Evaluation of the Safety and Efficacy of Remimazolam Combined With Remifentanil for Sedation in Adult Dental Anxiety Patients Undergoing Mandibular Impacted Third Molar Extraction: A Single-Center, Retrospective Cohort Analysis.

IF 1.8 4区 医学 Q3 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
British journal of hospital medicine Pub Date : 2025-08-25 Epub Date: 2025-08-18 DOI:10.12968/hmed.2024.0583
Chen Cao, Chu-Xiong Pan, Wen-Jing Zhu, Fu-Shan Xue
{"title":"Evaluation of the Safety and Efficacy of Remimazolam Combined With Remifentanil for Sedation in Adult Dental Anxiety Patients Undergoing Mandibular Impacted Third Molar Extraction: A Single-Center, Retrospective Cohort Analysis.","authors":"Chen Cao, Chu-Xiong Pan, Wen-Jing Zhu, Fu-Shan Xue","doi":"10.12968/hmed.2024.0583","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Aims/Background</b> Dental anxiety (DA) often leads to significant fear and anxiety in the patients undergoing dental procedures, and increases the complexity and difficulty of treatment. Currently, remimazolam, a benzodiazepine-like sedative drug, has been found effective and safe during endoscopic and surgical procedures. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate the safety levels and efficacy profile of remimazolam combined with remifentanil for sedation in adult patients with DA who underwent the mandibular impacted third molar extraction. <b>Methods</b> This single-center, retrospective cohort study included adult patients with DA who underwent mandibular impacted third molar extraction at the Beijing Stomatological Hospital between January 2021 and December 2023. Based on the sedation protocols used during dental procedures, patients were divided into two groups: a remimazolam combined with remifentanil group (the remimazolam group, n = 63) and a propofol combined with remifentanil group (the propofol group, n = 71). The overall incidence of adverse events was selected as the primary outcome measure, including pulse oxygen saturation (SpO<sub>2</sub>) <93%, injection pain, sedation failure, hypotension, bradycardia, and nausea/vomiting. The secondary outcome measures included sedation onset time, postoperative pain levels, satisfactions of patient and anesthesiologists, and vital signs changes over time. <b>Results</b> The remimazolam group showed an overall incidence of adverse events of 7.9%, compared to 49.3% in the propofol group, with a statistically significant difference between the two groups (<i>p</i> < 0.001). Both study groups demonstrated no statistically significant differences in sedation onset time (<i>p</i> = 0.252) and postoperative pain Verbal Rating Scale (VRS) score (<i>p</i> = 0.527). Moreover, the remimazolam group had greater stability in blood pressure (between-group effect, <i>p</i> = 0.012) and heart rate (between-group effect, <i>p</i> < 0.001) and exhibited statistically significant differences in changes in respiratory rate over time (between-group effect, <i>p</i> < 0.001). Anesthesiologists' satisfaction scores with respiratory and circulatory stability, sedation efficacy, and quality of sedation recovery were significantly higher in the remimazolam group compared to the propofol group (<i>p</i> < 0.001). Surgeons reported a higher satisfaction with sedation efficacy in the remimazolam group. <b>Conclusion</b> In summary, remimazolam combined with remifentanil demonstrates greater safety and effectiveness than propofol combined with remifentanil for sedation during dental procedures in adult DA patients. This combination particularly decreases adverse events, maintains stable respiratory and circulatory functions, and improves satisfaction levels among anesthesiologists and surgeons.</p>","PeriodicalId":9256,"journal":{"name":"British journal of hospital medicine","volume":"86 8","pages":"1-13"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British journal of hospital medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.12968/hmed.2024.0583","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/8/18 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aims/Background Dental anxiety (DA) often leads to significant fear and anxiety in the patients undergoing dental procedures, and increases the complexity and difficulty of treatment. Currently, remimazolam, a benzodiazepine-like sedative drug, has been found effective and safe during endoscopic and surgical procedures. