[Thrombopenia in treatment with mesalazine].

P. Seror

2000-09-23

Presse Medicale

Abstract:

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Effect of Remimazolam Supplementation on Propofol Requirements During Hysteroscopy: A Double-Blind, Dose-Response Study.

Yan-Hong Zhou,Shu-Xi Li,Lin Li,Chun-Mei Deng,Jian-Jun Shen,Dong-Xin Wang,Xin-Zhong Chen,Li-Li Xu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1213/ane.0000000000006921

2024-01-01

Abstract:BACKGROUND:Propofol is commonly used for procedural sedation but may increase side effects in a dose-dependent manner. Remimazolam, an ultrashort-acting benzodiazepine, has been approved for procedural sedation but may delay awakening. This study tested the hypothesis that remimazolam as a supplement reduces effect-site propofol concentration (Ceprop) required to suppress response to cervical dilation in patients undergoing hysteroscopy.METHODS:One hundred and fifty patients who were scheduled for hysteroscopy were randomized to receive 0, 0.05, 0.1, 0.15, or 0.2 mg·kg-1 intravenous remimazolam, followed by a bolus of sufentanil 0.15 μg⋅kg-1, and a target-controlled propofol infusion. The initial target Ceprop was 3.5 μg·mL-1 and was increased or decreased in subsequent patients by steps of 0.5 μg·mL-1 according to whether there was loss of response to cervical dilation in the previous patient. We used up-down sequential analysis to determine values of Ceprop that suppressed response to cervical dilation in 50% of patients (EC50).RESULTS:The EC50 of propofol for suppressing response to cervical dilation was lower in patients given 0.1 mg·kg-1 (2.08 [95% confidence interval, CI, 1.88-2.28] μg·mL-1), 0.15 mg⋅kg-1 (1.83 [1.56-2.10] μg·mL-1), and 0.2 mg⋅kg-1 (1.43 [1.27-1.58] μg·mL-1) remimazolam than those given 0 mg⋅kg-1 (3.67 [3.49-3.86] μg·mL-1) or 0.05 mg⋅kg-1 (3.47 [3.28-3.67] μg·mL-1) remimazolam (all were P < .005). Remimazolam at doses of 0.1, 0.15, and 0.2 mg·kg-1 decreased EC50 of propofol by 43.3% (95% CI, 41.3%-45.5%), 50.3% (48.0%-52.8%), and 61.2% (58.7%-63.8%), respectively, from baseline (remimazolam 0 mg⋅kg-1). Propofol consumption was lower in patients given 0.1 mg⋅kg-1 (4.15 [3.51-5.44] mg·kg-1), 0.15 mg⋅kg-1 (3.54 [3.16-4.46] mg·kg-1), and 0.2 mg⋅kg-1 (2.74 [1.73-4.01] mg·kg-1) remimazolam than those given 0 mg⋅kg-1 (6.09 [4.99-7.35] mg·kg-1) remimazolam (all were P < .005). Time to anesthesia emergence did not differ significantly among the 5 groups.CONCLUSIONS:For women undergoing hysteroscopic procedures, remimazolam at doses from 0.1 to 0.2 mg·kg-1 reduced the EC50 of propofol inhibiting response to cervical dilation and the total propofol requirement. Whether the combination could improve perioperative outcomes deserves further investigation.
Efficacy and Safety of Remimazolam in Endoscopic Sedation—A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Xianlin Zhu,Hongbai Wang,Su Yuan,Yinan Li,Yuan Jia,Zhe Zhang,Fuxia Yan,Zaiping Wang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2021.655042

