Inhaled Budesonide Prevents Acute Mountain Sickness in Young Chinese Men

Wilderness Medical Society Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Prevention, Diagnosis, and Treatment of Acute Altitude Illness: 2024 Update

To provide guidance to clinicians about best practices, the Wilderness Medical Society (WMS) convened an expert panel to develop evidence-based guidelines for prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of acute mountain sickness, high altitude cerebral edema, and high altitude pulmonary edema. Recommendations are graded based on the quality of supporting evidence and the balance between the benefits and risks/burdens according to criteria put forth by the American College of Chest Physicians. The guidelines also provide suggested approaches for managing each form of acute altitude illness that incorporate these recommendations as well as recommendations on how to approach high altitude travel following COVID-19 infection. This is an updated version of the original WMS Consensus Guidelines for the Prevention and Treatment of Acute Altitude Illness published in Wilderness & Environmental Medicine in 2010 and the subsequently updated WMS Practice Guidelines for the Prevention and Treatment of Acute Altitude Illness published in 2014 and 2019.

Efficacy and safety of inhaled budesonide on prevention of acute mountain sickness during emergent ascent: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Background

Acute Mountain Sickness (AMS) is a pathophysiologic process that occurs in non-acclimated susceptible individuals rapidly ascending to high-altitude. Barometric pressure falls at high altitude and it translates to a decreased partial pressure of alveolar oxygen (PAO2) and arterial oxygen (PaO2). A gradual staged ascent with sufficient acclimatization can prevent AMS but emergent circumstances requiring exposure to rapid atmospheric pressure changes – such as for climbers, disaster or rescue team procedures, and military operations – establishes a need for effective prophylactic medications. This systematic review and meta-analysis aim to analyze the incidence of AMS during emergent ascent of non-acclimatized individuals receiving inhaled budesonide compared to placebo.

Methods

This current meta-analysis was conducted according to the guidance of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement. We searched PubMed, Google Scholar and Embase for relevant studies. The efficacy of budesonide in reducing incidence of AMS was evaluated by calculating the pooled ORs and 95% CIs. The efficacy of budesonide in maintaining hemoglobin-oxygen saturation was evaluated by calculating standard mean difference (SMD) and 95% confidence intervals.

Results

We found that at high altitude, inhaled budesonide was effective in reducing the incidence of mild AMS [OR: 0.37; 95% CI, 0.14 to 0.9, p = 0.042] but was ineffective in reducing the incidence of severe AMS [OR: 0.46; 95% CI, 0.14 to 1.41, p = 0.17]. Inhaled budesonide was also effective in maintaining SpO2 (SMD: 0.47; 95% CI, 0.09 to 0.84, p = 0.014) at high altitude. However, it was not effective in maintaining or improving pulmonary function at high altitude. Systematic-review found no adverse effects of budesoide in the dose used for prophylaxis of AMS.

Conclusions

Our systematic review showed that prophylactic inhaled budesonide is effective in preventing mild AMS during emergency ascent but not effective in preventing severe AMS. Though statistically significant, authors recommend caution in interpretation of data and questions for further well designed randomized studies to evaluate the role of budesonide in prophylaxis of AMS during an emergent ascent.

Inhaled budesonide for the prevention of acute mountain sickness: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Altitude induces acute mountain sickness (AMS), which can affect the health or limit the activities of 15 -80% of climbers and workers. Budesonide has been applied to prevent AMS. However, its prophylactic efficacy is controversial. Our purpose was to conduct a meta-analysis to assess whether budesonide qualifies as a prophylaxis for AMS.

METHODS

A literature search was performed in PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library in February 2019. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were selected. The main outcome, AMS, was estimated with the relative risk (RR), weighted mean difference (WMD), and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). The statistical analysis was performed using Rev. Man 5.3.

RESULTS

Five groups in six articles met the eligibility criteria with 304 participants, including two articles with the same participants but different measurements. Inhaled budesonide showed a potential trend towards preventing AMS, but it was not statistically significant (RR = 0.68, 95% CI: 0.41-1.13, p = 0.14). The subgroup analysis based on dosage (200 µg) did not have significant results. A similar trend was observed for severe AMS and in subgroups stratified by the Lake Louise Score (LLC). However, there was a significant improvement in heart rate (HR) (WMD = -5.41, 95% CI: -8.26 to -2.55, p = 0.0002) and pulse oxygen saturation (SPO2) (WMD = 2.36, 95% CI: 1.62-3.1, p < 0.00001) in the group with inhaled budesonide. Additionally, no side effects were reported in any included study.

CONCLUSION

The current meta-analysis indicates that inhaled budesonide does not protect against AMS or severe AMS. However, it is successful at reducing HR and increasing SPO₂ without any side effects.

