Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37085760›Full record

Trial reportBMC anesthesiology2023

Comparison of postoperative nausea and vomiting between Remimazolam and Propofol in Patients undergoing oral and maxillofacial surgery: a prospective Randomized Controlled Trial.

Eun-Jung Kim, Cheul-Hong Kim, Ji-Young Yoon, Gyeong-Jo Byeon, Hee Young Kim, Eun-Ji Choi

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC anesthesiology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
7.3field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Eun-Jung KimDepartment of Dental Anesthesia and Pain Medicine, School of Dentistry, Dental Research Institute, Pusan National University, Yangsan, Republic of Korea.
Cheul-Hong KimDepartment of Dental Anesthesia and Pain Medicine, School of Dentistry, Dental Research Institute, Pusan National University, Yangsan, Republic of Korea.
Ji-Young YoonDepartment of Dental Anesthesia and Pain Medicine, School of Dentistry, Dental Research Institute, Pusan National University, Yangsan, Republic of Korea.
Gyeong-Jo ByeonDepartment of Anesthesia and Pain Medicine, Pusan National University Yangsan Hospital, Yangsan, Republic of Korea.
Hee Young KimDepartment of Anesthesia and Pain Medicine, Pusan National University Yangsan Hospital, Yangsan, Republic of Korea.
Eun-Ji ChoiDepartment of Dental Anesthesia and Pain Medicine, School of Dentistry, Dental Research Institute, Pusan National University, Yangsan, Republic of Korea. eunjichoi81@gmail.com.ORCID 0000-0003-3731-0785
Pusan National University Dental Hospital · KRPusan National University Yangsan Hospital · KR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRemimazolam is a recently approved, ultra-short-acting benzodiazepine. However, few studies have investigated remimazolam in relation to postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). This study aimed to compare the effects of remimazolam and propofol on PONV in patients undergoing oral and maxillofacial surgery.

methodsPatients (n = 206) aged 19-65 years who were scheduled for oral and maxillofacial surgery were randomized into two groups, the remimazolam (R) and propofol group (P). In the R group (n = 94), remimazolam was used to induce anesthesia at 12 mg/kg/h and to maintain anesthesia at 1-2 mg/kg/h. In the P group (n = 95), anesthesia was induced and maintained with propofol (target effect-site concentration: 3-5 µg/ml). In both groups, remifentanil was administered at a target effect-site concentration of 2.5-4 ng/ml. The primary outcome was the overall incidence of PONV during the first 24 h after surgery. Secondary outcomes included the severity of nausea, use of rescue antiemetics, severity of postoperative pain, use of rescue analgesia, and quality of recovery.

resultsThe incidence of PONV during the first 24 h after surgery was 11.7% and 10.5% in the R group and P group, respectively, and there was no significant difference in the severity of nausea (P > 0.05). Ten patients in the R group and ten patients in the P group required rescue antiemetics during the first 24 h after surgery (P = 0.98). No inter-group differences were observed in terms of postoperative pain score, use of rescue analgesia, and quality of recovery (P > 0.05).

conclusionsIn this study, remimazolam did not increase the incidence and severity of PONV compared with propofol.

trial registrationKCT0006965, Clinical Research Information Service (CRIS), Republic of Korea. Registration date: 26/01/2022.

Indexed as

AntiemeticsPropofolSurgery, OralBenzodiazepinesHumansPostoperative Nausea and VomitingPostoperative PainProspective StudiesAntiemeticsBenzodiazepinesPropofolremimazolamPostoperative nausea and vomitingPropofolRemimazolam

Identifiers

PMID37085760
PMCPMC10122311
OpenAlexW4366769306

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.