IF: 3.9

2021-07-26

Frontiers in Medicine

Abstract:Background: The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to investigate the efficacy and safety of remimazolam in clinical endoscopic procedure sedation. Methods: The authors searched the databases of PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library for studies published until January 2, 2021, that reported remimazolam sedation for endoscopic procedures. The sedative efficiency and the incidence of adverse events were assessed as outcomes. Cochrane Review Manager Software 5.3 was used to perform the statistical analyses. Results: Seven relevant studies involving a total of 1,996 patients were identified. We conducted a meta-analysis of the different controls used in the studies, that is, the placebo, midazolam, and propofol. The results demonstrated that remimazolam had a strong sedative effect, and its sedative efficiency was significantly higher than that of placebo [OR = 0.01, 95% CI: (0.00, 0.10), I 2 = 30%, p <0.00001]. The sedative efficiency of remimazolam was significantly higher than that of midazolam [OR = 0.12, 95% CI: (0.08, 0.21), I 2 = 0%, p < 0.00001] but lesser than that of propofol [OR = 12.22, 95% CI: (1.58, 94.47), I 2 = 0%, p = 0.02]. Regarding the adverse events, remimazolam is associated with a lower incidence of hypotension than placebo and midazolam. Similarly, remimazolam was associated with a lower incidence of hypotension and hypoxemia than propofol. Conclusions: Remimazolam is a safe and effective sedative for patients undergoing endoscopic procedures. The sedative efficiency of remimazolam was significantly higher than that of midazolam but slightly lower than that of propofol. However, the respiration and circulation inhibitory effects of remimazolam were weaker than those of midazolam and propofol.

medicine, general & internal
Remimazolam versus traditional sedatives for procedural sedation: a systematic review and meta-analysis of efficacy and safety outcomes

Yun Tang,Xiaobo Yang,Yuan Yu,Huaqing Shu,Jiqian Xu,Ruiting Li,Xiaojing Zou,Shiying Yuan,You Shang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.23736/S0375-9393.22.16631-9

Abstract:Introduction: Remimazolam is a novel and ultra-short-acting benzodiazepine currently approved for procedural sedation and induction of general anaesthesia, with a possible indication for ICU sedation. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of remimazolam and traditional sedatives for patients undergoing procedural sedation. Evidence acquisition: We systematically searched Cochrane Library, Embase, PubMed, Web of Science and ClinicalTrials.gov for randomized controlled trials of procedural sedation performed with remimazolam versus traditional sedatives. Data from the eligible studies were combined to calculate pooled risk ratio or standardized mean difference. Evidence synthesis: Eleven studies of 2356 patients met the inclusion criteria. The results showed that remimazolam was associated with a higher procedure success rate (RR: 1.28, 95% CI: 1.07 to 1.52, P=0.006; I2=99%), a shorter duration of recovery after procedure (SMD: -0.56, 95% CI: -0.98, -0.14, P=0.009; I2=89%), and an earlier patient discharge after procedure (SMD: -0.37, 95% CI: -0.49, -0.25, P<0.00001; I2=0%) in comparison with traditional sedatives. There were no statistically significant differences in onset time, procedure time, and cognitive recovery between remimazolam and traditional sedatives groups. Remimazolam significantly decreased the rate of bradycardia (RR: 0.65, 95% CI: 0.43, 0.97, P=0.04; I2=0%), hypotension (RR: 0.57, 95% CI: 0.40, 0.80, P=0.001; I2=80%), and respiratory depression/hypoxia (RR: 0.46, 95% CI: 0.25, 0.83, P=0.01; I2=61%) compared to traditional sedatives. Conclusions: Remimazolam is a safe and effective sedative for procedural sedation on account of a higher success procedure rate, a faster recovery, a shorter discharge time, and a superior safety profile in comparison with traditional sedatives. Larger sample-sized and well-designed clinical trials are needed to verify our finding.
Are pediatric patients more susceptible to major renal injury from blunt trauma? A comparative study.