Wilderness Medical Society Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Prevention and Treatment of Acute Altitude Illness: 2019 Update

To provide guidance to clinicians about best preventive and therapeutic practices, the Wilderness Medical Society (WMS) convened an expert panel to develop evidence-based guidelines for prevention and treatment of acute mountain sickness, high altitude cerebral edema, and high altitude pulmonary edema. Recommendations are graded based on the quality of supporting evidence and the balance between the benefits and risks/burdens according to criteria put forth by the American College of Chest Physicians. The guidelines also provide suggested approaches to prevention and management of each form of acute altitude illness that incorporate these recommendations. This is an updated version of the original WMS Consensus Guidelines for the Prevention and Treatment of Acute Altitude Illness published in 2010 and subsequently updated as the WMS Practice Guidelines for the Prevention and Treatment of Acute Altitude Illness in 2014.

The effects of respiratory inhaled drugs on the prevention of acute mountain sickness

BACKGROUND

Acute mountain sickness (AMS) is common in high-altitude travelers, and may lead to life-threatening high-altitude cerebral edema (HACE) or high-altitude pulmonary edema (HAPE). The inhaled drugs have a much lower peak serum concentrations and a shorter half-life period than oral drugs, which give them a special character, greater local effects in the lung. Meanwhile, short-term administration of inhaled drugs results in almost no adverse reactions.

METHODS

We chose inhaled ipratropium bromide/salbutamol sulfate (combivent, COM), budesonide (pulmicortrespules, BUD), and salbutamol sulfate (ventolin, VEN) in our study to investigate their prophylactic efficacy against AMS. Since COM is a compound drug of ipratropium bromide and salbutamol sulfate, to verify which part of COM plays a role in the prevention of AMS, we also tested VEN in our experiment.

RESULTS

In our study, Lake Louise scores (LLS) in the COM (1.14 ± 0.89 vs 1.91 ± 1.23, P < .05) and BUD (1.35 ± 0.94 vs 1.91 ± 1.23, P < .05) groups were both significantly lower than the placebo group at 72 hours. There were no significant differences in LLS scores among the 4 groups at 120 hours. The incidence of AMS in the COM group was significantly reduced at 72 hours (16.7% in COM group vs 43.4% in placebo group, P < .05) after exposure to high-altitude. There were no significant differences in AMS incidences at 120 hours among the 4 groups.

CONCLUSION

The prophylactic use of COM could prevent AMS in young Chinese male at 72 hours after high-altitude exposure. BUD also could reduce LLS but not prevent AMS at 72 hours. Ipratropium bromide maybe the effective drug in COM work on the prevention of AMS alone.

Pharmacological interventions for preventing acute mountain sickness: a network meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis of randomized clinical trials

BACKGROUND

Individuals ascending to high altitude are at a risk of getting acute mountain sickness (AMS). The present study is a network meta-analysis comparing all the interventions available to prevent AMS.

METHODS

Electronic databases were searched for randomized clinical trials evaluating the use of drugs to prevent AMS. Incidence of AMS was the primary outcome and incidence of severe AMS, paraesthesia (as side effect of acetazolamide use), headache and severe headache, and oxygen saturation were the secondary outcomes. Odds ratio [95% confidence interval] was the effect estimate for categorical outcomes and weighted mean difference for oxygen saturation. Random effects model was used to derive the direct and mixed treatment comparison pooled estimates. Trial sequential analysis and grading of the evidence for key comparisons were carried out.

RESULTS

A total of 24 studies were included. Acetazolamide at 125, 250 and 375 mg twice daily, dexamethasone and ibuprofen had statistically significant lower incidence of AMS compared to placebo. All the above agents except ibuprofen were also observed to significantly reduce the incidence of severe AMS. Acetazolamide alone or in combination with Ginkgo biloba were associated with lower incidence of headache, but higher risk of paraesthesia. Acetazolamide at 125 mg and 375 mg twice daily significantly reduce the incidence of severe headache as like ibuprofen. Trial sequential analysis indicates that the current evidence is adequate for the incidence of AMS only for acetazolamide 125 and 250 mg twice daily. Similarly, the strength of evidence for acetazolamide 125 and 250 mg twice daily was moderate while it was either low or very low for all other comparisons.

CONCLUSIONS

Acetazolamide at 125, 250 and 375 mg twice daily, ibuprofen and dexamethasone significantly reduce the incidence of AMS of which adequate evidence exists only for acetazolamide 125 and 250 mg twice daily therapy. Acetazolamide 125 mg twice daily could be the best in the pool considering the presence of enough evidence for preventing AMS and associated with lower incidence of paraesthesia. Key messages Acetazolamide 125, 250 and 375 mg twice daily, dexamethasone and ibuprofen reduce the incidence of AMS in high altitudes. Adequate evidence exists supporting the use of acetazolamide 125 mg and 250 mg twice daily for preventing AMS of which acetazolamide 125 mg twice daily could be the best.

