Efficacy of remimazolam versus midazolam for outpatient dental sedation: a multicenter, randomized, controlled, non-inferiority trial

IF 7.5
Bing Liu, Peijuan Wang, Wei Zhu, Cong Yu, Liyong Jia, Xiaotong Shi, Zhi Wang, Ting Xu, Qian Li, Xudong Yang, Juzhao Zhao, Zhoupeng Zheng, Yong Li, Na Xing, Tiejun Zhang, Nan Zhao, Weifang Shan, Qiumiao Chen, Lina Zhang, Yanyu Liu, Yuyan Sun, Zijian Guo, Qiuyuan Hong, Sulin Tang, Xiaofei Qi, Yanna Li, Li Wang, Zhaohua Ji, Rui Lu, Hui Zhang
{"title":"Efficacy of remimazolam versus midazolam for outpatient dental sedation: a multicenter, randomized, controlled, non-inferiority trial","authors":"Bing Liu,&nbsp;Peijuan Wang,&nbsp;Wei Zhu,&nbsp;Cong Yu,&nbsp;Liyong Jia,&nbsp;Xiaotong Shi,&nbsp;Zhi Wang,&nbsp;Ting Xu,&nbsp;Qian Li,&nbsp;Xudong Yang,&nbsp;Juzhao Zhao,&nbsp;Zhoupeng Zheng,&nbsp;Yong Li,&nbsp;Na Xing,&nbsp;Tiejun Zhang,&nbsp;Nan Zhao,&nbsp;Weifang Shan,&nbsp;Qiumiao Chen,&nbsp;Lina Zhang,&nbsp;Yanyu Liu,&nbsp;Yuyan Sun,&nbsp;Zijian Guo,&nbsp;Qiuyuan Hong,&nbsp;Sulin Tang,&nbsp;Xiaofei Qi,&nbsp;Yanna Li,&nbsp;Li Wang,&nbsp;Zhaohua Ji,&nbsp;Rui Lu,&nbsp;Hui Zhang","doi":"10.1007/s44254-025-00160-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><p>Intravenous sedation is commonly used in routine dental procedures, however, existing agents are associated with limitations in recovery profiles and postoperative complications. Remimazolam has emerged as a promising alternative to address these clinical challenges. This study aimed to establish the non-inferiority of titrated remimazolam compared to midazolam concerning both efficacy and safety endpoints in dental extraction procedures.</p><h3>Methods</h3><p>This randomized, single-blind, parallel-controlled, non-inferiority study was conducted across 13 centers in China from September 2021 to July 2023. A total of 612 eligible patients scheduled for dental extraction were randomized to receive either remimazolam (group R, initial dose of 0.1 mg/kg with 2 mg top-ups; n = 307) or midazolam (group M, initial dose of 0.05 mg/kg with 1 mg top-ups; n = 305). The primary endpoint was the sedation success rate, with a predefined non-inferiority margin of 6%. Secondary outcomes included recovery time, discharge readiness, adverse events, and 24-h postoperative complications.</p><h3>Results</h3><p>Remimazolam demonstrated non-inferior efficacy, achieving success rates of 99.0% compared to 96.1% for midazolam (adjusted risk difference, 95% confidence interval, 2.81 [−1.29 to 6.91]; adjusted <i>P</i> = 0.179). Patients in group R recovered faster and were discharged earlier than patients in group M (5 [3, 6] vs. 7 [4, 10] min, <i>P</i> &lt; 0.001; and 46 [38, 53] vs. 52 [44, 60] min, <i>P</i> &lt; 0.001). Additionally, patients in group R exhibited a significantly lower incidence of 24-h postoperative adverse reactions (4.6% vs. 12.1%; adjusted <i>P</i> = 0.030).</p><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Titrated remimazolam demonstrates non-inferior sedation success when compared to midazolam while offering a superior recovery profile and improved postoperative safety. These findings indicate that remimazolam may serve as a more advantageous sedative option for outpatient dental procedures, especially in environments requiring rapid patient turnover.</p><h3>Trial registration</h3><p>The trial was registered at the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (registration number: ChiCTR2100050822, URL: https://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.html?proj=133251, Principal investigator: Hui Zhang, date of registration: September 4, 2021).</p></div>","PeriodicalId":100082,"journal":{"name":"Anesthesiology and Perioperative Science","volume":"4 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":7.5000,"publicationDate":"2026-02-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s44254-025-00160-z.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Anesthesiology and Perioperative Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s44254-025-00160-z","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose

Intravenous sedation is commonly used in routine dental procedures, however, existing agents are associated with limitations in recovery profiles and postoperative complications. Remimazolam has emerged as a promising alternative to address these clinical challenges. This study aimed to establish the non-inferiority of titrated remimazolam compared to midazolam concerning both efficacy and safety endpoints in dental extraction procedures.