Scott L. Brown,J. Elder,J. Spirnak

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5347(01)63071-4

1998-07-01

Abstract:
The clinical role of remimazolam: Protocol for a scoping review

Christina V Intzilaki,Jasmin Davodi,Peter Vilmann,Ann M Møller

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/aas.14421

Abstract:Background: Remimazolam, a novel benzodiazepine, shows promise as an alternative to traditional sedatives and hypnotic agents in procedural sedation and general anaesthesia. While preliminary research indicates potential advantages over conventional agents, such as faster onset, predictable duration, and improved safety profile, the extent and quality of existing evidence remain unclear. This scoping review aims to investigate the current clinical role of remimazolam and provide a broad and comprehensive overview. Methods: The proposed review will adhere to the JBI methodology for scoping reviews and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis for Scoping Reviews. A comprehensive search will be conducted across major peer-reviewed databases and grey literature will be sought. All studies involving individuals undergoing procedural sedation or general anaesthesia with remimazolam will be eligible. Data extraction will encompass trial and participant characteristics, intervention details, reported outcomes, comparative efficacy versus midazolam and propofol, patient and operator experience and economic costs. Results: We will provide a descriptive summary supplemented by statistics, figures and tables where applicable. Conclusion: The outlined scoping review aims to assess the clinical use of remimazolam in procedural sedation and as the hypnotic component of general anaesthesia. The review will map the current body of evidence of remimazolam and identify knowledge gaps, contributing to understanding its clinical implications and guiding future research efforts in procedural sedation and general anaesthesia.
Remimazolam versus propofol for procedural sedation and anesthesia: a systemic review and meta-analysis

Junbao Zhang,Zhuoma Cairen,Liwen Shi,Shasha Pang,Yingjie Shao,Yun Wang,Zhihong Lu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.23736/S0375-9393.22.16817-3

Abstract:Introduction: The aim of this systemic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of remimazolam compared with propofol when used for procedural sedation and general anesthesia. Evidence acquisition: Data sources were PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and ClinicaTrials.gov, searched up to March 21, 2022. RCTs comparing remimazolam and propofol in patients undergoing procedural sedation or general anesthesia were searched. Pooled risk ratios (RRs) or standardized mean difference, 95% CIs, and P values were estimated for end points using the fixed- and random-effects statistical model. The trial sequential analysis was used for sensitivity analysis. Evidence synthesis: Ten studies with 1813 patients were included. Compared with propofol, remimazolam had lower success rate of sedation/general anesthesia (RR, 1.02; 95% CI: 1.01 to 1.03; P=0.004; N.=1402). However, remimazolam had lower incidence of hypoxia, hypotension, and injection pain than propofol. No difference in incidence of nausea and vomiting, time to awake and to discharge was found. Subgroup studies showed that remimazolam had lower success rate than propofol when used for procedural sedation, not general anesthesia. The trial sequential analysis adjusted confidence interval was 1.01 to 1.04 for success rate. Conclusions: Remimazolam could be alternatively used in procedural sedation and general anesthesia. Additional research is needed to develop higher quality evidence on the use of remimazolam, especially in general anesthesia.
Remimazolam versus propofol for procedural sedation: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Yu Chang,Yun-Ting Huang,Kuan-Yu Chi,Yen-Ta Huang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.15495

IF: 3.061

2023-06-12

PeerJ

Abstract:Background: To improve patient tolerability and satisfaction as well as minimize complications, procedural sedation has been widely used. Propofol is the most widely used agent for induction of anesthesia and sedation by anesthesiologists. With a different mechanism compared to propofol, remimazolam is a new short-acting GABA-A receptor agonist. It is an ester-based benzodiazepine. This meta-analysis aims to clarify the efficacy and safety of remimazolam versus propofol for procedure sedation. Methods: Electronic databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing efficacy or safety of remimazolam versus propofol. Meta-analysis were conducted using RStudio with "metafor" package with random-effects model. Results: A total of twelve RCTs were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled results demonstrated that patients with remimazolam for procedural sedation had lower risk of bradycardia (OR 0.28, 95% CI [0.14-0.57]), hypotension (OR 0.26, 95% CI [0.22-0.32]), and respiratory depression (OR 0.22, 95% CI [0.14-0.36]). There was no difference in the risk of developing postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) (OR 0.65, 95% CI [0.15-2.79]) and dizziness (OR 0.93, 95% CI [0.53-1.61]) between the remimazolam and propofol groups. Using remimazolam for procedural sedation is significantly associated with less injection pain compared to propofol (OR 0.06, 95% CI [0.03-0.13]). Regarding the sedation efficacy, there was no difference in sedation success rate or time to loss of consciousness, recover and discharge between the remimazolam and the propofol groups. Conclusions: Based on our meta-analysis, patients receiving procedural sedation with remimazolam had lower risk of bradycardia, hypotension, respiratory depression and injection pain compared with propofol. On the other hand, there was no difference in sedation success rate, risk of PONV, dizziness, time to LOC, recovery and discharge between these two sedatives. Prospero registration number: CRD42022362950.
Shamanism, Psychosis and Autonomous Imagination

