Prophylactic antihistamines in adverse reactions to snake antivenom. A systematic review of randomized controlled trials

María Herrera-Vara; Eduardo Ricaldi-Contreras; Erik Santa-María-Huamani; Maylee Santiago-Esteban; Vicky Panduro-Correa

doi:10.54034/mic.e2689

Authors

María Herrera-Vara Universidad Nacional Hermilio Valdizan, Huanuco, Peru
Eduardo Ricaldi-Contreras Universidad Nacional Hermilio Valdizan, Huanuco, Peru
Erik Santa-María-Huamani Universidad Nacional Hermilio Valdizan, Huanuco, Peru
Maylee Santiago-Esteban Universidad Nacional Hermilio Valdizan, Huanuco, Peru
Vicky Panduro-Correa Universidad Nacional Hermilio Valdizan, Huanuco, Peru

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.54034/mic.e2689

Keywords:

snakebite envenoming, antivenom, premedication, antihistamines, hypersensitivity

Abstract

Background. Snakebite envenoming is a neglected tropical disease that kills thousands and leaves many more with permanent disabilities every year, especially in rural areas of low- and middle-income countries. Antivenom remains the only specific and truly effective treatment, but early adverse reactions, often anaphylactoid or allergic, are common and have led many clinicians to routinely give H1 antihistamines as premedication, even though solid evidence for doing so is lacking. This systematic review looks at whether prophylactic H1 antihistamines, compared with placebo or no premedication, actually reduce the risk of early, severe, or delayed reactions, as well as mortality, in patients receiving antivenom for snakebite envenoming. Methods. We conducted a systematic review following PRISMA 2020 guidelines. We searched PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane CENTRAL, LILACS, SCOPUS, EMBASE, and grey literature sources from October 14 to December 20, 2025. Only randomized controlled trials comparing prophylactic H1 antihistamines against control were included. Risk of bias was assessed using RoB 2, and certainty of evidence using GRADE. The protocol was prospectively registered on OSF. Results. Three RCTs were included (total n=1160 participants). Promethazine alone did not reduce early reactions (RR ≈0.96–1.00) or severe reactions (RR ≈0.93–1.00). Chlorpheniramine, given only together with hydrocortisone, appeared to lower reactions in one small trial, but the antihistamine’s independent effect could not be isolated. No studies systematically reported delayed reactions (serum sickness). Mortality was low overall and showed no clear differences linked to antihistamines. Evidence certainty was low for early and severe reactions, and very low for mortality and delayed reactions. Conclusions. Current evidence does not support routine use of H1 antihistamines alone as premedication to prevent antivenom reactions. Efforts should focus instead on high-quality antivenoms, close monitoring during infusion, and prompt treatment of reactions (especially with adrenaline when needed).

References

1. Afroz A, Siddiquea BN, Chowdhury HA, Jackson TN, Watt AD. Snakebite envenoming: A systematic review and metaanalysis of global morbidity and mortality. PLoS neglected tropical diseases. 2024;18(4): e0012080. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pntd.0012080.

2. Snakebite envenoming: a strategy for prevention and control. https://iris.who.int/items/c7f52049-ab44-42da-86f9-aad4dda0081c [Accessed 11th January 2026].

3. Gutiérrez JM, Calvete JJ, Habib AG, Harrison RA, Williams DJ, Warrell DA. Snakebite envenoming. Nature Reviews. Disease Primers. 2017;3: 17063. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrdp.2017.63.

4. Suhita R, Begum I, Rashid M, Chandran VP, Shastri SA, Kantamneni R, et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of global prevalence of neurotoxic and hemotoxic snakebite envenomation. Eastern Mediterranean Health Journal = La Revue De Sante De La Mediterranee Orientale = Al-Majallah Al-Sihhiyah Li-Sharq Al-Mutawassit. 2022;28(12): 909–916. https://doi.org/10.26719/emhj.22.090.

