OBJECTIVE: The study was undertaken to determine whether normobaric hypoxia causes elevated brain volume and intracranial pressure in individuals with symptoms consistent with acute mountain sickness (AMS). METHODS: Thirteen males age = (26 (sd 6)) years were exposed to normobaric hypoxia (12% O2 ) and normoxia (21% O2 ). After 2 and 10 hours, AMS symptoms were assessed alongside ventricular and venous vessel volumes, cerebral blood flow, regional brain volumes, and intracranial pressure, using high-resolution magnetic resonance imaging. RESULTS: In normoxia, neither lateral ventricular volume (R(2) = 0.07, p = 0.40) nor predominance of unilateral transverse venous sinus drainage (R(2) = 0.07, p = 0.45) was related to AMS symptoms. Furthermore, despite an increase in cerebral blood flow after 2 hours of hypoxia (hypoxia vs normoxia: Δ148ml/min(-1) , 95% confidence interval [CI] = 58 to 238), by 10 hours, when AMS symptoms had developed, cerebral blood flow was normal (Δ-51ml/min(-1) , 95% CI = -141 to 39). Conversely, at 10 hours brain volume was increased (Δ59ml, 95% CI = 8 to 110), predominantly due to an increase in gray matter volume (Δ73ml, 95% CI = 25 to 120). Therefore, cerebral spinal fluid volume was decreased (Δ-40ml, 95% CI = -67 to -14). The intracranial pressure response to hypoxia varied between individuals, and as hypothesized, the most AMS-symptomatic participants had the largest increases in intracranial pressure (AMS present, Δ7mmHg, 95% CI = -2.5 to 17.3; AMS not present, Δ-1mmHg, 95% CI = -3.3 to 0.5). Consequently, there was a significant relationship between the change in intracranial pressure and AMS symptom severity (R(2) = 0.71, p = 0.002). INTERPRETATION: The data provide the strongest evidence to date to support the hypothesis that the "random" nature of AMS symptomology is explained by a variable intracranial pressure response to hypoxia.
OBJECTIVE: The study was undertaken to determine whether normobaric hypoxia causes elevated brain volume and intracranial pressure in individuals with symptoms consistent with acute mountain sickness (AMS). METHODS: Thirteen males age = (26 (sd 6)) years were exposed to normobaric hypoxia (12% O2 ) and normoxia (21% O2 ). After 2 and 10 hours, AMS symptoms were assessed alongside ventricular and venous vessel volumes, cerebral blood flow, regional brain volumes, and intracranial pressure, using high-resolution magnetic resonance imaging. RESULTS: In normoxia, neither lateral ventricular volume (R(2) = 0.07, p = 0.40) nor predominance of unilateral transverse venous sinus drainage (R(2) = 0.07, p = 0.45) was related to AMS symptoms. Furthermore, despite an increase in cerebral blood flow after 2 hours of hypoxia (hypoxia vs normoxia: Δ148ml/min(-1) , 95% confidence interval [CI] = 58 to 238), by 10 hours, when AMS symptoms had developed, cerebral blood flow was normal (Δ-51ml/min(-1) , 95% CI = -141 to 39). Conversely, at 10 hours brain volume was increased (Δ59ml, 95% CI = 8 to 110), predominantly due to an increase in gray matter volume (Δ73ml, 95% CI = 25 to 120). Therefore, cerebral spinal fluid volume was decreased (Δ-40ml, 95% CI = -67 to -14). The intracranial pressure response to hypoxia varied between individuals, and as hypothesized, the most AMS-symptomatic participants had the largest increases in intracranial pressure (AMS present, Δ7mmHg, 95% CI = -2.5 to 17.3; AMS not present, Δ-1mmHg, 95% CI = -3.3 to 0.5). Consequently, there was a significant relationship between the change in intracranial pressure and AMS symptom severity (R(2) = 0.71, p = 0.002). INTERPRETATION: The data provide the strongest evidence to date to support the hypothesis that the "random" nature of AMS symptomology is explained by a variable intracranial pressure response to hypoxia.
Authors: Noam Alperin; James R Loftus; Carlos J Oliu; Ahmet M Bagci; Sang H Lee; Birgit Ertl-Wagner; Raymond Sekula; Terry Lichtor; Barth A Green Journal: Neurosurgery Date: 2015-07 Impact factor: 4.654
Authors: Stephen A McGuire; Meghann C Ryan; Paul M Sherman; John H Sladky; Laura M Rowland; S Andrea Wijtenburg; L Elliot Hong; Peter V Kochunov Journal: Hum Brain Mapp Date: 2019-03-29 Impact factor: 5.038
Authors: Giacomo Strapazzon; Matiram Pun; Tomas Dal Cappello; Emily Procter; Piergiorgio Lochner; Hermann Brugger; Antonio Piccoli Journal: High Alt Med Biol Date: 2017-10-16 Impact factor: 1.981
Authors: Chun Guo; Jianfeng Xu; Mingnian Wang; Tao Yan; Lu Yang; Zhitao Sun Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2015-12-22 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Samuel Verges; Thomas Rupp; Marjorie Villien; Laurent Lamalle; Irène Troprés; Camille Poquet; Jan M Warnking; François Estève; Pierre Bouzat; Alexandre Krainik Journal: Front Physiol Date: 2016-09-08 Impact factor: 4.566
Authors: Ravjit S Sagoo; Charles E Hutchinson; Alex Wright; Charles Handford; Helen Parsons; Victoria Sherwood; Sarah Wayte; Sanjoy Nagaraja; Eddie Ng'Andwe; Mark H Wilson; Christopher He Imray Journal: J Cereb Blood Flow Metab Date: 2016-01-08 Impact factor: 6.200