Methods

This randomized, single-blind, parallel-controlled, non-inferiority study was conducted across 13 centers in China from September 2021 to July 2023. A total of 612 eligible patients scheduled for dental extraction were randomized to receive either remimazolam (group R, initial dose of 0.1 mg/kg with 2 mg top-ups; n = 307) or midazolam (group M, initial dose of 0.05 mg/kg with 1 mg top-ups; n = 305). The primary endpoint was the sedation success rate, with a predefined non-inferiority margin of 6%. Secondary outcomes included recovery time, discharge readiness, adverse events, and 24-h postoperative complications.

Results

Remimazolam demonstrated non-inferior efficacy, achieving success rates of 99.0% compared to 96.1% for midazolam (adjusted risk difference, 95% confidence interval, 2.81 [−1.29 to 6.91]; adjusted P = 0.179). Patients in group R recovered faster and were discharged earlier than patients in group M (5 [3, 6] vs. 7 [4, 10] min, P < 0.001; and 46 [38, 53] vs. 52 [44, 60] min, P < 0.001). Additionally, patients in group R exhibited a significantly lower incidence of 24-h postoperative adverse reactions (4.6% vs. 12.1%; adjusted P = 0.030).

Conclusions

Titrated remimazolam demonstrates non-inferior sedation success when compared to midazolam while offering a superior recovery profile and improved postoperative safety. These findings indicate that remimazolam may serve as a more advantageous sedative option for outpatient dental procedures, especially in environments requiring rapid patient turnover.

Trial registration

The trial was registered at the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (registration number: ChiCTR2100050822, URL: https://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.html?proj=133251, Principal investigator: Hui Zhang, date of registration: September 4, 2021).

雷马唑仑与咪达唑仑在门诊牙科镇静中的疗效:一项多中心、随机、对照、非劣效性试验
目的静脉镇静通常用于常规牙科手术,然而,现有的药物在恢复概况和术后并发症方面存在局限性。雷马唑仑已成为解决这些临床挑战的有希望的替代方案。本研究旨在确定在拔牙过程中,与咪达唑仑相比,滴定雷马唑仑在疗效和安全性方面的非劣效性。该随机、单盲、平行对照、非劣效性研究于2021年9月至2023年7月在中国的13个中心进行。共有612名计划拔牙的符合条件的患者随机接受雷马唑仑(R组,初始剂量为0.1 mg/kg,补充2mg, n = 307)或咪达唑仑(M组,初始剂量为0.05 mg/kg,补充1mg, n = 305)。主要终点是镇静成功率,预设的非劣效裕度为6%。次要结局包括恢复时间、出院准备、不良事件和术后24小时并发症。结果雷马唑仑的疗效不逊色,成功率为99.0%,而咪达唑仑为96.1%(校正风险差,95%可信区间为2.81[−1.29 ~ 6.91];校正P = 0.179)。R组患者恢复较快,出院早于M组患者(5[3,6]比7 [4,10]min, P < 0.001; 46[38,53]比52 [44,60]min, P < 0.001)。此外,R组患者术后24小时不良反应发生率明显低于对照组(4.6% vs. 12.1%,校正P = 0.030)。结论与咪达唑仑相比,雷马唑仑的镇静效果优于咪达唑仑,同时具有更好的恢复情况和更高的术后安全性。这些发现表明,雷马唑仑可能是门诊牙科手术中更有利的镇静选择,特别是在需要快速患者周转的环境中。试验已在中国临床试验注册中心注册(注册号:ChiCTR2100050822, URL: https://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.html?proj=133251,首席研究员:张辉,注册日期:2021年9月4日)。
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
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书