Efficacy and safety of remimazolam tosilate versus propofol in patients undergoing day surgery: a prospective randomized controlled trial

Emergence profiles of remimazolam-flumazenil versus propofol in pediatric general anesthesia for strabismus correction: a randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Remimazolam (Rm) is a novel ultra-short-acting benzodiazepine used in general anesthesia. However, its application in pediatric general anesthesia remains limited. This study aims to compare the efficacy, safety, and postoperative emergence profiles of remimazolam and propofol (Pf) in pediatric surgical anesthesia.

METHODS

Children (aged 3-12 years) undergoing strabismus correction surgery were randomly assigned to the Group Rm or the Group Pf. The Group Rm and Group Pf received an induction dose of 0.3 mg/kg and 2 mg/kg, respectively. For emergence, the Group Rm was administered flumazenil 0.2-0.3 mg. The primary outcome was the time from the discontinuation of anesthetic agents to the first eye opening. Secondary outcomes included the time from the end of surgery to laryngeal mask airway (LMA) removal, the time to achieve a Modified Observer's Assessment of Alertness/Sedation (MOAA/S) score of 5 after LMA removal, and Aldrete scores during the postanesthetic care unit (PACU) stay. Additionally, the changes of vital signs before and after anesthesia were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

In all patients, both remimazolam and propofol induced anesthesia successfully. Regarding emergence profiles, the Group Rm had significantly shorter times to first eye opening, LMA removal, and achieving an MOAA/S score of 5 post-LMA removal compared to the Group Pf (p < 0.001). Upon arrival at the PACU, the number of patients with Aldrete scores ≥ 9 was significantly higher in the Group Rm (p < 0.001). Following injection, the reduction in DBP was significantly greater in the Group Pf compared to the Group Rm (p < 0.001). The Group Rm maintained a more stable HR compared to the Group Pf.

CONCLUSION

Remimazolam provides more stable hemodynamic characteristics and significantly shorter postoperative emergence time in pediatric patients compared to propofol. This suggests that remimazolam may be more suitable than propofol for pediatric general anesthesia, though larger scale clinical trials are needed for further validation.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Chinese Clinical Trial Registry, ChiCTR2400083265.

Incidence and predictors of postoperative delirium following remimazolam administration: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 29 randomized trials

BACKGROUND

Postoperative delirium is a significant and common complication in surgical patients, particularly in vulnerable populations such as the elderly. Remimazolam, a novel benzodiazepine, has been introduced as an anesthetic agent with a favorable pharmacokinetic profile. However, its potential association with postoperative delirium remains unclear. This study aims to systematically synthesize available evidence on the incidence of delirium following remimazolam administration in surgical patients. We sought to identify significant moderators of delirium incidence and to explore predictors of delirium through meta-regression analysis.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted across multiple databases, including PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar, up to May 20, 2024. The search was updated on Feb 2nd, 2025. Randomized trials were selected based on predefined criteria, and data on patient characteristics, surgical details, and delirium incidence were extracted. A meta-analysis was performed to calculate the pooled incidence rate of delirium, and subgroup and meta-regression analyses were conducted to identify incidence rate moderators.

RESULTS

A total of 29 RCTs, including 2,435 patients, were analyzed. The pooled incidence of postoperative delirium following remimazolam administration was 5% (95%CI: 3-7%). ASA III-IV patients had a delirium rate of 19% (95%CI: 15-23%) compared to 1% (95%CI: 0-1%) for ASA I-II. Age was a key factor, with children showing the highest rate (11%, 95%CI: 3-19%), followed by elderly patients (8%, 95%CI: 4-13%), while adults had the lowest (1%, 95%CI: 0-2%). Delirium incidence was highest in oncologic (16%, 95%CI: 0-34%) and orthopedic surgeries (12%, 95%CI: 9-14%), and lowest in gastrointestinal and endoscopic procedures (0%, 95%CI: 0-1%). High-dose remimazolam was linked to the lowest delirium incidence, while moderate doses had higher rates. Meta-regression identified surgery type as the primary predictor, with orthopedic surgery having the highest risk compared to laparoscopic and abdominal procedures (coefficient = 0.081, p = 0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

Postoperative delirium occurs in 5% of surgical patients following remimazolam administration. Key moderators include ASA classification, age, surgery type, and anesthetic dosing. Remimazolam may be safely used in surgical patients, particularly when higher doses are administered, but caution is warranted in high-risk populations such as elderly patients and those undergoing complex surgical procedures.

