Trial reportFrontiers in medicine2026
Comparative effects of alfentanil-remimazolam versus fentanyl-remimazolam on anesthesia onset, emergence, and safety in first-trimester surgical abortion under intravenous anesthesia: a randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in Frontiers in medicine, 2026. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Alfentanil is a short-acting Methods: A total of 120 patients undergoing first-trimester surgical abortion under intravenous anesthesia at our hospital were recruited between January 1, 2025 and June 30, 2025, and were randomly assigned to two groups: the alfentanil-remimazolam group (AF-RMZ, Results: The AF-RMZ and F-RMZ groups had comparable demographic characteristics. AF-RMZ showed shorter induction (37.97 ± 4.38 s) and emergence times (68.40 ± 47.01 s) and reduced discharge time (36.38 ± 5.31 min) compared with F-RMZ, while total remimazolam use and postoperative 30-min VAS scores were similar. Heart rate and respiratory rate exhibited significant group-time interactions, whereas mean arterial pressure remained comparable. Peripheral oxygen saturation was transiently higher in the F-RMZ at early time points. All SpO₂ values remained clinically acceptable, supporting monitored respiratory safety. Adverse events were mild, with a lower incidence of somatomotor response in AF-RMZ (8.3% vs. 21.7%, Conclusion: Alfentanil combined with remimazolam showed a slight advantage in anesthesia induction and emergence times, with comparable postoperative recovery, clinically stable hemodynamics, and safety profiles compared with fentanyl-remimazolam in outpatient gynecological procedures; however, the clinical impact of these differences may be limited. Clinical trial registration: https://www.chictr.org.cn, identifier ChiCTR2400094571.
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.