Effects of Acetazolamide on Cognitive Performance During High-Altitude Exposure.

Effect of acetazolamide and gingko biloba on the human pulmonary vascular response to an acute altitude ascent.

The Effect of High-Altitude Hypoxia on Neuropsychiatric Functions.

Proteomic and clinical biomarkers for acute mountain sickness in a longitudinal cohort

Physiological risk factors for severe high-altitude illness: a prospective cohort study

Acute Mountain Sickness: Controversies and Advances