ArticleHeliyon2024
Exploring the Utility of remimazolam in cesarean sections under general anesthesia: A preliminary retrospective analysis and Implications for future study.
Article in Heliyon, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Emergency cesarean section under general anesthesia using remimazolam in a pregnant woman with Fontan circulation : Case report with literature review.Die Anaesthesiologie · 2025Article
- Remimazolam and Its Place in the Current Landscape of Procedural Sedation and General Anesthesia.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Remimazolam has recently been introduced as a maintenance agent for general anesthesia. However, the effect of remimazolam on peripartum prognosis has not been reported. Therefore, this study aimed to compare the effects of remimazolam and propofol for uterotonic drugs following cesarean section. Methods: The electronic medical records of 51 adult women who underwent elective cesarean sections by single obstetrician under general anesthesia were collected. Participants were categorized into two groups: the propofol group and the remimazolam group. General anesthesia was maintained by continuous infusion of propofol or remimazolam after delivery. The number of uterotonic drugs administered during the cesarean section, the estimated blood loss (EBL), and length of hospital stay (LOS) after delivery were assessed. Results: Of the 51 patients included in the study, 35 were in the propofol group and 16 in the remimazolam group. In the remimazolam group, five patients (31.3%, 5/16) received more uterotonics than the standard regimen. Conversely, in the propofol group, 19 patients (54.3%, 19/35) were injected with more uterotonics than the standard regimen. Logistic regression analysis showed that abnormal positioning of the placenta ( Conclusions: The use of remimazolam as a maintenance agent did not result in significantly higher use of intrapartum uterotonics compared to the use of propofol. These results cannot exclude all adverse effects of remimazolam during cesarean delivery. Further randomized controlled trials must be conducted to obtain high-quality evidence.
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.