前瞻性随机对照试验:比较在开颅手术中使用苯磺酸瑞马唑仑和氟马西尼与丙泊酚进行麻醉管理的 "睡-醒-睡 "方法。

IF 2.3 2区 医学 Q2 ANESTHESIOLOGY
Takehito Sato, Takahiro Ando, Kanako Ozeki, Ichiko Asano, Yachiyo Kuwatsuka, Masahiko Ando, Kazuya Motomura, Kimitoshi Nishiwaki
{"title":"前瞻性随机对照试验:比较在开颅手术中使用苯磺酸瑞马唑仑和氟马西尼与丙泊酚进行麻醉管理的 \"睡-醒-睡 \"方法。","authors":"Takehito Sato, Takahiro Ando, Kanako Ozeki, Ichiko Asano, Yachiyo Kuwatsuka, Masahiko Ando, Kazuya Motomura, Kimitoshi Nishiwaki","doi":"10.1097/ANA.0000000000000975","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Awake craniotomy is performed to resect brain tumors in eloquent brain areas to maximize tumor reduction and minimize neurological damage. Evidence suggests that intraoperative anesthetic management of awake craniotomy with remimazolam is safe. We compared the time to arousal and efficacy of anesthetic management with remimazolam and propofol during awake craniotomy.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In a single-institution randomized, prospective study, patients who underwent elective awake craniotomy were randomized to receive remimazolam and reversal with flumazenil (group R) or propofol (group P). The primary end point was time to awaken. Secondary end points were time to loss of consciousness during induction of anesthesia, the frequency of intraoperative complications (pain, hypertension, seizures, nausea, vomiting, and delayed arousal), and postoperative nausea and vomiting. Intraoperative task performance was assessed using a numerical rating scale (NRS) score.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Fifty-eight patients were recruited, of which 52 (26 in each group) were available for the efficacy analysis. Patients in group R had faster mean (±SD) arousal times than those in the P group (890.8±239.8 vs. 1075.4±317.5 s; P=0.013)and higher and more reliable intraoperative task performance (NRS score 8.81±1.50 vs. 7.69±2.36; P=0.043). There were no significant intraoperative complications.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Compared with propofol, remimazolam was associated with more rapid loss of consciousness and, after administration of flumazenil, with faster arousal times and improved intraoperative task performance.</p>","PeriodicalId":16550,"journal":{"name":"Journal of neurosurgical anesthesiology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Anesthetic Management With Remimazolam Besylate and Flumazenil Versus Propofol During Awake Craniotomy Following an Asleep-awake-asleep Method.\",\"authors\":\"Takehito Sato, Takahiro Ando, Kanako Ozeki, Ichiko Asano, Yachiyo Kuwatsuka, Masahiko Ando, Kazuya Motomura, Kimitoshi Nishiwaki\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/ANA.0000000000000975\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Awake craniotomy is performed to resect brain tumors in eloquent brain areas to maximize tumor reduction and minimize neurological damage. Evidence suggests that intraoperative anesthetic management of awake craniotomy with remimazolam is safe. We compared the time to arousal and efficacy of anesthetic management with remimazolam and propofol during awake craniotomy.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In a single-institution randomized, prospective study, patients who underwent elective awake craniotomy were randomized to receive remimazolam and reversal with flumazenil (group R) or propofol (group P). The primary end point was time to awaken. Secondary end points were time to loss of consciousness during induction of anesthesia, the frequency of intraoperative complications (pain, hypertension, seizures, nausea, vomiting, and delayed arousal), and postoperative nausea and vomiting. Intraoperative task performance was assessed using a numerical rating scale (NRS) score.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Fifty-eight patients were recruited, of which 52 (26 in each group) were available for the efficacy analysis. Patients in group R had faster mean (±SD) arousal times than those in the P group (890.8±239.8 vs. 1075.4±317.5 s; P=0.013)and higher and more reliable intraoperative task performance (NRS score 8.81±1.50 vs. 7.69±2.36; P=0.043). There were no significant intraoperative complications.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Compared with propofol, remimazolam was associated with more rapid loss of consciousness and, after administration of flumazenil, with faster arousal times and improved intraoperative task performance.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16550,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of neurosurgical anesthesiology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of neurosurgical anesthesiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/ANA.0000000000000975\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ANESTHESIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of neurosurgical anesthesiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/ANA.0000000000000975","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:清醒状态下进行开颅手术是为了切除位于脑功能区的脑肿瘤,以最大限度地缩小肿瘤和减少神经损伤。有证据表明,术中使用雷马唑仑进行清醒开颅手术的麻醉管理是安全的。我们比较了清醒开颅手术中使用瑞马唑仑和异丙酚进行麻醉管理的唤醒时间和效果:在一项单一机构的随机前瞻性研究中,接受择期清醒开颅手术的患者被随机分配到接受瑞马唑仑和氟马西尼逆转(R组)或丙泊酚(P组)。主要终点是苏醒时间。次要终点是麻醉诱导期间意识丧失的时间、术中并发症(疼痛、高血压、癫痫发作、恶心、呕吐和唤醒延迟)的发生频率以及术后恶心和呕吐。术中任务表现采用数字评分量表(NRS)评分进行评估:共招募了 58 名患者,其中 52 人(每组 26 人)可用于疗效分析。R 组患者的平均(±SD)唤醒时间比 P 组更快(890.8±239.8 对 1075.4±317.5 秒;P=0.013),术中任务表现更高、更可靠(NRS 评分 8.81±1.50 对 7.69±2.36;P=0.043)。术中无明显并发症:结论:与异丙酚相比,瑞马唑仑能更快地失去知觉,在使用氟马西尼后,唤醒时间更快,术中任务表现更好。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Anesthetic Management With Remimazolam Besylate and Flumazenil Versus Propofol During Awake Craniotomy Following an Asleep-awake-asleep Method.

