ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2021
Outcomes in Critically Ill Patients Sedated with Intravenous Lormetazepam or Midazolam: A Retrospective Cohort Study.
Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cipepofol versus Conventional Sedation for Pneumonia Patients Receiving Mechanical Ventilation: A Real-World Retrospective Study of Effectiveness and Hemodynamic Safety.Drug design, development and therapy · 2026Observational
- Sedation and analgesia strategies in the neuro intensive care unit.World journal of critical care medicine · 2025Review
- Pharmacokinetics of Enteral Lormetazepam in Mechanically Ventilated ICU Patients with COVID-19: An Adjunct Sedative Study.Clinical pharmacokinetics · 2024Article
- Modern Sedation and Analgesia Strategies in Neurocritical Care.Current neurology and neuroscience reports · 2023Review
- Post-Intensive Care Syndrome after Critical Illness: An Imperative for Effective Prevention.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The benzodiazepine, midazolam, is one of the most frequently used sedatives in intensive care medicine, but it has an unfavorable pharmacokinetic profile when continuously applied. As a consequence, patients are frequently prolonged and more deeply sedated than intended. Due to its distinct pharmacological features, including a cytochrome P450-independent metabolization, intravenous lormetazepam might be clinically advantageous compared to midazolam. In this retrospective cohort study, we compared patients who received either intravenous lormetazepam or midazolam with respect to their survival and sedation characteristics. The cohort included 3314 mechanically ventilated, critically ill patients that received one of the two drugs in a tertiary medical center in Germany between 2006 and 2018. A Cox proportional hazards model with mortality as outcome and APACHE II, age, gender, and admission mode as covariates revealed a hazard ratio of 1.75 [95% CI 1.46-2.09;
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.