M. Stephen,L. Suryani

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1005528028869

2000-03-01

Abstract:
The comparison of remimazolam and midazolam for the sedation of gastrointestinal endoscopy: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled studies

Lin Zhang,Chun Li,Chuncheng Zhao,Yulai You,Jian Xu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.4314/ahs.v22i2.44

Abstract:Introduction: Remimazolam and midazolam are used for the sedation of gastrointestinal endoscopy, but their efficacy remains controversial. We conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the sedation of remimazolam with midazolam for gastrointestinal endoscopy. Methods: PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the influence of remimazolam versus midazolam on gastrointestinal endoscopy were included. Two investigators independently have searched articles, extracted data, and assessed the quality of included studies. This meta-analysis was performed using the random-effect model. Results: Three RCTs involving 528 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Compared with midazolam for gastrointestinal endoscopy, remimazolam was associated with higher procedure success (OR=9.78; 95% CI=1.48 to 64.71; P=0.02), lower need for rescue medication (OR=0.09; 95% CI=0.01 to 0.80; P=0.03), shorter total recall (Std. MD=0.93; 95% CI=0.15 to 1.72; P=0.02) and delayed recall (Std. MD=0.44; 95% CI=0.05 to 0.83; P=0.03), reduced incidence of hypotenson (OR=0.39; 95% CI=0.25 to 0.62; P<0.0001) and adverse events (OR=0.36; 95% CI=0.17 to 0.79; P=0.01), but had no obvious influence on fully alert (Std. MD=-0.75; 95% CI=-1.58 to 0.08; P=0.08). Conclusions: Remimazolam demonstrated better efficacy and safety for the sedation of gastrointestinal endoscopy compared to midazolam.
Efficacy of remimazolam versus midazolam for procedural sedation: post hoc integrated analyses of three phase 3 clinical trials

Van-Anh Dao,Frank Schippers,Thomas Stöhr

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1055/a-1743-1936

2022-04-14

Abstract:Background and study aims Remimazolam is an ultra-short acting, fast onset/fast offset benzodiazepine for intravenous use in procedural sedation, general anesthesia, and Intensive Care Unit sedation. The aim of this work was to compare the efficacy of remimazolam versus midazolam dosed according to medical practice (real-world midazolam) and midazolam dosed according to US prescribing information (on-label midazolam) for procedural sedation. Patients and methods This post hoc analysis was performed using integrated data from three randomized, placebo, and active (midazolam) controlled, phase 3 clinical trials in patients undergoing colonoscopy and bronchoscopy. Statistical comparisons between treatment groups, without adjustment for potential confounding factors, were exploratory and observational in nature. Results The mean ± SD dose of midazolam in the real-world midazolam group was 6.2 ± 3.1 mg, compared with 3.5 ± 1.5 mg in the on-label midazolam group. remimazolam showed significantly shorter time from first dose to start of procedure (median 3 minutes) compared to on-label midazolam (median 8 minutes). Recovery time from end of procedure to fully alert was significantly shorter for remimazolam (median 6 minutes) than real-world midazolam (median 14 minutes), enabling earlier transfer of patients from the procedure room to the recovery area with a lower requirement for patient monitoring. The onset and recovery times with remimazolam showed significantly less inter-patient variability than with on-label midazolam and real-world midazolam, respectively. Patients treated with remimazolam received significantly less fentanyl for analgesia (78.2 ± 28.4 µg) than did those treated with real-world midazolam (113.6 ± 60.1 µg) and on-label midazolam (92.5 ± 40.0 µg). Conclusions Remimazolam offers advantages over midazolam in terms of faster recovery and less fentanyl requirement, which may facilitate increased procedural throughput in clinical practice.
The Availability and Safety Study of Remimazolam Besylate for Injection on Sedation of ERAS Patients Under Mechanical Ventilation in ICU: Protocol for a Randomized, Open-Label, Controlled Trial

