Comparison of remimazolam-remifentanil and propofol-remifentanil during laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Tae Young Lee, Min A Kim, Deuk Won Eom, Ji Wook Jung, Chan Jong Chung, Sang Yoong Park
{"title":"Comparison of remimazolam-remifentanil and propofol-remifentanil during laparoscopic cholecystectomy.","authors":"Tae Young Lee,&nbsp;Min A Kim,&nbsp;Deuk Won Eom,&nbsp;Ji Wook Jung,&nbsp;Chan Jong Chung,&nbsp;Sang Yoong Park","doi":"10.17085/apm.22252","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Remimazolam is a novel benzodiazepine with fast onset and short half-life. We compared the effects of remimazolam and propofol on recovery profiles for general anesthesia in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We randomly assigned 108 patients to either a remimazolam (n=54) or propofol (n=54) group. Remimazolam and propofol were used for induction and maintanance of anesthesia. Following anesthesia, we recorded the time until an Aldrete score of 9 was achieved as the primary surrogate marker of complete recovery. The time to reach a Modified Observer's Assessment of Alertness/Sedation (MOAA/S) score of 2 and the time from the end of anesthesia to eye opening time, recovery time of orientation, time to spontaneous breathing, extubation time, and the time required for analgesics were measured. Heart rate, blood pressure, and bispectral index were assessed before, during, and after pneumoperitoneum.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We included 101 patients in the analysis. In the remimazolam group, it took longer to reach an Aldrete score of 9 after the drug infusion ended (P = 0.031). There was no difference in the time to reach MOAA/S 2 between the two groups. The time to eye opening, recovery time of orientation, and time required for analgesics were longer and heart rate was higher in the remimazolam group. Neither blood pressure, nor extubation time differed between groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Remimazolam and propofol provided safe induction and maintenance of anesthesia in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy. The recovery time from anesthesia was longer than that with propofol. Fewer hemodynamic changes were observed with remimazolam, but further studies are needed.</p>","PeriodicalId":7801,"journal":{"name":"Anesthesia and pain medicine","volume":"18 3","pages":"252-259"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/d6/53/apm-22252.PMC10410549.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Anesthesia and pain medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17085/apm.22252","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Remimazolam is a novel benzodiazepine with fast onset and short half-life. We compared the effects of remimazolam and propofol on recovery profiles for general anesthesia in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Methods: We randomly assigned 108 patients to either a remimazolam (n=54) or propofol (n=54) group. Remimazolam and propofol were used for induction and maintanance of anesthesia. Following anesthesia, we recorded the time until an Aldrete score of 9 was achieved as the primary surrogate marker of complete recovery. The time to reach a Modified Observer's Assessment of Alertness/Sedation (MOAA/S) score of 2 and the time from the end of anesthesia to eye opening time, recovery time of orientation, time to spontaneous breathing, extubation time, and the time required for analgesics were measured. Heart rate, blood pressure, and bispectral index were assessed before, during, and after pneumoperitoneum.

Results: We included 101 patients in the analysis. In the remimazolam group, it took longer to reach an Aldrete score of 9 after the drug infusion ended (P = 0.031). There was no difference in the time to reach MOAA/S 2 between the two groups. The time to eye opening, recovery time of orientation, and time required for analgesics were longer and heart rate was higher in the remimazolam group. Neither blood pressure, nor extubation time differed between groups.

Conclusions: Remimazolam and propofol provided safe induction and maintenance of anesthesia in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy. The recovery time from anesthesia was longer than that with propofol. Fewer hemodynamic changes were observed with remimazolam, but further studies are needed.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
雷马唑仑-瑞芬太尼与异丙酚-瑞芬太尼在腹腔镜胆囊切除术中的比较。
背景:雷马唑仑是一种起效快、半衰期短的新型苯二氮卓类药物。我们比较了雷马唑仑和异丙酚对腹腔镜胆囊切除术患者全身麻醉后恢复情况的影响。方法:108例患者随机分为雷马唑仑组(n=54)和异丙酚组(n=54)。雷马唑仑和异丙酚用于麻醉诱导和维持。麻醉后,我们记录到Aldrete评分达到9分的时间,作为完全恢复的主要替代指标。测量两组患者达到MOAA/S评分2分的时间、麻醉结束至睁眼时间、定向恢复时间、自主呼吸时间、拔管时间、使用镇痛药所需时间。在气腹前、气腹中、气腹后分别评估心率、血压和双谱指数。结果:我们纳入了101例患者。雷马唑仑组药物输注结束后Aldrete评分达到9分所需时间更长(P = 0.031)。两组达到MOAA/S 2的时间无差异。雷马唑仑组患者睁眼时间、定向恢复时间、镇痛时间更长,心率更高。两组之间的血压和拔管时间均无差异。结论:雷马唑仑和异丙酚可安全诱导和维持腹腔镜胆囊切除术患者的麻醉。麻醉后恢复时间较异丙酚组长。使用雷马唑仑观察到的血流动力学改变较少,但需要进一步的研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Anesthetic neurotoxicity in the developing brain: an update on theinsights and implications for fetal surgery Extubation and removal of supraglottic airway devices in pediatric anesthesia Relationship between intraoperative requirement for anesthetics and postoperative analgesic consumption in laparoscopic colectomy: a randomized controlled double-blinded study Opioid-free anesthesia using a combination of ketamine and dexmedetomidine in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a randomized controlled trial How does circadian rhythm affect postoperative pain after pediatric acute appendicitis surgery?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1