ArticleBMC anesthesiology2025
Remimazolam is more suitable for general anesthesia bronchoscopy in tuberculosis patients treated with isoniazid: a retrospective cohort analysis.
Article in BMC anesthesiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe objective of this study was to assess the suitability of remimazolam compared to propofol for general anesthesia during tracheoscopic procedures in patients with tuberculosis undergoing treatment with isoniazid. PATIENTS AND
methodsA retrospective analysis was conducted on 1,098 patients diagnosed with pulmonary tuberculosis who underwent bronchoscopic general anesthesia at our institution between January and June 2023 (Protocol No. 2022LY0416). The patients were categorized into remimazolam and propofol groups based on the primary anesthetic agent administered. The primary outcomes assessed included the time from the conclusion of anesthesia to patient awakening, as well as hemodynamic changes during the anesthesia period.
resultsThe time from drug withdrawal to awakening was significantly shorter in the remimazolam group compared to the propofol group (38.0 s vs. 100.0 s, P < 0.001). Additionally, the time to extubation was reduced in the remimazolam group (88.5 s vs. 181.0 s, P < 0.001), although the time to induction of anesthesia was longer, and the post-anesthesia Aldrete score was higher in the remimazolam group than in the propofol group (P < 0.001). These findings were consistently observed in subgroup analyses. During anesthesia maintenance, the amount of intraoperative vasoactive drugs (dopamine and nicardipine) administered to patients in the remimazolam group was lower than that in the propofol group (P = 0.014 and P = 0.031, respectively). Furthermore, during anesthesia, blood pressure in the remimazolam group was higher and more stable, exhibiting smaller fluctuations compared to the propofol group. Specifically, changes in systolic blood pressure were 38.2 ± 15.9 mmHg in the remimazolam group compared to 46.7 ± 19.0 mmHg in the propofol group (P < 0.001), while changes in diastolic blood pressure were 6.4 ± 16.4 mmHg in the remimazolam group versus 12.7 ± 18.7 mmHg in the propofol group (P = 0.002).
conclusionIn patients with tuberculosis undergoing treatment with isoniazid, general anesthesia with remimazolam was associated with a shorter time from the cessation of anesthesia to recovery, a reduced requirement for vasoactive agents, and improved hemodynamic stability, without an increase in postoperative complications, when compared to propofol.
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.