Shengjun Liu,Longxiang Su,Bo Zhang,Huaiwu He,Zunzhu Li,Qi Li,Qianlin Wang,Fang Smith,Yun Long

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2021.735473

IF: 3.9

2021-11-05

Frontiers in Medicine

Abstract:Introduction: The most common physiological and psychological disorders associated with critical care patients are pain and anxiety. Sedatives and analgesics are commonly used to relieve these symptoms. However, the adverse effects of sedatives and analgesics are common and inevitable. As a new type of sedative drug, limited number of trials are available to evaluate Remimazolam Besylate's availability and safety compared with propofol. Methods: This study is a single center, randomized, open-label, controlled trial. A total of 84 patients who meet ERAS criteria and receive mechanical ventilation in ICU, aged ≥18 years old will be included. Patients will be randomized (1:1) into two groups: Remimazolam Besylate group and Propofol group. The Primary outcomes includes satisfaction rate of sedation and incidence rate of major clinical events. Secondary outcomes including incidence of delirium, time to weaning and extubation, Difficulty of nursing RASS, BIS and PI, 28-days survival, side-effect and vital signs during medications, total dose and dose per kilogram body weight of analgesic and sedatives and incidence of rescue therapy in experimental group. Ethics and Dissemination: This trial has been approved by the ethics boards of Peking Union Medical College Hospital. Recruitment began in January 2022 and will continue until June 2022. Dissemination plans include presentations at scientific conferences, scientific publications, stakeholder engagement efforts and presentation to the public via lay media outlets. Clinical Trial Registration: www.ClinicalTrials.gov , identifier: NCT04947345

medicine, general & internal
Sliding flap advancement for the treatment of high level fistulae

J. Wedell,P. Meier zu Eissen,G. Banzhaf,L. Kleine

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/bjs.1800740522

1987-05-01

Abstract:The technique of sliding flap advancement for the treatment of high anal fistulae is described. The technique is not suitable for cases with an acute abscess and is reserved for patients with a well‐established chronic fistula track. Thirty patients with anal fistulae were treated by sliding flap advancement from 1980 to 1984. Twenty‐nine patients had satisfactory results. With a follow‐up ranging from 18 months to 4 years no recurrence of fistulae or abscess were observed. The advantages of the advancement flap technique over the staging division technique with application of a seton and over the rerouting technique are discussed.
The rate and pattern of nucleotide substitution in Drosophila mitochondrial DNA.

K. Tamura

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/OXFORDJOURNALS.MOLBEV.A040763

IF: 10.7

1992-09-01

Molecular Biology and Evolution

Abstract:The nucleotide sequences of a segment of mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) have been determined for nine species or subspecies of the subgenus Drosophila of the genus Drosophila. This segment contains two complete protein-coding genes (i.e., NADH dehydrogenase subunit 1 and cytochrome b) and a transfer RNA gene (tRNA(ser)). The G+C content at third-codon positions for the two protein-coding genes was 1.5 times higher than that in the D. melanogaster species group, which belongs to the subgenus Sophophora. However, there was a substantial difference between the nucleotide frequencies of G and C. The number of nucleotide substitutions per silent site was more than three times higher than that for nuclear DNA, although it was only 60% of that for mammalian mtDNA. Both parametric and nonparametric analyses revealed a strong transition-transversion bias in nucleotide substitution, as was observed in mammalian mtDNA. Moreover, the rate of substitution of A and T for G and C is higher than that for the opposite direction. This bias seems to be responsible for the extremely A+T-rich base composition of Drosophila mtDNA. It is also noted that the rate of transitional change between A and G is higher than that between T and C.
Efficacy and safety of remimazolam in bronchoscopic sedation: A meta-analysis

Ying Zhou,Cheng Zhao,Yi-Xun Tang,Ji-Tong Liu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.12998/wjcc.v12.i6.1120

