Comparison of remimazolam and midazolam for sedation during colonoscopy in Japanese patients: A propensity score matching analysis

IF 1.4 Q4 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY
DEN open Pub Date : 2024-07-23 DOI:10.1002/deo2.412
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
{"title":"Comparison of remimazolam and midazolam for sedation during colonoscopy in Japanese patients: A propensity score matching analysis","authors":"Kanako Ogura,&nbsp;Ryoji Ichijima,&nbsp;Hisatomo Ikehara,&nbsp;Tomomi Sugita,&nbsp;Daisuke Yamaguchi,&nbsp;Yasuhiko Nagata,&nbsp;Mitsuru Esaki,&nbsp;Yosuke Minoda,&nbsp;Hiroyuki Ono,&nbsp;Kinichi Hotta,&nbsp;Shinsuke Kiriyama,&nbsp;Tetsuya Sumiyoshi,&nbsp;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> &lt; 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}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

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.

Abstract Image

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
目的比较使用咪达唑仑和瑞咪唑仑进行结肠直肠内窥镜检查的镇静效果和安全性:这项对 REM-IICTJP01 研究进行的单中心、双臂、事后分析调查了瑞马唑仑用于消化道内窥镜镇静的有效性和安全性。我们在同一时期分别招募了 40 名和 208 名患者,他们分别在雷马唑仑和咪达唑仑镇静下接受了结肠镜检查。主要结果是从结肠镜检查结束到出院的时间。次要结果包括从结肠镜检查结束到苏醒的时间、剂量和不良事件。为消除混杂因素的影响,采用了倾向得分匹配法:每组有 37 名患者进行了匹配。倾向匹配后,咪达唑仑组结肠镜检查后苏醒时间为28.0(13.0-37.0)分钟,而瑞咪唑仑组为0(0-0)分钟;此外,咪达唑仑组结肠镜检查后至出院时间为40.0(35.0-46.5)分钟,而瑞咪唑仑组为0(0-5.0)分钟,两者均明显短于瑞咪唑仑组(p < 0.01)。咪达唑仑组和瑞咪唑仑组的额外剂量分别为 0(0-0)和 2(1-3)。咪达唑仑组和瑞咪唑仑组的总剂量分别为2.0(2.0-3.5)毫克和6.0(5.0-7.0)毫克:结论:与咪达唑仑相比,雷咪唑仑的苏醒和安全出院时间明显更快。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信