Trial reportDigestive endoscopy : official journal of the Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society2026
Efficacy and Recovery of Remimazolam Versus Midazolam in Sedated Colonoscopy: A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial in Japan.
Trial report in Digestive endoscopy : official journal of the Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
19 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesSedation during colonoscopy is becoming increasingly important. Remimazolam, an ultra-short-acting benzodiazepine, has a shorter pharmacokinetic half-life than that of midazolam. This study examined whether remimazolam provides superior sedation during colonoscopy in Japanese patients.
methodsThis prospective, multicenter, randomized, single-blind, controlled trial included adults (18-80 years) scheduled for sedated colonoscopy. Participants were randomized to the remimazolam and midazolam groups. The primary outcome was the proportion of ambulatory patients 5 min after colonoscopy. Secondary outcomes were successful pre-procedure sedation (Modified Observer's Assessment of Alertness/Sedation [MOAA/S] ≤ 4), recovery time, total sedative dose, and adverse events.
resultsForty patients were enrolled and analyzed (remimazolam, n = 19; midazolam, n = 21). At 5 min post-colonoscopy, ambulation was achieved in 100% (19/19) of remimazolam patients and 19.1% (4/21) of midazolam patients (p < 0.0001). The median time [interquartile range (IQR)] from procedure end to full alertness (MOAA/S = 5) was 0 [0-0] min for remimazolam and 10 [5-20] min for midazolam (p < 0.0001). The median time [IQR] from procedure end to independent ambulation was 0 [0-5] min for remimazolam and 20 [10-30] min for midazolam (p < 0.001). Pre-procedure sedation was successful (MOAA/S ≤ 4) in 100% of both groups. The median amount [IQR] of total sedative dose was 5 [4-6] mg for remimazolam and 3 [3] mg for midazolam. Hypoxemia occurred in 5.3% and 9.5% of patients in the remimazolam and midazolam groups, respectively.
conclusionsCompared with midazolam, remimazolam resulted in significantly faster recovery after colonoscopy in Japanese patients, with comparable achievement of target sedation and a low incidence of hypoxemia. CLINICAL REGISTRATION: Trial number: jRCTs071240062.
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.