Efficacy and safety of remimazolam versus propofol for intraoperative sedation during regional anesthesia: A phase II, multicenter, randomized, active-controlled, single-blind clinical trial

Ibrain Pub Date : 2024-06-16 DOI:10.1002/ibra.12163
Ting-Ting Li, Lu Yin, Yue-Xin Huang, Xiu-Hong Wang, Yan-Huan Wei, Yong Wang, Shi-Wei Yang, Genoveva B. da Graca Cunha, Fei Liu
{"title":"Efficacy and safety of remimazolam versus propofol for intraoperative sedation during regional anesthesia: A phase II, multicenter, randomized, active-controlled, single-blind clinical trial","authors":"Ting-Ting Li,&nbsp;Lu Yin,&nbsp;Yue-Xin Huang,&nbsp;Xiu-Hong Wang,&nbsp;Yan-Huan Wei,&nbsp;Yong Wang,&nbsp;Shi-Wei Yang,&nbsp;Genoveva B. da Graca Cunha,&nbsp;Fei Liu","doi":"10.1002/ibra.12163","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of remimazolam for intraoperative sedation during regional anesthesia. It was a phase II-multicenter, randomized, single-blind, parallel-group, active-controlled clinical trial (No. ChiCTR2100054956). From May 6, 2021 to July 4, 2021, patients were randomly enrolled from 17 hospitals in China. A total of 105 patients aged 18–65 years who underwent selective surgery under regional anesthesia were included. Patients received different sedatives with different dosages: 0.1 mg/kg remimazolam (HR), 0.05 mg/kg remimazolam (LR), or 1.0 mg/kg propofol (P) group, followed by a maintenance infusion. Main outcome measures included the efficacy of sedation measured by Modified Observer's Assessment of Alertness/Sedation Scale (MOAA/S) levels (1–4, 1–3, 2–3, 3, and 2–4) during the sedation procedure (the duration percentage) and incidence of adverse reactions. It showed that the duration percentage of MOAA/S levels 1–4 was 100.0 [8.1]% (median [interquartile range]), 89.9 [20.2]%, 100.0 [7.7]% in the HR, LR, and P groups, respectively. The percentage of patients in the HR, LR, and P groups who achieved MOAA/S levels 1–4 within 3 min after administration was 85.7%, 58.8%, and 82.9%, respectively. However, the time to recovery from anesthesia after withdrawal of sedatives (7.9 ± 5.7 min), incidence of anterograde amnesia (75%), and adverse effects were not statistically significant among the three groups. These findings suggest that a loading dose of remimazolam 0.1 mg/kg followed by a maintenance infusion of 0–3 mg/kg/h provides adequate sedation for patients under regional anesthesia without increasing adverse reactions.</p>","PeriodicalId":94030,"journal":{"name":"Ibrain","volume":"10 2","pages":"134-145"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/ibra.12163","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ibrain","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ibra.12163","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

This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of remimazolam for intraoperative sedation during regional anesthesia. It was a phase II-multicenter, randomized, single-blind, parallel-group, active-controlled clinical trial (No. ChiCTR2100054956). From May 6, 2021 to July 4, 2021, patients were randomly enrolled from 17 hospitals in China. A total of 105 patients aged 18–65 years who underwent selective surgery under regional anesthesia were included. Patients received different sedatives with different dosages: 0.1 mg/kg remimazolam (HR), 0.05 mg/kg remimazolam (LR), or 1.0 mg/kg propofol (P) group, followed by a maintenance infusion. Main outcome measures included the efficacy of sedation measured by Modified Observer's Assessment of Alertness/Sedation Scale (MOAA/S) levels (1–4, 1–3, 2–3, 3, and 2–4) during the sedation procedure (the duration percentage) and incidence of adverse reactions. It showed that the duration percentage of MOAA/S levels 1–4 was 100.0 [8.1]% (median [interquartile range]), 89.9 [20.2]%, 100.0 [7.7]% in the HR, LR, and P groups, respectively. The percentage of patients in the HR, LR, and P groups who achieved MOAA/S levels 1–4 within 3 min after administration was 85.7%, 58.8%, and 82.9%, respectively. However, the time to recovery from anesthesia after withdrawal of sedatives (7.9 ± 5.7 min), incidence of anterograde amnesia (75%), and adverse effects were not statistically significant among the three groups. These findings suggest that a loading dose of remimazolam 0.1 mg/kg followed by a maintenance infusion of 0–3 mg/kg/h provides adequate sedation for patients under regional anesthesia without increasing adverse reactions.

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
区域麻醉术中镇静用瑞咪唑安定与异丙酚的疗效和安全性:多中心、随机、主动对照、单盲临床试验II期
本研究旨在评估区域麻醉期间使用雷马唑仑进行术中镇静的有效性和安全性。这是一项II期多中心、随机、单盲、平行组、主动对照临床试验(编号:ChiCTR2100054956)。从 2021 年 5 月 6 日至 2021 年 7 月 4 日,患者从中国的 17 家医院随机入组。共纳入 105 名年龄在 18-65 岁之间、在区域麻醉下接受选择性手术的患者。患者接受了不同剂量的镇静剂:每公斤 0.1 毫克瑞马唑仑(HR 组)、每公斤 0.05 毫克瑞马唑仑(LR 组)或每公斤 1.0 毫克丙泊酚(P 组),然后进行维持输注。主要结果指标包括镇静过程中通过改良观察者警觉性评估/镇静量表(MOAA/S)水平(1-4、1-3、2-3、3和2-4)测量的镇静效果(持续时间百分比)和不良反应发生率。结果显示,MOAA/S 1-4 级的持续时间百分比在 HR 组、LR 组和 P 组分别为 100.0 [8.1]%(中位数[四分位距])、89.9 [20.2]%、100.0 [7.7]%。HR、LR 和 P 组患者在用药后 3 分钟内达到 MOAA/S 1-4 级的比例分别为 85.7%、58.8% 和 82.9%。然而,三组患者在停用镇静剂后的麻醉恢复时间(7.9 ± 5.7 分钟)、逆行性遗忘发生率(75%)和不良反应方面均无统计学意义。这些研究结果表明,负荷剂量为 0.1 毫克/千克的瑞马唑仑,然后以 0-3 毫克/千克/小时的剂量输注,可为接受区域麻醉的患者提供充分的镇静效果,同时不会增加不良反应。
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
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Issue Information The effects of a bioavailable curcumin formulation on Alzheimer's disease pathologies: A potential risk for neuroinflammation Correction to “Protective effect of isoflurane preconditioning on neurological function in rats with HIE” Modulation of the central nervous system immune response and neuroinflammation via Wnt signaling in health and neurodegenerative diseases The interplay between epitranscriptomic RNA modifications and neurodegenerative disorders: Mechanistic insights and potential therapeutic strategies
×
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