Comparison of safety and efficacy of commonly used sedatives in bronchoscopy examination: a Bayesian network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

IF 2.9 3区 医学 Q1 ANESTHESIOLOGY
Weiying Chen, Feng Chen, Xiaodan Luo, Dongmei Li, Hong Li, Fuhai Bai
{"title":"Comparison of safety and efficacy of commonly used sedatives in bronchoscopy examination: a Bayesian network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.","authors":"Weiying Chen, Feng Chen, Xiaodan Luo, Dongmei Li, Hong Li, Fuhai Bai","doi":"10.23736/S0375-9393.24.18426-X","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Propofol, dexmedetomidine, midazolam, and remimazolam are widely used for sedation during bronchoscopy. The purpose of this network meta-analysis was to compare the safety and efficacy of these four sedative drugs for bronchoscopy.</p><p><strong>Evidence acquisition: </strong>PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Libary, and Wed of Science databases were systematically searched to collect randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of propofol, dexmedetomidine, midazolam, and remimazolam for bronchoscopy from the inception of the database to December 25, 2023. The search strategy we used was (sedative subject terms or sedative free terms) AND (bronchoscopy subject terms or bronchoscopy free terms), without language restrictions. The included studies were randomized controlled trials. Two authors independently searched the databases, selected studies, and extracted data.</p><p><strong>Evidence synthesis: </strong>Eleven RCTs and 1,076 patients were finally included. The results showed that in terms of hypoxemia, compared to midazolam (RR=0.156, 95% CI [0.031, 0.677]), placebo (RR=1.109, 95% Cl [0.014, 0.977]), propofol (RR=0.112, 95% Cl [0.021, 0.553]), and remimazolam (RR=0.104, 95% Cl [0.012, 0.991]), dexmedetomidine significantly reduced the occurrence of hypoxemia (P<0.05). A surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) value indicated a higher ranking of a treatment plan, suggesting that the treatment plan is more advantageous. In terms of hypoxemia, the SUCRA ranking was as follows: dexmedetomidine (98%) > midazolam (57%) > placebo (33%) > remimazolam (32%) > propofol (30%). In terms of arrhythmia, the SUCRA ranking was as follows: dexmedetomidine (89%) > placebo (44%) > remimazolam (42%) > midazolam (40%) > propofol (35%). In terms of bronchoscopy time, the SUCRA ranking was as follows: propofol (68%) > remimazolam (67%) > midazolam (66%) > dexmedetomidine (37%) > placebo (12%).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Compared to midazolam, remimazolam, and propofol, dexmedetomidine significantly reduced the occurrence of hypoxemia and arrhythmia during bronchoscopy. Additionally, bronchoscopy procedures performed under propofol sedation exhibited the shortest operating time.</p>","PeriodicalId":18522,"journal":{"name":"Minerva anestesiologica","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Minerva anestesiologica","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.23736/S0375-9393.24.18426-X","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Propofol, dexmedetomidine, midazolam, and remimazolam are widely used for sedation during bronchoscopy. The purpose of this network meta-analysis was to compare the safety and efficacy of these four sedative drugs for bronchoscopy.

Evidence acquisition: PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Libary, and Wed of Science databases were systematically searched to collect randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of propofol, dexmedetomidine, midazolam, and remimazolam for bronchoscopy from the inception of the database to December 25, 2023. The search strategy we used was (sedative subject terms or sedative free terms) AND (bronchoscopy subject terms or bronchoscopy free terms), without language restrictions. The included studies were randomized controlled trials. Two authors independently searched the databases, selected studies, and extracted data.

Evidence synthesis: Eleven RCTs and 1,076 patients were finally included. The results showed that in terms of hypoxemia, compared to midazolam (RR=0.156, 95% CI [0.031, 0.677]), placebo (RR=1.109, 95% Cl [0.014, 0.977]), propofol (RR=0.112, 95% Cl [0.021, 0.553]), and remimazolam (RR=0.104, 95% Cl [0.012, 0.991]), dexmedetomidine significantly reduced the occurrence of hypoxemia (P<0.05). A surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) value indicated a higher ranking of a treatment plan, suggesting that the treatment plan is more advantageous. In terms of hypoxemia, the SUCRA ranking was as follows: dexmedetomidine (98%) > midazolam (57%) > placebo (33%) > remimazolam (32%) > propofol (30%). In terms of arrhythmia, the SUCRA ranking was as follows: dexmedetomidine (89%) > placebo (44%) > remimazolam (42%) > midazolam (40%) > propofol (35%). In terms of bronchoscopy time, the SUCRA ranking was as follows: propofol (68%) > remimazolam (67%) > midazolam (66%) > dexmedetomidine (37%) > placebo (12%).

Conclusions: Compared to midazolam, remimazolam, and propofol, dexmedetomidine significantly reduced the occurrence of hypoxemia and arrhythmia during bronchoscopy. Additionally, bronchoscopy procedures performed under propofol sedation exhibited the shortest operating time.

支气管镜检查中常用镇静剂的安全性和有效性比较:随机对照试验的贝叶斯网络荟萃分析。
简介:异丙酚、右美托咪定、咪达唑仑和雷马唑仑被广泛用于支气管镜检查时的镇静。本网络meta分析的目的是比较这四种镇静药物用于支气管镜检查的安全性和有效性。证据获取:系统检索PubMed、Embase、Cochrane library和Wed of Science数据库,收集从数据库建立到2023年12月25日异丙酚、右美托咪定、咪达唑仑和雷马唑仑用于支气管镜检查的随机对照试验(rct)。我们使用的搜索策略是(镇静主题词或无镇静主题词)和(支气管镜主题词或无支气管镜主题词),没有语言限制。纳入的研究为随机对照试验。两位作者独立地检索了数据库,选择了研究并提取了数据。证据综合:11项随机对照试验和1076例患者最终纳入。结果显示,在低氧血症方面,与咪达唑仑(RR=0.156, 95% CI[0.031, 0.677])、安慰剂(RR=1.109, 95% Cl[0.014, 0.977])、异丙酚(RR=0.112, 95% Cl[0.021, 0.553])、雷马唑仑(RR=0.104, 95% Cl[0.012, 0.991])相比,右美托咪定显著降低了低氧血症的发生(P咪达唑仑(57%)>安慰剂(33%)>雷马唑仑(32%)>异丙酚(30%))。在心律失常方面,SUCRA排序如下:右美托咪定(89%)>安慰剂(44%)>雷马唑仑(42%)>咪达唑仑(40%)>异丙酚(35%)。支气管镜检查时间方面,SUCRA排序为:异丙酚(68%)>雷马唑仑(67%)>咪达唑仑(66%)>右美托咪定(37%)>安慰剂(12%)。结论:与咪达唑仑、雷马唑仑和异丙酚相比,右美托咪定可显著降低支气管镜检查时低氧血症和心律失常的发生。此外,在异丙酚镇静下进行的支气管镜手术显示出最短的手术时间。
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
Minerva anestesiologica
Minerva anestesiologica 医学-麻醉学
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
21.90%
发文量
367
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Minerva Anestesiologica is the journal of the Italian National Society of Anaesthesia, Analgesia, Resuscitation, and Intensive Care. Minerva Anestesiologica publishes scientific papers on Anesthesiology, Intensive care, Analgesia, Perioperative Medicine and related fields. Manuscripts are expected to comply with the instructions to authors which conform to the Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Editors by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors.
×
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