Effect of remimazolam on postoperative delirium and cognitive function in adults undergoing general anesthesia or procedural sedation: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Remimazolam is a novel short-acting benzodiazepine. This study compared the effects of remimazolam and propofol on cognitive function in adult patients after surgery or other procedures.

METHODS

We searched electronic databases, including PubMed, Embase, CENTRAL, Web of Science, and Scopus, for relevant studies. The primary outcome was the proportion of participants who experienced delirium or impaired cognitive function postoperatively. Secondary outcomes included the incidence of hypotension, bradycardia, and postoperative nausea and vomiting. We estimated the odds ratios (OR) and mean differences (MD) with 95% CIs using a random-effects model.

RESULTS

In total, 1295 patients from 11 randomized controlled trials were included. The incidence of postoperative delirium was 8.0% in the remimazolam group and 10.4% in the propofol group that was not significantly different (OR: 0.74, 95% CI [0.39-1.42], P = 0.369, I2 = 32%). More favorable cognitive function, as assessed using the Mini-Mental State Examination, was observed in the remimazolam group compared to the propofol group (MD: 1.06, 95% CI [0.32-1.80], P = 0.005, I2 = 89%). Remimazolam lowered the incidence of hypotension (OR: 0.28, 95% CI [0.21-0.37], P = 0.000, I2 = 0%) compared to propofol.

CONCLUSIONS

Remimazolam did not increase the risk of postoperative delirium and maintained cognitive function well, providing hemodynamic stability during surgery compared to propofol.

Association of remimazolam with delirium and cognitive function: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

BACKGROUND AND STUDY OBJECTIVE

Delirium is an organic mental syndrome significantly associated with long-term cognitive decline, increased hospital stays and higher mortality. This systematic review of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) with meta-analysis assesses the association of remimazolam with postoperative cognitive function and delirium compared with non-benzodiazepine hypnotics.

DESIGN

Systematic review of RCTs with meta-analysis.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library and Web of Science databases up to 27 April 2024.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Adult patients undergoing general anaesthesia or sedation procedures; use of remimazolam as the primary hypnotic or as an adjunct, administered via intermittent bolus or continuous infusion; comparison with other hypnotics or sedatives; evaluation of cognitive function or delirium.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty-three RCTs with 3598 patients were included. The incidence of delirium was not significantly different between remimazolam and other sedatives in general anaesthesia and sedation procedures [ n  = 3261; odds ratio (OR) = 1.2, 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.76 to 1.91; P  = 0.378843; I2  = 17%]. Regarding cognitive function evaluation, remimazolam showed no difference compared with the control group in Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) scores on the first postoperative day ( n  = 263; mean difference = 0.60, 95% CI, -1.46 to 2.66; P  = 0.5684; I2  = 90%) or on the third postoperative day ( n  = 163; mean difference  = 1.33, 95% CI, -0.72 to 3.38; P  = 0.2028; I2  = 93%). Remimazolam exhibited superiority over the control group in MMSE scores on the seventh postoperative day ( n  = 247; mean difference = 0.53, 95% CI, 0.30 to 0.75; P  < 0.0001; I2  = 28%).

CONCLUSION

Remimazolam does not increase the incidence of delirium or cognitive impairments compared with non-benzodiazepine hypnotics. However, the analysis showed that the type of surgery significantly influenced the incidence of delirium. Additionally, remimazolam was associated with better short-term postoperative cognitive function.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42024532751.

Remimazolam vs. propofol for induction and maintenance of general anesthesia: A systematic review and meta-analysis of emergence agitation risk in surgical populations

INTRODUCTION

The association between remimazolam and emergence agitation (EA) remains unclear. This meta-analysis aimed to compare the relative risk of developing EA when using remimazolam vs. propofol in induction and maintenance of general anesthesia.

