{"title":"雷马唑仑在短期内窥镜手术中的有效性和安全性:一项系统综述和荟萃分析。","authors":"Yueyang Xin, Pei Lu, Shaodi Guan, Shaomeng Si, Rao Sun, Wei Xia, Hui Xu","doi":"10.3390/medicina61030453","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><i>Background and Objectives</i>: Appropriate sedation and anesthesia are crucial for ensuring comfortable endoscopic procedures. Propofol is one of the most often used sedatives. However, its safety and adverse effects restrict its usage. Remimazolam is a relatively new intravenous benzodiazepine that offers many benefits. Our analysis aims to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of remimazolam during short endoscopic procedures. <i>Materials and Methods:</i> We conducted a comprehensive search of the PubMed, Web of Science, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Turning Research Into Practice databases up to 31 December 2023, for randomized controlled trials published in English. Statistical analyses were performed using Cochrane Review Manager 5.4.1 and Stata Software/MP. <i>Results:</i> The success rate of sedation with remimazolam was slightly lower than that with propofol (RR: 0.99, 95% CI: 0.98~1.00; <i>p</i> = 0.004; I<sup>2</sup> = 42%). As for anesthetic effect-related outcomes, remimazolam did not show advantages in onset time (MD = 12.72, 95% CI: 6.53~18.90, <i>p</i> < 0.001, I<sup>2</sup> = 94%), recovery time (MD = 0.86, 95% CI: -0.55~2.27, <i>p</i> = 0.23, I<sup>2</sup> = 98%), or intraoperative body movement (RR: 1.18, 95% CI: 0.60~2.32, <i>p</i> = 0.62, I<sup>2</sup> = 87%). However, compared to propofol, remimazolam significantly reduced the incidence of several adverse events, including injection pain (RR: 0.07, 95% CI: 0.03~0.14, <i>p</i> < 0.001, I<sup>2</sup> = 69%), intraoperative hypotension (RR: 0.38, 95% CI: 0.31~0.47, <i>p</i> < 0.001, I<sup>2</sup> = 65%), bradycardia (RR: 0.25, 95% CI: 0.15~0.45, <i>p</i> < 0.001, I<sup>2</sup> = 0%), and respiratory depression (RR: 0.34, 95% CI: 0.25~0.46, <i>p</i> < 0.001, I<sup>2</sup> = 50%). The incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) was slightly higher with remimazolam (RD: 0.01, 95% CI: 0.00~0.03, <i>p</i> = 0.04, I<sup>2</sup> = 33%). <i>Conclusions:</i> Remimazolam is a promising sedative for short endoscopic procedures due to its superior safety profile despite a slightly lower sedation success rate compared to propofol.</p>","PeriodicalId":49830,"journal":{"name":"Medicina-Lithuania","volume":"61 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11943698/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Efficacy and Safety of Remimazolam in Short Endoscopic Procedures: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Yueyang Xin, Pei Lu, Shaodi Guan, Shaomeng Si, Rao Sun, Wei Xia, Hui Xu\",\"doi\":\"10.3390/medicina61030453\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><i>Background and Objectives</i>: Appropriate sedation and anesthesia are crucial for ensuring comfortable endoscopic procedures. Propofol is one of the most often used sedatives. However, its safety and adverse effects restrict its usage. Remimazolam is a relatively new intravenous benzodiazepine that offers many benefits. Our analysis aims to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of remimazolam during short endoscopic procedures. <i>Materials and Methods:</i> We conducted a comprehensive search of the PubMed, Web of Science, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Turning Research Into Practice databases up to 31 December 2023, for randomized controlled trials published in English. Statistical analyses were performed using Cochrane Review Manager 5.4.1 and Stata Software/MP. <i>Results:</i> The success rate of sedation with remimazolam was slightly lower than that with propofol (RR: 0.99, 95% CI: 0.98~1.00; <i>p</i> = 0.004; I<sup>2</sup> = 42%). As for anesthetic effect-related outcomes, remimazolam did not show advantages in onset time (MD = 12.72, 95% CI: 6.53~18.90, <i>p</i> < 0.001, I<sup>2</sup> = 94%), recovery time (MD = 0.86, 95% CI: -0.55~2.27, <i>p</i> = 0.23, I<sup>2</sup> = 98%), or intraoperative body movement (RR: 1.18, 95% CI: 0.60~2.32, <i>p</i> = 0.62, I<sup>2</sup> = 87%). However, compared to propofol, remimazolam significantly reduced the incidence of several adverse events, including injection pain (RR: 0.07, 95% CI: 0.03~0.14, <i>p</i> < 0.001, I<sup>2</sup> = 69%), intraoperative hypotension (RR: 0.38, 95% CI: 0.31~0.47, <i>p</i> < 0.001, I<sup>2</sup> = 65%), bradycardia (RR: 0.25, 95% CI: 0.15~0.45, <i>p</i> < 0.001, I<sup>2</sup> = 0%), and respiratory depression (RR: 0.34, 95% CI: 0.25~0.46, <i>p</i> < 0.001, I<sup>2</sup> = 50%). The incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) was slightly higher with remimazolam (RD: 0.01, 95% CI: 0.00~0.03, <i>p</i> = 0.04, I<sup>2</sup> = 33%). <i>Conclusions:</i> Remimazolam is a promising sedative for short endoscopic procedures due to its superior safety profile despite a slightly lower sedation success rate compared to propofol.