2024-02-26

World Journal of Clinical Cases

Abstract:BACKGROUND Remimazolam is a new benzodiazepine used for procedural sedation and general anesthesia. Several studies have used remimazolam for bendable bronchoscopy. AIM To assess the safety and efficacy of remimazolam for sedation in patients undergoing bendable bronchoscopy by performing a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). METHODS We searched the EMBASE, PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases for RCTs on bendable bronchoscopic procedural sedation with remimazolam vs conventional sedatives (CS). RESULTS Five studies with 1080 cases were included. Remimazolam had the same sedation success rate compared with CS [relative risk (RR): 1.35, 95%CI: 0.60-3.05, P = 0.474, I 2 = 99.6%]. However, remimazolam was associated with a lower incidence of hypotension (RR: 0.61; 95%CI: 0.40-0.95, P = 0.027; I 2 = 65.1%) and a lower incidence of respiratory depression (RR: 0.50, 95%CI: 0.33-0.77, P = 0.002, I 2 = 42.3%). A subgroup analysis showed a higher success rate of sedation with remimazolam than midazolam (RR: 2.45, 95%CI: 1.76-3.42, P < 0.001). Compared with propofol, the incidence of hypotension (RR: 0.45, 95%CI: 0.32-0.64, P < 0.001, I 2 = 0.0%), respiratory depression (RR: 0.48, 95%CI: 0.30-0.76, P = 0.002, I 2 = 78.4%), hypoxemia (RR: 0.36, 95%CI: 0.15-0.87, P = 0.023), and injection pain (RR: 0.04, 95%CI: 0.01-0.28, P = 0.001) were lower. CONCLUSION Remimazolam is safe and effective during bronchoscopy. The sedation success rate was similar to that in the CS group. However, remimazolam has a higher safety profile, with fewer inhibitory effects on respiration and circulation.

medicine, general & internal
Effect of remimazolam vs propofol in high-risk patients undergoing upper gastrointestinal endoscopy: a non-inferiority randomized controlled trial

Zhi Li,Daming Yuan,Yu Yu,Jie Xu,Weili Yang,Li Chen,Nanbo Luo

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-024-07934-z

IF: 2.728

2024-01-29

Trials

Abstract:Procedural sedation is essential for optimizing upper gastrointestinal endoscopy, particularly in high-risk patients with multiple underlying diseases. Respiratory and circulatory complications present significant challenges for procedural sedation in this population. This non-inferiority randomized controlled trial aims to investigate the safety and comfort of remimazolam compared to propofol for procedural sedation during upper gastrointestinal endoscopy in high-risk patients.

medicine, research & experimental
Remimazolam for sedation and anesthesia in children: Protocol for a scoping review

Vladimir Brüggemann,Tom G Hansen

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/aas.14411

Abstract:Background: Remimazolam, a novel intravenous benzodiazepine recently approved by both the European Medicines Agency and the Food and Drug Agency, holds significant promise in clinical practice. Its pharmacodynamic profile closely mirrors that of midazolam, while its pharmacokinetics properties bear resemblance to remifentanil. Research in adult populations continues to accumulate, but the pediatric studies' pace is not significant. This scoping review aims to methodically scrutinize published studies, clinical trials, observational research, case reports, and pertinent literature to offer a comprehensive insight into the existing understanding of remimazolam in pediatric sedation and anesthesia. The synthesis of gathered evidence will discern lacunae in the literature, direct forthcoming investigations, and enlighten clinical practices. Methods: The review will adhere to the guidelines outlined by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) for Scoping Review. A meticulous search strategy will be executed across prominent peer-reviewed databases, with concerted efforts to identify relevant gray literature. All primary investigations involving the administration of remimazolam in pediatric populations will be encompassed within the scope of this review. Results: The encompassed studies will be elucidated through a narrative synopsis, complemented by descriptive statistical analyses of quantitative data where deemed applicable. Conclusion: The planned scoping review aims to delineate the existing evidence regarding the utilization of remimazolam in pediatric anesthesia and sedation. It will discern areas of knowledge deficiency, provide guidance for future inquiries, and enhance clinical practices within the field.
The safety and efficacy of remimazolam tosylate for induction and maintenance of general anesthesia in pediatric patients undergoing elective surgery: Study protocol for a multicenter, randomized, single-blind, positive-controlled clinical trial