METHOD

We searched PubMed, clinicaltrials.gov, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Embase databases to identify studies meeting the inclusion criteria. The primary outcome was the incidence of EA. Secondary outcomes included the incidence of postoperative delirium (POD) within 7 days after surgery, emergence time, extubation time, length of post-anesthesia care unit (PACU) stay, and adverse events.

RESULTS

A total of 19 randomized controlled trials with 3031 patients were included in the meta-analysis. There was no statistically significant difference in the incidence of EA (RR = 0.82; 95 % confidence interval [CI], 0.41-1.65; p = 0.585) between remimazolam and propofol. Likewise, there were no significant intergroup differences in POD incidence, extubation time, emergence time, or length of PACU stay. Remimazolam exhibited superior hemodynamic stability, with a significantly reduced incidence of postinduction hypotension and intraoperative hypotension compared with propofol, while maintaining comparable safety profiles in terms of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), intraoperative awareness, and hypoxemia. Subgroup analysis revealed that without routine postoperative antagonist administration, remimazolam was associated with prolonged extubation and length of PACU stay relative to propofol. In contrast, following antagonizing with flumazenil, the extubation and emergence times of the remimazolam group were shorter than those of the propofol group, while comparable PACU discharge time was maintained.

CONCLUSION

The use of remimazolam for the induction and maintenance of general anesthesia does not lead to a higher occurrence of EA in adult patients undergoing surgery, relative to propofol. However, in patients with ASA III-IV, remimazolam may be linked to a greater risk of POD than propofol.

Effect of intraoperative intravenous remimazolam on the postoperative quality of recovery after noncardiac surgery: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVES

The postoperative quality of recovery holds significant economic and prognostic implications. Numerous studies have investigated the postoperative quality of recovery following surgery. However, the impact of intraoperative intravenous remimazolam on postoperative recovery has yielded conflicting results.

METHODS

In this qualitative review of randomized controlled clinical trials assessing the use of intraoperative remimazolam, we present the effects of intravenous remimazolam on postoperative recovery quality in noncardiac surgery patients. We conducted a comprehensive search of PubMed, MEDLINE, Web of Science and Cochrane Library for randomized controlled trials published up to September 23, 2024, without any language restrictions, to investigate the impact of intraoperative intravenous remimazolam on the quality of postoperative recovery following noncardiac surgery. The primary outcome measure was the quality of postoperative recovery assessed using global QoR-40 scores or QoR-15 scores. Secondary outcomes included five dimensions of quality of postoperative recovery: physical comfort, emotional state, physical independence, psychological support, and pain. As well as time to extubation, VAS score, PACU stay, and days in hospital. We analyzed the pooled data using a random-effects model.

RESULTS

This meta-analysis included 18 studies published between 2022 and 2024 involving 1720 patients. The quality of postoperative recovery was assessed using the QoR-15 or QoR-40 questionnaires. The pooled results showed no significant difference in QoR scores between the two groups on the first postoperative day (SMD =  0.12; 95% CI -0.13-0.36; I2 = 78%; p =  0.35). Furthermore, differences in QoR dimensions, PACU duration, extubation time, and length of hospital stay were not observed.

CONCLUSION

Our analysis showed that the quality of recovery after general anaesthesia in the remimazolam group was similar to that of conventional sedation. Therefore, remimazolam may be used as a potential anaesthetic agent as an alternative to conventional sedation for non-cardiac surgical anaesthesia.

Remimazolam Versus Propofol in General Anesthesia of Complex Surgery in Critical and Non-Critical Patients: Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials

