Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38915947›Full record

ArticleIbrain2024

Efficacy and safety of remimazolam versus propofol for intraoperative sedation during regional anesthesia: A phase II, multicenter, randomized, active-controlled, single-blind clinical trial.

Ting-Ting Li, Lu Yin, Yue-Xin Huang, Xiu-Hong Wang, Yan-Huan Wei, Yong Wang, Shi-Wei Yang, Genoveva B da Graca Cunha, Fei Liu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Ibrain, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Oxycodone versus sufentanil on pain management for spinal PVP surgery.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
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

9 authors.

Ting-Ting LiDepartment of Anesthesiology West China Hospital, Sichuan University Chengdu Sichuan China.ORCID 0000-0001-6041-6719
Lu YinDepartment of Anesthesiology West China Hospital, Sichuan University Chengdu Sichuan China.
Yue-Xin HuangDepartment of Anesthesiology West China Hospital, Sichuan University Chengdu Sichuan China.
Xiu-Hong WangDepartment of Anesthesiology West China Hospital, Sichuan University Chengdu Sichuan China.
Yan-Huan WeiGraduate School of Education Beijing Foreign Studies University Beijing China.
Yong WangDivision of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Department of General Surgery West China Hospital, Sichuan University Chengdu Sichuan China.
Shi-Wei YangDivision of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Department of General Surgery West China Hospital, Sichuan University Chengdu Sichuan China.
Genoveva B da Graca CunhaHospital Ayres Menezes Sao Tome Sao Tome and Principe.
Fei LiuDepartment of Anesthesiology West China Hospital, Sichuan University Chengdu Sichuan China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of remimazolam for intraoperative sedation during regional anesthesia. It was a phase II-multicenter, randomized, single-blind, parallel-group, active-controlled clinical trial (No. ChiCTR2100054956). From May 6, 2021 to July 4, 2021, patients were randomly enrolled from 17 hospitals in China. A total of 105 patients aged 18-65 years who underwent selective surgery under regional anesthesia were included. Patients received different sedatives with different dosages: 0.1 mg/kg remimazolam (HR), 0.05 mg/kg remimazolam (LR), or 1.0 mg/kg propofol (P) group, followed by a maintenance infusion. Main outcome measures included the efficacy of sedation measured by Modified Observer's Assessment of Alertness/Sedation Scale (MOAA/S) levels (1-4, 1-3, 2-3, 3, and 2-4) during the sedation procedure (the duration percentage) and incidence of adverse reactions. It showed that the duration percentage of MOAA/S levels 1-4 was 100.0 [8.1]% (median [interquartile range]), 89.9 [20.2]%, 100.0 [7.7]% in the HR, LR, and P groups, respectively. The percentage of patients in the HR, LR, and P groups who achieved MOAA/S levels 1-4 within 3 min after administration was 85.7%, 58.8%, and 82.9%, respectively. However, the time to recovery from anesthesia after withdrawal of sedatives (7.9 ± 5.7 min), incidence of anterograde amnesia (75%), and adverse effects were not statistically significant among the three groups. These findings suggest that a loading dose of remimazolam 0.1 mg/kg followed by a maintenance infusion of 0-3 mg/kg/h provides adequate sedation for patients under regional anesthesia without increasing adverse reactions.

Indexed as

HR7056propofolregional anesthesiaremimazolamsedation

Identifiers

PMID38915947
PMCPMC11193864

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.