Yu-Bo Fang,Cheng-Yu Wang,Yu-Qing Gao,Yu-Hang Cai,Jia Chen,Xu-Lin Zhang,Le-Qi Dong,Wang-Ning Shang-Guan,Hua-Cheng Liu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fphar.2023.1090608

IF: 5.6

2023-02-11

Frontiers in Pharmacology

Abstract:Introduction: Remimazolam is an ultra-short-acting benzodiazepine sedative agent commonly used in general anesthesia, procedural sedation, and intensive care unit (ICU) sedation. This study aimed to explore the efficacy and safety of remimazolam versus propofol for the induction and maintenance of general anesthesia in preschool-age children undergoing elective surgery. Methods and analysis: In this multicenter, randomized, single-blind, positive-controlled non-inferior clinical trial, one hundred ninety-two children aged 3–6 years will be randomly allocated as a 3:1 ratio into two groups: Group R with an intravenous dose of remimazolam 0.3 mg/kg for the induction of anesthesia followed by a constant infusion rate of remimazolam 1–3 mg/kg/h to maintain anesthesia, and Group P with an intravenous dose of propofol 2.5 mg/kg for the induction of anesthesia followed by a constant infusion rate of propofol 4–12 mg/kg/h to maintain anesthesia. The primary outcome will be the rate of the successful induction and maintenance of anesthesia. The secondary outcomes will include the time to LoC, the Bispectral Index (BIS) value, awakening time, extubation time, post-anesthesia care unit (PACU) discharge time, usage of additional sedative drugs during the induction period, usage of remedial drugs in PACU, emergence delirium, pain in PACU, behavior scores at day 3 after surgery, parental and anesthesiologists' satisfaction, and adverse events. Ethics and dissemination: This study has been approved by the ethics review boards at all participating hospitals. The Ethics Committee of the Second Affiliated Hospital and Yuying Children's Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University (Reference No. LCKY 2020-380, November 13, 2020) is the central ethics committee.

pharmacology & pharmacy
Efficacy and safety of remimazolam tosylate for patients undergoing off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting: a study protocol for a non-inferiority randomised controlled trial in China

Dan Wang,Min Cui,Xue Wu,Min Niu,Tianhao Yu,Yuzhu Zhang,Yifeng Yue,Qingting Wang,Boxuan Xu,Nianhai Feng,Jiguo Si

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2024-085519

IF: 3.006

2024-11-20

BMJ Open

Abstract:Introduction Maintaining haemodynamic stability is crucial but challenging during the induction and maintenance of general anaesthesia (GA) in patients undergoing off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting (OPCABG). Remimazolam tosylate is a novel ultra-short-acting benzodiazepine with minimal cardiovascular depression. Currently, non-inferior studies comparing the haemodynamic changes induced by remimazolam and etomidate are limited. This study aims to assess the efficacy and safety of remimazolam tosylate for the induction and maintenance of GA in patients undergoing OPCABG. Method and analysis This two-armed non-inferiority randomised controlled trial will include 88 patients aged 18–75 years who are scheduled for OPCABG. Patients will be randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive either remimazolam tosylate or etomidate and propofol for anaesthesia induction and maintenance. The primary outcome will be the fluctuation of mean artery pressure during anaesthesia induction. Secondary outcomes will include adverse events, adverse drug reactions, the cumulative dosage of vasoactive drugs, vital signs and bispectral index values at different time points, lengths of postoperative mechanical ventilation and tracheal intubation, lengths of intensive care unit stay and hospital stay and hospital mortality. Analyses will be conducted using both the intention-to-treat approach and the per-protocol approach. Ethics and dissemination This study was approved by the Ethics Committee of Zibo Central Hospital (No. 2024001). The trial results will be submitted to an international peer-reviewed journal. Trial registration number ChiCTR.gov.cn: ChiCTR2400079615.

medicine, general & internal
Preterm delivery risk factors in singletons born after in vitro fertilization procedures.

