{"title":"日本患者在结肠镜检查中使用雷马唑仑和咪达唑仑镇静剂的比较:倾向得分匹配分析","authors":"Kanako Ogura, Ryoji Ichijima, Hisatomo Ikehara, Tomomi Sugita, Daisuke Yamaguchi, Yasuhiko Nagata, Mitsuru Esaki, Yosuke Minoda, Hiroyuki Ono, Kinichi Hotta, Shinsuke Kiriyama, Tetsuya Sumiyoshi, Yuichi Kanmura","doi":"10.1002/deo2.412","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objectives</h3>\n \n <p>To compare the efficacy and safety of sedation with midazolam and remimazolam for colorectal endoscopy.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>This single-center, two-arm, post-hoc analysis of the REM-IICTJP01 study investigated the efficacy and safety of remimazolam for gastrointestinal endoscopic sedation. We enrolled 40 and 208 patients who underwent colonoscopy under remimazolam and midazolam sedation, respectively, during the same period. The primary outcome was the time from the end of the colonoscopy until discharge. The secondary outcomes included the time from the end of the colonoscopy until awakening, dosage, and adverse events. Propensity score matching was employed to eliminate the effect of confounding factors.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Thirty-seven patients in each group were matched. After propensity matching, the time to awakening after colonoscopy was 28.0 (13.0–37.0) min in the midazolam group and 0 (0–0) min in the remimazolam group; moreover, the time till discharge was 40.0 (35.0–46.5) min in the midazolam group and 0 (0–5.0) min in the remimazolam group, both of which were significantly shorter in the remimazolam group (<i>p</i> < 0.01). The number of additional doses was 0 (0–0) and 2 (1–3) in the midazolam and remimazolam groups, respectively. The total dose was 2.0 (2.0–3.5) and 6.0 (5.0–7.0) mg in the midazolam and remimazolam groups, respectively.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>Remimazolam yielded significantly faster times to awakening and discharge safely compared to midazolam.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":93973,"journal":{"name":"DEN open","volume":"5 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11266431/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of remimazolam and midazolam for sedation during colonoscopy in Japanese patients: A propensity score matching analysis\",\"authors\":\"Kanako Ogura, Ryoji Ichijima, Hisatomo Ikehara, Tomomi Sugita, Daisuke Yamaguchi, Yasuhiko Nagata, Mitsuru Esaki, Yosuke Minoda, Hiroyuki Ono, Kinichi Hotta, Shinsuke Kiriyama, Tetsuya Sumiyoshi, Yuichi Kanmura\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/deo2.412\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Objectives</h3>\\n \\n <p>To compare the efficacy and safety of sedation with midazolam and remimazolam for colorectal endoscopy.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Methods</h3>\\n \\n <p>This single-center, two-arm, post-hoc analysis of the REM-IICTJP01 study investigated the efficacy and safety of remimazolam for gastrointestinal endoscopic sedation. We enrolled 40 and 208 patients who underwent colonoscopy under remimazolam and midazolam sedation, respectively, during the same period. The primary outcome was the time from the end of the colonoscopy until discharge. The secondary outcomes included the time from the end of the colonoscopy until awakening, dosage, and adverse events. Propensity score matching was employed to eliminate the effect of confounding factors.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>Thirty-seven patients in each group were matched. After propensity matching, the time to awakening after colonoscopy was 28.0 (13.0–37.0) min in the midazolam group and 0 (0–0) min in the remimazolam group; moreover, the time till discharge was 40.0 (35.0–46.5) min in the midazolam group and 0 (0–5.0) min in the remimazolam group, both of which were significantly shorter in the remimazolam group (<i>p</i> < 0.01). The number of additional doses was 0 (0–0) and 2 (1–3) in the midazolam and remimazolam groups, respectively. The total dose was 2.0 (2.0–3.5) and 6.0 (5.0–7.0) mg in the midazolam and remimazolam groups, respectively.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\\n \\n <p>Remimazolam yielded significantly faster times to awakening and discharge safely compared to midazolam.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":93973,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"DEN open\",\"volume\":\"5 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11266431/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"DEN open\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/deo2.412\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"DEN open","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/deo2.412","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Comparison of remimazolam and midazolam for sedation during colonoscopy in Japanese patients: A propensity score matching analysis
Objectives
To compare the efficacy and safety of sedation with midazolam and remimazolam for colorectal endoscopy.
Methods
This single-center, two-arm, post-hoc analysis of the REM-IICTJP01 study investigated the efficacy and safety of remimazolam for gastrointestinal endoscopic sedation. We enrolled 40 and 208 patients who underwent colonoscopy under remimazolam and midazolam sedation, respectively, during the same period. The primary outcome was the time from the end of the colonoscopy until discharge. The secondary outcomes included the time from the end of the colonoscopy until awakening, dosage, and adverse events. Propensity score matching was employed to eliminate the effect of confounding factors.
Results
Thirty-seven patients in each group were matched. After propensity matching, the time to awakening after colonoscopy was 28.0 (13.0–37.0) min in the midazolam group and 0 (0–0) min in the remimazolam group; moreover, the time till discharge was 40.0 (35.0–46.5) min in the midazolam group and 0 (0–5.0) min in the remimazolam group, both of which were significantly shorter in the remimazolam group (p < 0.01). The number of additional doses was 0 (0–0) and 2 (1–3) in the midazolam and remimazolam groups, respectively. The total dose was 2.0 (2.0–3.5) and 6.0 (5.0–7.0) mg in the midazolam and remimazolam groups, respectively.
Conclusions
Remimazolam yielded significantly faster times to awakening and discharge safely compared to midazolam.