Objective: To compare the efficacy and safety of remimazolam with propofol in general anesthesia in adult patients. Methods: A systematic search in Pubmed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Embase was performed. Patients undergoing complex surgery who were critically ill or non-critically ill were included. The risk of bias (RoB) 2.0 tool was applied. Random-effects models using the inverse variance method were applied for all meta-analyses. Results: Nine randomized controlled trials were included (patients taking remimazolam, n = 678; propofol, n = 454). Remimazolam compared to propofol is likely to produce a large decrease in intraoperative hypotension (RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.50 to 0.76, I2 = 63%, n = 9, CoE moderate certainty), incidence of respiratory depression (RR 0.28, 95% CI 0.09 to 0. 82, I2 = 0%, n = 3; CoE moderate certainty), injection site pain (RR 0.14, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.94, I2 = 21%, n = 4; CoE moderate certainty), and may produce little or no difference in bradycardia (RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.36 to 1.06, I2 = 0%, n = 4; CoE moderate certainty). Conclusions: In patients undergoing complex surgery who are critically ill or non-critically ill, remimazolam, compared with propofol, is likely to produce a large decrease in intraoperative hypotension, incidence of respiratory depression, and injection site pain, but little or no difference in bradycardia is possible.

Effect of remimazolam on intra-operative hypotension: Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Hypotension is common during anaesthesia. Increasing number of studies have reported that remimazolam may be associated with lower incidence of intra-operative hypotension compared with other anaesthetics. However, the results remain controversial.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to evaluate the influence of remimazolam on intra-operative hypotension and its related outcomes (hypoxaemia, bradycardia and time to awake).

DESIGN

A systematic review of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) with meta-analyses.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, Cocharane and Embase databases were searched to identify eligible RCTs published up to June 2024.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

RCTs published in English were eligible for inclusion. The study patients were 18 years or older who were administered with remimazolam and other positive control agents in either the pre-operative or intra-operative period. The incidence of intra-operative hypotension was identified in these studies.

RESULTS

This study evaluated 34 trials including 4847 individuals. Basing on moderate-certainty evidence, we found that remimazolam administration reduced the incidence of intra-operative hypotension [risk ratio (RR) = 0.48, 95% confidence interval (95% CI): 0.41 to 0.57] and bradycardia (16 studies, n  = 2869, RR = 0.40, 95% CI: 0.29 to 0.54). No difference was observed in the incidence of hypoxaemia (RR = 0.70, 95% CI: 0.48 to 1.01) and time to awake (MD = -0.91, 95% CI: -2.42 to 0.60). The remarkable association between remimazolam and hypotension remained robust and significant, regardless of general anaesthesia or procedural sedation ( P  < 0.01, I2  = 82%). No significant difference was found between different control drugs ( P  = 0.97, I2  = 82%).

CONCLUSION

Moderate-quality evidence shows that remimazolam administration to patients undergoing general anaesthesia or procedural sedation decreases the incidence of intra-operative hypotension and bradycardia.

Effectiveness and safety of remimazolam tosilate versus propofol for sedation in patients undergoing gastrointestinal endoscopy: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Remimazolam tosilate is a new type of benzodiazepine currently used for gastrointestinal endoscopy and can be combined with alfentanil.

AIM

This trial compared the effectiveness and safety of remimazolam with alfentanil to propofol with alfentanil in patients undergoing gastrointestinal endoscopy.

METHOD

One hundred and sixty-six patients were randomly divided into propofol-alfentanil anaesthesia (Group P) and remimazolam-alfentanil anaesthesia (Group R). The primary outcomes were perioperative haemodynamic variables, including systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP), mean arterial pressure (MAP), heart rate (HR) and oxygen saturation (SpO2) preoperatively (T0); after anaesthesia induction (T1); when the gastroscope passed through the oropharynx (T2); 3 min (T3), 5 min (T4) and 7 min (T5) after T2; at the end of surgery (T6); and when patients successfully awakened (T7). The secondary outcomes included induction and awakening time, patient satisfaction, operator satisfaction, and adverse event occurrences.

RESULTS

Compared with those in Group P, the SBP in Group R was significantly higher at T1, T2, T3, and T6 (P < 0.05); the DBP and MAP were significantly higher at T1, T2, T3, T5, and T6 (P < 0.05); the HR was significantly faster at T1 to T6 (P < 0.05); the SpO2 was significantly higher at T1 to T4 (P < 0.05); the incidences of hypoxemia, hypotension, and drug injection pain were significantly lower in Group R (P < 0.05); the incidence of hiccups was higher (P < 0.05); the awakening time was shorter in Group R (P < 0.05); and the operator satisfaction score was high (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Compared to propofol with alfentanil, remimazolam with alfentanil can be used safely and effectively for sedation in patients undergoing gastrointestinal endoscopy, with less impact on the patient's circulatory and respiratory systems and a lower incidence of adverse events.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This trial protocol was registered in the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCR2300077252, date: 2023-11-02).