Budesonide Versus Acetazolamide for Prevention of Acute Mountain Sickness

BACKGROUND

Inhaled budesonide has been suggested as a novel prevention for acute mountain sickness. However, efficacy has not been compared with the standard acute mountain sickness prevention medication acetazolamide.

METHODS

This double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial compared inhaled budesonide versus oral acetazolamide versus placebo, starting the morning of ascent from 1240 m (4100 ft) to 3810 m (12,570 ft) over 4 hours. The primary outcome was acute mountain sickness incidence (headache and Lake Louise Questionnaire ≥3 and another symptom).

RESULTS

A total of 103 participants were enrolled and completed the study; 33 (32%) received budesonide, 35 (34%) acetazolamide, and 35 (34%) placebo. Demographics were not different between the groups (P > .09). Acute mountain sickness prevalence was 73%, with severe acute mountain sickness of 47%. Fewer participants in the acetazolamide group (n = 15, 43%) developed acute mountain sickness compared with both budesonide (n = 24, 73%) (odds ratio [OR] 3.5, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.3-10.1) and placebo (n = 22, 63%) (OR 0.5, 95% CI 0.2-1.2). Severe acute mountain sickness was reduced with acetazolamide (n = 11, 31%) compared with both budesonide (n = 18, 55%) (OR 2.6, 95% CI 1-7.2) and placebo (n = 19, 54%) (OR 0.4, 95% CI 0.1-1), with a number needed to treat of 4.

CONCLUSION

Budesonide was ineffective for the prevention of acute mountain sickness, and acetazolamide was preventive of severe acute mountain sickness taken just before rapid ascent.

Inhaled Budesonide Does Not Affect Hypoxic Pulmonary Vasoconstriction at 4559 Meters of Altitude

Berger, Marc Moritz, Franziska Macholz, Peter Schmidt, Sebastian Fried, Tabea Perz, Daniel Dankl, Josef Niebauer, Peter Bärtsch, Heimo Mairbäurl, and Mahdi Sareban. Inhaled budesonide does not affect hypoxic pulmonary vasoconstriction at 4559 meters of altitude. High Alt Med Biol 19:52-59, 2018.-Oral intake of the corticosteroid dexamethasone has been shown to lower pulmonary artery pressure (PAP) and to prevent high-altitude pulmonary edema. This study tested whether inhalation of the corticosteroid budesonide attenuates PAP and right ventricular (RV) function after rapid ascent to 4559 m. In this prospective, randomized, double-blind, and placebo-controlled trial, 50 subjects were randomized into three groups to receive budesonide at 200 or 800 μg twice/day (n = 16 and 17, respectively) or placebo (n = 17). Inhalation was started 1 day before ascending from 1130 to 4559 m within 20 hours. Systolic PAP (SPAP) and RV function were assessed by transthoracic echocardiography at low altitude (423 m) and after 7, 20, 32, and 44 hours at 4559 m. Ascent to high altitude increased SPAP about 1.7-fold (p < 0.001), whereas RV function was preserved. There was no difference in SPAP and RV function between groups at low and high altitude (all p values >0.10). Capillary partial pressure of oxygen (PO₂) and carbon dioxide as well as the alveolar to arterial PO₂ difference were decreased at high altitude but not affected by budesonide. Prophylactic inhalation of budesonide does not attenuate high-altitude-induced pulmonary vasoconstriction and RV function after rapid ascent to 4559 m.

Effect of hypoxia and hyperoxia on exercise performance in healthy individuals and in patients with pulmonary hypertension: a systematic review

Exercise performance is determined by oxygen supply to working muscles and vital organs. In healthy individuals, exercise performance is limited in the hypoxic environment at altitude, when oxygen delivery is diminished due to the reduced alveolar and arterial oxygen partial pressures. In patients with pulmonary hypertension (PH), exercise performance is already reduced near sea level due to impairments of the pulmonary circulation and gas exchange, and, presumably, these limitations are more pronounced at altitude. In studies performed near sea level in healthy subjects, as well as in patients with PH, maximal performance during progressive ramp exercise and endurance of submaximal constant-load exercise were substantially enhanced by breathing oxygen-enriched air. Both in healthy individuals and in PH patients, these improvements were mediated by a better arterial, muscular, and cerebral oxygenation, along with a reduced sympathetic excitation, as suggested by the reduced heart rate and alveolar ventilation at submaximal isoloads, and an improved pulmonary gas exchange efficiency, especially in patients with PH. In summary, in healthy individuals and in patients with PH, alterations in the inspiratory Po₂ by exposure to hypobaric hypoxia or normobaric hyperoxia reduce or enhance exercise performance, respectively, by modifying oxygen delivery to the muscles and the brain, by effects on cardiovascular and respiratory control, and by alterations in pulmonary gas exchange. The understanding of these physiological mechanisms helps in counselling individuals planning altitude or air travel and prescribing oxygen therapy to patients with PH.

