ReviewJournal of intensive care2026
Safety and efficacy of remimazolam in critical illness.
Review in Journal of intensive care, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Remimazolam-based anesthesia in sepsis patients: a retrospective cohort study of hemodynamic stability and postoperative outcomes.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Effect of Remimazolam on Postoperative Delirium in Elderly Surgical Patients: A Critical Review of Pharmacological Mechanisms and Clinical Evidence.Drug design, development and therapy · 2026Review
- Effect of Remimazolam on Postoperative Delirium in Surgical ICU Patients: A Single-Center Prospective Cohort Study.Critical care research and practice · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Sedation is essential in intensive care units (ICUs) for invasive procedures and mechanical ventilation; however, commonly used agents are limited by hemodynamic instability, delayed recovery of consciousness, and delirium. Remimazolam, an ultra-short-acting benzodiazepine, introduced in 2020, is rapid metabolized by hepatic carboxylesterase 1 and enables predictable recovery after prolonged administration, suggesting potential advantages for sedation in critical illness despite limited ICU-specific evidence. A narrative review was conducted based on evidence derived from randomized controlled trials, meta-analyses, and observational studies, which indicated that remimazolam provides sedation efficacy comparable to that of conventional hypnotics across surgical anesthesia, procedural sedation, and ICU settings. Multiple meta-analyses have suggested that remimazolam is associated with favorable hemodynamic tolerance and does not increase the incidence of postoperative or ICU delirium compared with propofol or other sedative agents. Delirium risk appears to be more strongly influenced by patient severity, surgical characteristics, and sedation depth than by hypnotic choice alone, although the heterogeneity across studies may partly reflect differences in delirium diagnostic tools. In ICU patients requiring mechanical ventilation, remimazolam demonstrated safety and efficacy comparable to those of propofol or midazolam, with acceptable hemodynamic stability and no consistent signs of increased mortality. Several studies have also suggested that the predictable recovery profile associated with flumazenil may facilitate ventilator weaning or recovery of consciousness, although the interpretation of recovery outcomes requires caution, particularly in studies involving routine flumazenil administration. Pharmacokinetic data in ICU populations remain limited but suggest preserved dose linearity with reduced clearance in patients with severe hepatic dysfunction. Remimazolam may be a promising sedative option for critically ill patients, offering a predictable recovery and generally favorable hemodynamic profiles. However, its optimal role in ICU sedation requires confirmation through high-quality international multicenter studies, particularly regarding prolonged mechanical ventilation, neurocognitive outcomes, and cost-effectiveness.
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.