Effect of remimazolam for general anesthesia on postoperative nausea and vomiting : A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Benzodiazepines reduce postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV); however, conflicting results have been reported regarding the use of remimazolam, a novel benzodiazepine.

OBJECTIVE

This meta-analysis examines whether remimazolam reduces PONV incidence compared with propofol or volatile agents used in general anesthesia.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Electronic databases, including PubMed, EMBASE, CENTRAL, and Web of Science, were searched on 31 July 2023. The primary outcome was the incidence of PONV. Secondary outcomes included PONV severity, rescue antiemetic use, amounts of remifentanil used, and participant satisfaction scores. Odds ratios (OR) and mean differences (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated using a random-effects model. The risk of bias (RoB) was assessed using the Cochrane RoB2 tool.

RESULTS

A total of 1514 adult patients from 11 randomized controlled trials were included. The incidences of PONV in the remimazolam and control groups were 16.1% and 16.5%, respectively. Remimazolam did not increase the incidence of PONV (OR 0.62; 95% CI, 0.37-1.04; p = 0.0676; I2 = 48%). Subgroup analysis showed a significant reduction in PONV with remimazolam vs. volatile agents (OR 0.25; 95% CI, 0.13-0.47; P = 0.0000; I2 = 0%) but not vs. propofol (OR 1.04; 95% CI, 0.70-1.56; p = 0.8332; I2 = 0%). More remifentanil was used in the remimazolam group vs. the volatile group, with no significant difference between remimazolam and propofol groups. Participant satisfaction scores were higher with remimazolam.

CONCLUSION

Remimazolam did not increase PONV risk compared to propofol and reduced PONV incidence compared to volatile agents, with higher participant satisfaction. To validate the present findings, further well-planned large clinical trials are required.

Comparison between hemodynamic effects of remimazolam and propofol during general anesthesia: a systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

The need for safe anesthetic agents with minimal side effects has led to the development of remimazolam, a new benzodiazepine designed to be an alternative to the commonly used drug propofol, which has significant hemodynamic effects. This study aims to compare the hemodynamic effects of remimazolam with propofol during general anesthesia.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

A systematic search was conducted in Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Scopus, and PubMed databases on 13/02/2023, following the recommendations of Cochrane Handbook and the PRISMA statement. The measure of association used was Risk Ratio (RR) or standardized mean difference, with 95% confidence intervals (CI) and 95% Prediction intervals (PI). An additional search was conducted on 04/09/2023. A Trial Sequential Analysis and a GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) evidence table were conducted based on the editor's recommendation.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

After applying eligibility criteria and removing duplicates, 16 randomized clinical trials comprising 1951 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Significant associations favoring remimazolam over propofol were observed in the following aspects: intraoperative hypotension events (RR=0.47; 95% CI=0.41 to 0.54; 95% PI=0.40 to 0.55); frequency of vasoactive drug administration (RR=0.54; 95% CI=0.46 to 0.64; 95% PI=0.41 to 0.74); intraoperative bradycardia (RR=0.39; 95% CI=0.27 to 0.57; 95% PI=0.26 to 0.66); mean arterial pressure at induction (MD=7.77; 95% CI=6.00 to 9.55; 95% PI=4.39 to 11.15); heart rate at induction (MD=6.40; 95% CI=4.07 to 8.73; 95% PI=0.33 to 12.48); and heart rate at intubation (MD=6.06; 95% CI=2.33 to 9.78; 95% PI=-5.59 to 17.71).

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides evidence that remimazolam induces fewer cardiorespiratory depressant effects and has a more favorable side effect profile compared to propofol during general anaesthesia.

Comparison of the recovery quality between remimazolam and propofol after general anesthesia: systematic review and a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Introduction

To evaluate the recovery quality between remimazolam and propofol after general anesthesia surgery.

