ArticleBiomedical reports2025
Efficacy and safety of remimazolam vs. propofol for general anesthesia with tracheal intubation: Systematic review and meta‑analysis.
Article in Biomedical reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Non-inferiority trial of remimazolam versus propofol for fast-track anesthesia in children undergoing percutaneous closure of atrial septal defect.BMC anesthesiology · 2026Trial
- Efficacy and safety of esketamine hydrochloride injection at different dosages for patients undergoing radical thyroidectomy for thyroid cancer: a randomized trial.BMC anesthesiology · 2025Trial
- Remimazolam Versus Propofol for General Anesthesia in Older Adults Undergoing Colon Cancer Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Comparative Studies.Pharmaceutics · 2026Review
- Comparative Effects of Remimazolam and Propofol on Intraoperative Hypertension and Hypotension During Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Gynecologic Surgery: A Retrospective Analysis.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Remimazolam is an ultra-short-acting intravenous benzodiazepine derivative approved for sedation during gastroscopy and colonoscopy. The present study aimed to compare the safety and efficacy of remimazolam and propofol for general anesthesia with tracheal intubation by meta-analysis. A comprehensive search was conducted in databases, including PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library and Web of Science, to identify relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The search period was from the inception of these databases until February 2024. All eligible randomized controlled trials that report at least one outcome of interest were subjected to quality assessment and data extraction by two researchers independently using Review Manager 5.4 software. Data analysis was conducted using R software. A total of 14 RCTs with 1,275 patients were included for meta-analysis. Compared with propofol, remimazolam significantly reduced incidence of hypotension [odds ratio (OR)=0.31, 95% confidence interval (CI; 0.23, 0.43), P<0.0001], bradycardia [OR=0.06, 95% CI (0.00, 1.20), P=0.06] and injection pain [OR=0.02, 95% CI (0.01, 0.08), P<0.0001] with shorter time to recovery of consciousness (ROC) [mean difference (MD)=5.47 min, 95% CI (-10.70, -0.24 min), P=0.04] but longer time to loss of consciousness [MD=37.01 sec, 95% CI (24.42, 49.60 sec), P<0.0001]. Remimazolam was a safer and more effective alternative to propofol for general anesthesia with tracheal intubation and demonstrated a lower risk of adverse events with shorter time to ROC.
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.