H. Ban Frangež,S. Korošec,I. Verdenik,Vanja Kotar,Urska Kladnik,E. Vrtacnik Bokal

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejogrb.2014.03.002

2014-05-01

Abstract:
Comparison of 95% Effective Dose of Remimazolam Besylate and Propofol for Gastroscopy Sedation on Older Patients: A Single‐centre Randomized Controlled Trial

Enci Ye,Keyang Wu,Hui Ye,Wenyuan Zhang,Lihua Chu,Kai Zhang,Guohao Xie,Yue Jin,Xiangming Fang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/bcp.15839

2023-01-01

British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology

Abstract:Aim: Advanced age is an important risk factor for adverse events during procedural sedation. Remimazolam is safe and effective in adults’ gastroscopy sedation. The ideal dose and availability for elderly patients are not well known. We aim to investigate its 95% effective dose (ED95) for elderly patients undergoing gastroscopy, and to assess its safety and efficacy, with propofol as the comparison. Methods: The trial consists of two parts, patients who are over 65 and scheduled for elective outpatient painless gastroscopy were enrolled. In the first part, Dixon’s up-and-down methodology was used to determine the ED95 of remimazolam and propofol for inhibiting body movement during gastroscopic insertion, in combination with 0.2μg/kg remifentanil. In the second part, patients in each group received 0.2μg/kg remifentanil and the ED95 dose of the study drug for sedation induction, adding supplemental doses to maintain sedation depth when necessary. The primary outcome was the incidence of adverse events. The secondary outcome was the recovery time. Results: The ED95 of remimazolam and propofol induction dose were 0.204mg/kg [95% CI (0.175–0.390) mg/kg] and 1.994 mg/kg [95% CI (1. 739–5.955) mg/kg] respectively in gastroscopy. Adverse events were reported in 40.6% of patients in the remimazolam group and 83.1% in the propofol group (p<0.001), whereas the remimazolam group showed a higher incidence of hiccup(p=0.017). A shorter time to awakening (p<0.05) in the remimazolam group was observed. Conclusion: For elderly patients undergoing gastroscopy, the ED95 dose of remimazolam is a safer alternative than propofol when inducing the same sedation depth.

[Thrombopenia in treatment with mesalazine].

Effect of Remimazolam Supplementation on Propofol Requirements During Hysteroscopy: A Double-Blind, Dose-Response Study.

Efficacy and Safety of Remimazolam in Endoscopic Sedation—A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Remimazolam versus traditional sedatives for procedural sedation: a systematic review and meta-analysis of efficacy and safety outcomes

Are pediatric patients more susceptible to major renal injury from blunt trauma? A comparative study.

The clinical role of remimazolam: Protocol for a scoping review

Remimazolam versus propofol for procedural sedation and anesthesia: a systemic review and meta-analysis

Remimazolam versus propofol for procedural sedation: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Shamanism, Psychosis and Autonomous Imagination

The comparison of remimazolam and midazolam for the sedation of gastrointestinal endoscopy: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled studies

Efficacy of remimazolam versus midazolam for procedural sedation: post hoc integrated analyses of three phase 3 clinical trials

The Availability and Safety Study of Remimazolam Besylate for Injection on Sedation of ERAS Patients Under Mechanical Ventilation in ICU: Protocol for a Randomized, Open-Label, Controlled Trial

Sliding flap advancement for the treatment of high level fistulae

The rate and pattern of nucleotide substitution in Drosophila mitochondrial DNA.

Efficacy and safety of remimazolam in bronchoscopic sedation: A meta-analysis

Effect of remimazolam vs propofol in high-risk patients undergoing upper gastrointestinal endoscopy: a non-inferiority randomized controlled trial

Remimazolam for sedation and anesthesia in children: Protocol for a scoping review

The safety and efficacy of remimazolam tosylate for induction and maintenance of general anesthesia in pediatric patients undergoing elective surgery: Study protocol for a multicenter, randomized, single-blind, positive-controlled clinical trial

Efficacy and safety of remimazolam tosylate for patients undergoing off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting: a study protocol for a non-inferiority randomised controlled trial in China

Preterm delivery risk factors in singletons born after in vitro fertilization procedures.

Comparison of 95% Effective Dose of Remimazolam Besylate and Propofol for Gastroscopy Sedation on Older Patients: A Single‐centre Randomized Controlled Trial