Methods

We included eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in EMBASE, PubMed, Cochrane Central, Scopus, and Web of Science up to June 26, 2024 for comparison the recovery quality of remimazolam and propofol after general anaesthesia. The primary outcomes were the total Quality of Recovery-15 (QoR-15) and five dimensions of QoR-15 on postoperative day 1 (POD1). Secondary outcomes were adverse events, the Quality of Recovery-40 (QoR-40) on POD1, and the intraoperative and postoperative time characteristics.

Results

Thirteen RCTs with a total of 1,305 patients were included in this meta-analysis. Our statistical analysis showed that remimazolam group had higher QoR-15 score on POD1, with no significant difference (Mean Difference (MD) = 1.24; 95% confidence interval (CI), [-1.67-4.15]; I2 = 75%; P = 0.41). In the five dimensions of QoR-15, remimazolam group was superior to propofol group in terms of physical independence (MD = 0.79; 95% CI [0.31-1.27]; I2 = 0%; P = 0.001). Remimazolam group was lower than propofol group in incidence of hypotension (Risk Ratio (RR) = 0.48; 95% CI [0.40-0.59]; I2 = 14%; P < 0.00001), bradycardia (RR = 0.18; 95% CI [0.08-0.38]; I2 = 0%; P < 0.0001) and injection pain (RR = 0.03; 95% CI [0.01-0.12]; I2 = 48%; P < 0.00001), respectively. The intraoperative and postoperative time characteristics and the QoR-40 were similar in the two groups.

Conclusions

Our analysis showed that the recovery quality of the remimazolam group after general anaesthesia was similar to propofol group, while the incidence of adverse events was low in remimazolam group. As a potential anesthetic, remimazolam can be used in place of propofol for surgical general anesthesia.

Remimazolam in General Anesthesia: A Comprehensive Review of Its Applications and Clinical Efficacy

Remimazolam is a novel ultra-short-acting benzodiazepine with a unique pharmacokinetic profile that makes it an attractive option for use in general anesthesia. This review paper provides an in-depth analysis of remimazolam's applications in the field of general anesthesia, focusing on its pharmacological properties, clinical efficacy, safety profile, and potential advantages compared to other anesthetic agents. Remimazolam acts on GABAa receptors, offering rapid onset and recovery times due to its unique metabolic pathway involving tissue esterases. Clinical trials have demonstrated its efficacy in procedural sedation and general anesthesia, showing a favorable safety profile with minimal cardiovascular and respiratory depression. Compared to traditional anesthetics such as propofol, remimazolam presents distinct advantages, including predictable pharmacokinetics, reduced risk of prolonged sedation, and a reliable safety margin. These attributes position remimazolam as a promising agent in various clinical settings. The purpose of this review is to synthesize current evidence on remimazolam and discuss its potential to improve clinical outcomes in anesthesia practice.

Comparison of Remimazolam Tosilate and Propofol Sedation on the Early Postoperative Quality of Recovery in Patients Undergoing Day Surgery: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial

Purpose

Remimazolam tosilate is a novel ultrafast-acting benzodiazepine that has a rapid emergence even after continuous infusion when using flumazenil. So far, relatively few articles are still focusing on the quality of recovery after general anesthesia with remimazolam, especially in day surgery. This study aimed to compare the early postoperative quality of recovery of remimazolam tosilate with flumazenil and propofol in patients undergoing day surgery.

Patients and Methods

137 patients scheduled for day surgery were randomly divided into the remimazolam tosilate or propofol group. The primary endpoint was the incidence of overall recovery assessed with the early postoperative quality of recovery scale (PostopQRS) on postoperative day 1 (POD 1). The Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale (RASS) scores in the post-anesthesia care unit (PACU), extubation time, postoperative recovery profiles, and perioperative data were documented. Any adverse events were recorded.