Background: Awake craniotomy is performed to resect brain tumors in eloquent brain areas to maximize tumor reduction and minimize neurological damage. Evidence suggests that intraoperative anesthetic management of awake craniotomy with remimazolam is safe. We compared the time to arousal and efficacy of anesthetic management with remimazolam and propofol during awake craniotomy.

Methods: In a single-institution randomized, prospective study, patients who underwent elective awake craniotomy were randomized to receive remimazolam and reversal with flumazenil (group R) or propofol (group P). The primary end point was time to awaken. Secondary end points were time to loss of consciousness during induction of anesthesia, the frequency of intraoperative complications (pain, hypertension, seizures, nausea, vomiting, and delayed arousal), and postoperative nausea and vomiting. Intraoperative task performance was assessed using a numerical rating scale (NRS) score.

Results: Fifty-eight patients were recruited, of which 52 (26 in each group) were available for the efficacy analysis. Patients in group R had faster mean (±SD) arousal times than those in the P group (890.8±239.8 vs. 1075.4±317.5 s; P=0.013)and higher and more reliable intraoperative task performance (NRS score 8.81±1.50 vs. 7.69±2.36; P=0.043). There were no significant intraoperative complications.

Conclusions: Compared with propofol, remimazolam was associated with more rapid loss of consciousness and, after administration of flumazenil, with faster arousal times and improved intraoperative task performance.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.20
自引率
10.80%
发文量
119
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Neurosurgical Anesthesiology (JNA) is a peer-reviewed publication directed to an audience of neuroanesthesiologists, neurosurgeons, neurosurgical monitoring specialists, neurosurgical support staff, and Neurosurgical Intensive Care Unit personnel. The journal publishes original peer-reviewed studies in the form of Clinical Investigations, Laboratory Investigations, Clinical Reports, Review Articles, Journal Club synopses of current literature from related journals, presentation of Points of View on controversial issues, Book Reviews, Correspondence, and Abstracts from affiliated neuroanesthesiology societies. JNA is the Official Journal of the Society for Neuroscience in Anesthesiology and Critical Care, the Neuroanaesthesia and Critical Care Society of Great Britain and Ireland, the Association de Neuro-Anesthésiologie Réanimation de langue Française, the Wissenschaftlicher Arbeitskreis Neuroanästhesie der Deutschen Gesellschaft fur Anästhesiologie und Intensivmedizen, the Arbeitsgemeinschaft Deutschsprachiger Neuroanästhesisten und Neuro-Intensivmediziner, the Korean Society of Neuroanesthesia, the Japanese Society of Neuroanesthesia and Critical Care, the Neuroanesthesiology Chapter of the Colegio Mexicano de Anesthesiología, the Indian Society of Neuroanesthesiology and Critical Care, and the Thai Society for Neuroanesthesia.
×
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