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate the safety levels and efficacy profile of remimazolam combined with remifentanil for sedation in adult patients with DA who underwent the mandibular impacted third molar extraction. Methods This single-center, retrospective cohort study included adult patients with DA who underwent mandibular impacted third molar extraction at the Beijing Stomatological Hospital between January 2021 and December 2023. Based on the sedation protocols used during dental procedures, patients were divided into two groups: a remimazolam combined with remifentanil group (the remimazolam group, n = 63) and a propofol combined with remifentanil group (the propofol group, n = 71). The overall incidence of adverse events was selected as the primary outcome measure, including pulse oxygen saturation (SpO2) <93%, injection pain, sedation failure, hypotension, bradycardia, and nausea/vomiting. The secondary outcome measures included sedation onset time, postoperative pain levels, satisfactions of patient and anesthesiologists, and vital signs changes over time. Results The remimazolam group showed an overall incidence of adverse events of 7.9%, compared to 49.3% in the propofol group, with a statistically significant difference between the two groups (p < 0.001). Both study groups demonstrated no statistically significant differences in sedation onset time (p = 0.252) and postoperative pain Verbal Rating Scale (VRS) score (p = 0.527). Moreover, the remimazolam group had greater stability in blood pressure (between-group effect, p = 0.012) and heart rate (between-group effect, p < 0.001) and exhibited statistically significant differences in changes in respiratory rate over time (between-group effect, p < 0.001). Anesthesiologists' satisfaction scores with respiratory and circulatory stability, sedation efficacy, and quality of sedation recovery were significantly higher in the remimazolam group compared to the propofol group (p < 0.001). Surgeons reported a higher satisfaction with sedation efficacy in the remimazolam group. Conclusion In summary, remimazolam combined with remifentanil demonstrates greater safety and effectiveness than propofol combined with remifentanil for sedation during dental procedures in adult DA patients. This combination particularly decreases adverse events, maintains stable respiratory and circulatory functions, and improves satisfaction levels among anesthesiologists and surgeons.

雷马唑仑联合瑞芬太尼镇静治疗成年下颌阻生第三磨牙患者的安全性和有效性评价:单中心、回顾性队列分析
目的/背景牙科焦虑(Dental anxiety, DA)常导致接受牙科治疗的患者产生明显的恐惧和焦虑,并增加治疗的复杂性和难度。目前,雷马唑仑是一种类似苯二氮卓类药物的镇静剂,在内窥镜和外科手术中有效且安全。因此,本研究旨在评估雷马唑仑联合瑞芬太尼用于成年DA患者下颌阻生第三磨牙拔牙镇静的安全性和有效性。方法本研究为单中心、回顾性队列研究,纳入2021年1月至2023年12月在北京口腔医院行下颌阻生第三磨牙拔牙手术的成年DA患者。根据牙科手术中使用的镇静方案,将患者分为两组:雷马唑仑联合瑞芬太尼组(雷马唑仑组,n = 63)和异丙酚联合瑞芬太尼组(异丙酚组,n = 71)。结果雷马唑仑组总体不良事件发生率为7.9%,异丙酚组为49.3%,两组间差异有统计学意义(p < 0.001)。两个研究组在镇静起效时间(p = 0.252)和术后疼痛言语评定量表(VRS)评分(p = 0.527)上均无统计学差异。此外,雷马唑仑组在血压(组间效应,p = 0.012)和心率(组间效应,p < 0.001)方面具有更大的稳定性,呼吸频率随时间变化的差异具有统计学意义(组间效应,p < 0.001)。麻醉医师对呼吸和循环稳定性、镇静效果和镇静恢复质量的满意度评分,雷马唑仑组明显高于异丙酚组(p < 0.001)。外科医生对雷马唑仑组镇静效果的满意度较高。综上所述,雷马唑仑联合瑞芬太尼在成人DA患者牙科手术镇静中的安全性和有效性优于异丙酚联合瑞芬太尼。这种组合特别减少了不良事件,维持了稳定的呼吸和循环功能,提高了麻醉师和外科医生的满意度。
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
British journal of hospital medicine
British journal of hospital medicine 医学-医学:内科
CiteScore
1.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
176
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: British Journal of Hospital Medicine was established in 1966, and is still true to its origins: a monthly, peer-reviewed, multidisciplinary review journal for hospital doctors and doctors in training. The journal publishes an authoritative mix of clinical reviews, education and training updates, quality improvement projects and case reports, and book reviews from recognized leaders in the profession. The Core Training for Doctors section provides clinical information in an easily accessible format for doctors in training. British Journal of Hospital Medicine is an invaluable resource for hospital doctors at all stages of their career. The journal is indexed on Medline, CINAHL, the Sociedad Iberoamericana de Información Científica and Scopus.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信