Results

The incidence of overall recovery on POD1 was 47.7% in the remimazolam tosilate group and 65.1% in the propofol group (odds ratio, 0.52; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.26 to 1.06; P = 0.072). In general, the overall recovery of the PostopQRS increased over time, and its interaction between time and group was significant (P = 0.003). Among the five dimensions of PostopQRS, there exist statistical differences between groups including emotional state and cognitive recovery. Upon arrival at the PACU, the remimazolam group was more sedated and took longer to recover to a RASS score similar to propofol. The frequency of application of vasoactive drugs during anesthesia was similar in both groups (P = 0.119). Despite rapid emergence with remimazolam after flumazenil reversal, re-sedation (10.8%) or somnolence (60%) in the PACU was observed, and the length of PACU stay in patients treated with remimazolam tosilate was longer than that of the propofol (35 min vs 30 min, P<0.001).

Conclusion

General anesthesia with remimazolam tosilate in conjunction with flumazenil reversal permits rapid recovery of consciousness in day surgery, but there was a notable occurrence of re-sedation or somnolence observed in PACU.

Adverse Drug Events Observed with the Newly Approved Remimazolam in Comparison to Propofol for General Anesthesia in Patients Undergoing Surgery: A Meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Developments in anesthetic pharmacology have been aiming at minimizing physiological disturbance in addition to maintaining and improving titrateability, recovery profile, and patient experience. Remimazolam, a GABAAlpha receptor agonist, is a new intravenous anesthetic agent which has recently been approved for use. This analysis aimed to systematically compare the adverse drug events reported with the newly approved remimazolam in comparison to propofol for general anesthesia (GA) in patients undergoing surgery.

METHODS

Electronic databases were searched from 15 May to 20 December 2023 for relevant publications which compared the outcomes reported with the newly approved remimazolam versus propofol in patients undergoing surgery. Relevant reported adverse drug events were the endpoints of this study. The statistical analysis was carried out using the latest version of the RevMan software. Data analysis was represented by risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI).

RESULTS

Sixteen studies with a total number of 1897 participants were included in this analysis; 1104 participants received remimazolam and 793 participants received propofol. The risks for hypotension (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.43-0.58; P = 0.00001), hypoxemia (RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.19-0.99; P = 0.05), bradycardia (RR 0.53, 95% CI 0.36-0.78; P = 0.001), pain at injection site (RR 0.07, 95% CI 0.01-0.56; P = 0.01), and total adverse events (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.24-0.47; P = 0.00001) were significantly lower with remimazolam. However, no significant differences were observed in terms of postoperative nausea and vomiting (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.66-1.46; P = 0.93), dizziness (RR 0.42, 95% CI 0.11-1.57; P = 0.20), psychiatric symptoms (RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.45-2.67; P = 0.85), and respiratory depression (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.24-2.76; P = 0.74).

CONCLUSION

Our current analysis showed that the newly approved remimazolam was apparently associated with significantly fewer adverse drug events in comparison to propofol for GA in patients undergoing surgery. Therefore, this new drug should be further studied and more research with larger population sizes should be carried out to confirm this hypothesis.

Target-controlled infusion of remimazolam effect-site concentration for total intravenous anesthesia in patients undergoing minimal invasive surgeries

Background

Although pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic models of remimazolam have been developed, their clinical application remains limited. This study aimed to administer a target-controlled infusion (TCI) of remimazolam at the effect-site concentration (Ce) in patients undergoing general anesthesia and to investigate the relationship of the remimazolam Ce with sedative effects and with recovery from general anesthesia.

Methods

Fifty patients aged 20-75 years, scheduled for minimally invasive surgery under general anesthesia for less than 2 h, were enrolled. Anesthesia was induced and maintained using Schüttler's model for effect-site TCI of remimazolam. During induction, the remimazolam Ce was increased stepwise, and sedation levels were assessed using the Modified Observer's Assessment of Alertness/Sedation (MOAA/S) scale and bispectral index (BIS). Following attainment of MOAA/S scale 1, continuous infusion of remifentanil was commenced, and rocuronium (0.6 mg/kg) was administered for endotracheal intubation. The target Ce of remimazolam and the remifentanil infusion rate were adjusted to maintain a BIS between 40 and 70 and a heart rate within 20% of the baseline value. Approximately 5 min before surgery completion, the target Ce of remimazolam was reduced by 20-30%, and anesthetic infusion ceased at the end of surgery. Nonlinear mixed-effects modeling was employed to develop pharmacodynamic models for each sedation level as well as emergence from anesthesia.

