Facultad de Medicina, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago, Chile; Proyecto Epistemonikos, Santiago, Chile.
Proyecto Epistemonikos, Santiago, Chile; Departamento de Traumatología, Facultad de Medicina, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago, Chile. Email:
Medwave. 2020 Jun 11;20(5):e7733. doi: 10.5867/medwave.2020.05.7732.
Acute mountain sickness is a common condition occurring in healthy subjects that undergo rapid ascent without prior acclimatization, as low as 2500 meters above sea level. The classic preventive agent has been acetazolamide, although in the last decade there has been evidence favoring ibuprofen. However, it is unclear which method is more efficient.
We searched in Epistemonikos, the largest database of systematic reviews in health, which is maintained by screening multiple information sources, including MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane, among others. We extracted data from the systematic reviews, reanalyzed data of primary studies, conducted a meta-analysis) and generated a summary of findings table using the GRADE approach.
We identified two systematic reviews that included only one primary study, which is a randomized trial. We concluded it is not possible to establish whether ibuprofen is better or worse than acetazolamide because the certainty of evidence has been evaluated as very low.
急性高原病是一种常见病症，发生于未经适应就快速上升至海拔 2500 米以上的健康人群中。经典的预防药物是乙酰唑胺，尽管在过去十年中，布洛芬的证据更为有利。然而，哪种方法更有效尚不清楚。
我们在 Epistemonikos 中进行了搜索，这是一个最大的健康系统评价数据库，通过筛选多个信息来源（包括 MEDLINE、EMBASE、Cochrane 等）进行维护。我们从系统评价中提取数据，重新分析原始研究的数据，进行荟萃分析，并使用 GRADE 方法生成证据总结表。
我们确定了两项仅包含一项随机试验的系统评价。我们得出结论，无法确定布洛芬是否优于乙酰唑胺，因为证据的确定性被评估为非常低。