5. Williams DJ, Faiz MA, Abela-Ridder B, Ainsworth S, Bulfone TC, Nickerson AD, et al. Strategy for a globally coordinated response to a priority neglected tropical disease: Snakebite envenoming. PLoS neglected tropical diseases. 2019;13(2): e0007059. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pntd.0007059.

6. Guerra-Duarte C, de Sousa VP, de Oliveira-Sousa G, Gomes Mol MP. Use of snake antivenom in the Region of the Americas: a systematic review. Bulletin of the World Health Organization. 2025;103(12): 785–798. https://doi.org/10.2471/BLT.24.291941.

7. de Silva HA, Ryan NM, de Silva HJ. Adverse reactions to snake antivenom, and their prevention and treatment. British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology. 2016;81(3): 446–452. https://doi.org/10.1111/bcp.12739.

8. Caron EJ, Manock SR, Maudlin J, Koleski J, Theakston RDG, Warrell DA, et al. Apparent marked reduction in early antivenom reactions compared to historical controls: was it prophylaxis or method of administration? Toxicon: Official Journal of the International Society on Toxinology. 2009;54(6): 779–783. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.toxicon.2009.06.001.

9. Habib AG, Kuznik A, Hamza M, Abdullahi MI, Chedi BA, Chippaux JP, et al. Snakebite is Under Appreciated: Appraisal of Burden from West Africa. PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases. 2015;9(9): e0004088. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pntd.0004088.

10. Fan HW, Marcopito LF, Cardoso JL, França FO, Malaque CM, Ferrari RA, et al. Sequential randomised and double blind trial of promethazine prophylaxis against early anaphylactic reactions to antivenom for bothrops snake bites. BMJ. 1999;318(7196): 1451–1452. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.318.7196.1451.

11. Gawarammana IB, Kularatne SAM, Kumarasiri RPV, Senanayake N, Dissanayake WP, Ariyasena H. Parallel infusion of hydrocortisone ± chlorpheniramine bolus injection to prevent acute adverse reactions to antivenom for snakebites. Medical Journal of Australia. 2004;180(1). https://www.mja.com.au/journal/2004/180/1/parallelinfusion-hydrocortisone-chlorpheniramine-bolus-injectionprevent-

acute

12. de Silva HA, Pathmeswaran A, Ranasinha CD, Jayamanne S, Samarakoon SB, Hittharage A, et al. Low-dose adrenaline, promethazine, and hydrocortisone in the prevention of acute adverse reactions to antivenom following snakebite: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. PLoS medicine. 2011;8(5): e1000435. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000435.

13. Sriapha C, Rittilert P, Vasaruchapong T, Srisuma S, Wananukul W, Trakulsrichai S. Early Adverse Reactions to Snake Antivenom: Poison Center Data Analysis. Toxins. 2022;14(10). https://doi.org/10.3390/toxins14100694.

14. Elmorsy EM, Syed A, Chatha WA, Agarwal A, Shah SSH, Alrawili SAH, et al. Critical care management of snakebite envenomation: An overlooked frontier in the intensive care. Anaesthesia, Pain & Intensive Care. 2025;29(5): 382–392. https://doi.org/10.35975/apic.v29i5.2870.

15. Afroz A, Siddiquea BN, Chowdhury HA, Jackson TN, Watt AD. Snakebite envenoming: A systematic review and metaanalysis of global morbidity and mortality. PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases. 2024;18(4): e0012080. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pntd.0012080.

16. Iliyasu G, Dayyab FM, Michael GC, Hamza M, Habib MA, Gutiérrez JM, et al. Case fatality rate and burden of snakebite envenoming in children - A systematic review and meta-analysis. Toxicon: Official Journal of the International Society on Toxinology. 2023;234: 107299. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.toxicon.2023.107299.

17. Brenes-Chacon H, Gutiérrez JM, Avila-Aguero ML. Use of Antibiotics following Snakebite in the Era of Antimicrobial Stewardship. Toxins. 2024;16(1): 37. https://doi.org/10.3390/toxins16010037.