Results

The remimazolam Ces associated with 50% probability (Ce50) of reaching MOAA/S scale ≤4, 3, 2, and 1 were 0.302, 0.397, 0.483, and 0.654 μg/mL, respectively. The Ce50 values for recovery of responsiveness (ROR) and endotracheal extubation were 0.368 and 0.345 μg/mL, respectively. The prediction probabilities of Ce and BIS for detecting changes in sedation level were 0.797 and 0.756, respectively. The sedation scale significantly correlated with remimazolam Ce (r = -0.793, P < 0.0001) and BIS (r = 0.914, P < 0.0001). Age significantly correlated with Ce at MOAA/S1 and ROR.

Conclusion

Effect-site TCI of remimazolam was successfully performed in patients undergoing general anesthesia. The remimazolam Ce significantly correlated with sedation depth. The Ce50 for MOAA/S scale ≤1 and ROR were determined to be 0.654 and 0.368 μg/mL, respectively.

Clinical Study of Flumazenil Antagonizing Remimazolam on Nausea and Vomiting After Gynecologic Day Surgery

Purpose

To evaluate the effect of flumazenil antagonizing remimazolam on postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) after gynecologic day surgery.

Patients and Methods

141 cases of gynaecological daycase surgery patients in Weifang People's Hospital were selected, randomized into group F (flumazenil group, 71 cases) and group C (control group, 70 cases). Dexamethasone 5 mg, flurbiprofen axetil 50 mg, and droperidol 1 mg were given intravenously before induction of anesthesia in both groups. Anesthesia induction: Remimazolam 0.25mg / kg was injected within 1 minute. After the patient fell asleep, mivacurium chloride 0.2mg / kg was injected for 30 seconds and alfentanil 20ug / kg was injected for 30 seconds. Anesthesia maintenance: Remimazolam 1mg/kg/h and alfentanil 40ug/kg/h were continuously pumped by micro pump. Stopping the injection of remimazolam and alfentanil at the end of the operation. Flumazenil 0.2 mg was given to antagonize remimazolam in group F after 1 minute. Group C was given an equal volume of saline. The incidence of PONV in the postoperative PACU and over a 24-hour period, patient awakening time, and general patient information were recorded.

Results

The incidence of PONV in both groups within 24 hours was 50.70% in group F was significantly higher than 32.86% in group C. The difference was statistically significant (P < 0.05). The incidence of PONV in the PACU was 5.6% in group F and 8.6% in group C. The difference was not statistically significant (p > 0.05).

Conclusion

Flumazenil antagonism of remimazolam increases the incidence of PONV within 24 hours in gynecologic day surgery patients and has no significant effect on the incidence of PONV in the PACU.

Remimazolam Pilot for Office-Based Dental Sedation: Adverse Events, Awareness and Outcomes

In recent years, remimazolam has gained approval for use in adult procedural sedation in both the United Kingdom and the United States, potentially offering an alternative to conventional sedatives like propofol and midazolam for procedural sedation. However, there is a limited body of literature that systematically reviews the outcomes of a remimazolam-alfentanil combination protocol for routine office-based dental procedures. The primary objective of this pilot study was to assess the occurrence of significant adverse events associated with the use of a remimazolam-alfentanil sedation protocol for adult dental procedures. Secondary outcomes included evaluating physiological responses, sedation effectiveness, patient and clinician satisfaction and the incidence of intraprocedural awareness. Notably, no significant adverse events were reported among the 25 adult subjects who received remimazolam and alfentanil, and all dental procedures were successfully completed. Patients and clinicians expressed high levels of satisfaction, and patients did not report any distressing memories associated with the dental procedure. These findings suggest that in a limited cohort, the remimazolam-alfentanil regimen appears to be well tolerated and effective for office-based dental procedures in adult patients, with a low risk of adverse events, acceptable hemodynamic effects, rapid onset and recovery and minimal intraoperative awareness. This study provides valuable insights into the potential use of the remimazolam-alfentanil combination in dental sedation practice.