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

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.

Advances in the Prevention and Treatment of High Altitude Illness

High altitude illness encompasses a spectrum of clinical entities to include: acute mountain sickness, high altitude cerebral edema, and high altitude pulmonary edema. These illnesses occur as a result of a hypobaric hypoxic environment. Although a mild case of acute mountain sickness may be self-limited, high altitude cerebral edema and high altitude pulmonary edema represent critical emergencies that require timely intervention. This article reviews recent advances in the prevention and treatment of high altitude illness, including new pharmacologic strategies for prophylaxis and revised treatment guidelines.

Acute high-altitude sickness

At any point 1–5 days following ascent to altitudes ≥2500 m, individuals are at risk of developing one of three forms of acute altitude illness: acute mountain sickness, a syndrome of nonspecific symptoms including headache, lassitude, dizziness and nausea; high-altitude cerebral oedema, a potentially fatal illness characterised by ataxia, decreased consciousness and characteristic changes on magnetic resonance imaging; and high-altitude pulmonary oedema, a noncardiogenic form of pulmonary oedema resulting from excessive hypoxic pulmonary vasoconstriction which can be fatal if not recognised and treated promptly. This review provides detailed information about each of these important clinical entities. After reviewing the clinical features, epidemiology and current understanding of the pathophysiology of each disorder, we describe the current pharmacological and nonpharmacological approaches to the prevention and treatment of these diseases.

Lack of acclimatisation is the main risk factor for acute altitude illness; descent is the optimal treatmenthttp://ow.ly/45d2305JyZ0

Drug Use and Misuse in the Mountains: A UIAA MedCom Consensus Guide for Medical Professionals

Donegani, Enrico, Peter Paal, Thomas Küpper, Urs Hefti, Buddha Basnyat, Anna Carceller, Pierre Bouzat, Rianne van der Spek, and David Hillebrandt. Drug use and misuse in the mountains: a UIAA MedCom consensus guide for medical professionals. High Alt Med Biol. 17:157-184, 2016.-Aims: The aim of this review is to inform mountaineers about drugs commonly used in mountains. For many years, drugs have been used to enhance performance in mountaineering. It is the UIAA (International Climbing and Mountaineering Federation-Union International des Associations d'Alpinisme) Medcom's duty to protect mountaineers from possible harm caused by uninformed drug use. The UIAA Medcom assessed relevant articles in scientific literature and peer-reviewed studies, trials, observational studies, and case series to provide information for physicians on drugs commonly used in the mountain environment. Recommendations were graded according to criteria set by the American College of Chest Physicians.

RESULTS

Prophylactic, therapeutic, and recreational uses of drugs relevant to mountaineering are presented with an assessment of their risks and benefits.

CONCLUSIONS

If using drugs not regulated by the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA), individuals have to determine their own personal standards for enjoyment, challenge, acceptable risk, and ethics. No system of drug testing could ever, or should ever, be policed for recreational climbers. Sponsored climbers or those who climb for status need to carefully consider both the medical and ethical implications if using drugs to aid performance. In some countries (e.g., Switzerland and Germany), administrative systems for mountaineering or medication control dictate a specific stance, but for most recreational mountaineers, any rules would be unenforceable and have to be a personal decision, but should take into account the current best evidence for risk, benefit, and sporting ethics.

Budesonide, but not dexamethasone, blunted the response of aldosterone to renin elevation by suppressing angiotensin converting enzyme upon high-altitude exposure

INTRODUCTION

Inhaled budesonide is a novel approach to prevent acute mountain sickness (AMS). However, its mechanism is not completely understood. We aimed to investigate the effects of budesonide and dexamethasone on renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system in AMS prevention.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Data were obtained from a randomised controlled trial including 138 participants. The participants were randomly assigned to receive budesonide, dexamethasone or placebo as prophylaxis before they travelled to 3450 m altitude from 400 m by car. Their plasma concentrations of renin, angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) and aldosterone were measured at both altitudes.

RESULTS

All parameters were comparable among the three groups at 400 m. After high-altitude exposure of 3450, renin in all groups increased significantly; the ACE, aldosterone concentrations, as well as the aldosterone/renin ratio, rose markedly in the dexamethasone and placebo groups but not in the budesonide group. Moreover, the aldosterone/renin ratio correlated closely with ACE concentration.

CONCLUSIONS

Upon acute high-altitude exposure, budesonide, but not dexamethasone, blunted the response of aldosterone to renin elevation by suppressing angiotensin converting enzyme.