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49830,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Medicina-Lithuania\",\"volume\":\"61 3\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11943698/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Medicina-Lithuania\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3390/medicina61030453\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medicina-Lithuania","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/medicina61030453","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景和目的:适当的镇静和麻醉是确保内镜手术舒适的关键。异丙酚是最常用的镇静剂之一。但其安全性和不良反应限制了其使用。雷马唑仑是一种相对较新的静脉注射苯二氮卓类药物,具有许多益处。我们的分析旨在评估在短期内镜手术中使用雷马唑仑的有效性和安全性。材料和方法:我们对PubMed、Web of Science、ClinicalTrials.gov和Turning Research Into Practice数据库进行了全面的检索,检索截止到2023年12月31日发表的英文随机对照试验。采用Cochrane Review Manager 5.4.1和Stata Software/MP进行统计分析。结果:雷马唑仑镇静成功率略低于异丙酚镇静成功率(RR: 0.99, 95% CI: 0.98~1.00;P = 0.004;I2 = 42%)。在麻醉效果相关结局方面,雷马唑仑在起效时间(MD = 12.72, 95% CI: 6.53~18.90, p < 0.001, I2 = 94%)、恢复时间(MD = 0.86, 95% CI: -0.55~2.27, p = 0.23, I2 = 98%)、术中体运动(RR: 1.18, 95% CI: 0.60~2.32, p = 0.62, I2 = 87%)方面均无优势。然而,与异丙酚相比,雷马唑仑显著降低了注射疼痛(RR: 0.07, 95% CI: 0.03~0.14, p < 0.001, I2 = 69%)、术中低血压(RR: 0.38, 95% CI: 0.31~0.47, p < 0.001, I2 = 65%)、心动缓(RR: 0.25, 95% CI: 0.15~0.45, p < 0.001, I2 = 0%)、呼吸抑制(RR: 0.34, 95% CI: 0.25~0.46, p < 0.001, I2 = 50%)等不良事件的发生率。雷马唑仑组术后恶心呕吐发生率(PONV)略高于对照组(RD: 0.01, 95% CI: 0.00~0.03, p = 0.04, I2 = 33%)。结论:Remimazolam是一种很有前途的短期内窥镜手术镇静剂,尽管与异丙酚相比,它的镇静成功率略低,但由于其优越的安全性。
Efficacy and Safety of Remimazolam in Short Endoscopic Procedures: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Background and Objectives: Appropriate sedation and anesthesia are crucial for ensuring comfortable endoscopic procedures. Propofol is one of the most often used sedatives. However, its safety and adverse effects restrict its usage. Remimazolam is a relatively new intravenous benzodiazepine that offers many benefits. Our analysis aims to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of remimazolam during short endoscopic procedures. Materials and Methods: We conducted a comprehensive search of the PubMed, Web of Science, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Turning Research Into Practice databases up to 31 December 2023, for randomized controlled trials published in English. Statistical analyses were performed using Cochrane Review Manager 5.4.1 and Stata Software/MP. Results: The success rate of sedation with remimazolam was slightly lower than that with propofol (RR: 0.99, 95% CI: 0.98~1.00; p = 0.004; I2 = 42%). As for anesthetic effect-related outcomes, remimazolam did not show advantages in onset time (MD = 12.72, 95% CI: 6.53~18.90, p < 0.001, I2 = 94%), recovery time (MD = 0.86, 95% CI: -0.55~2.27, p = 0.23, I2 = 98%), or intraoperative body movement (RR: 1.18, 95% CI: 0.60~2.32, p = 0.62, I2 = 87%). However, compared to propofol, remimazolam significantly reduced the incidence of several adverse events, including injection pain (RR: 0.07, 95% CI: 0.03~0.14, p < 0.001, I2 = 69%), intraoperative hypotension (RR: 0.38, 95% CI: 0.31~0.47, p < 0.001, I2 = 65%), bradycardia (RR: 0.25, 95% CI: 0.15~0.45, p < 0.001, I2 = 0%), and respiratory depression (RR: 0.34, 95% CI: 0.25~0.46, p < 0.001, I2 = 50%). The incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) was slightly higher with remimazolam (RD: 0.01, 95% CI: 0.00~0.03, p = 0.04, I2 = 33%). Conclusions: Remimazolam is a promising sedative for short endoscopic procedures due to its superior safety profile despite a slightly lower sedation success rate compared to propofol.
期刊介绍:
The journal’s main focus is on reviews as well as clinical and experimental investigations. The journal aims to advance knowledge related to problems in medicine in developing countries as well as developed economies, to disseminate research on global health, and to promote and foster prevention and treatment of diseases worldwide. MEDICINA publications cater to clinicians, diagnosticians and researchers, and serve as a forum to discuss the current status of health-related matters and their impact on a global and local scale.