Observational studyBMC anesthesiology2026
Effect and hemodynamics of remimazolam besylate on sedation of mechanically ventilated patients: a propensity score-matched study.
Observational study in BMC anesthesiology, 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
17 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveRemimazolam besylate is a novel ultra-short-acting benzodiazepine sedative. This study aimed to evaluate its hemodynamics profiles during sedation in mechanically ventilated patients in the intensive care unit (ICU), compared with propofol.
methodsWe conducted a single-center, retrospective, propensity score–matched observational study including patients who underwent mechanical ventilation and received either remimazolam or propofol for sedation. The primary outcome was change in mean arterial pressure (MAP) during sedation. Secondary outcomes included the incidence of hypotension and hypertension, norepinephrine requirements, bradycardia, tachycardia, volume of fluid resuscitation, post-sedation nausea and vomiting, duration of mechanical ventilation, ICU and hospital length of stay, and 28-day mortality.
resultsAfter matching, 366 patients (183 pairs) were analyzed. The median (IQR) age was 55.0 (43.3–67.0) years, and 64.2% were male. Compared with propofol, the remimazolam group had a smaller change in MAP [13 (9–17) vs. 14 (11–18) mmHg, p < 0.05], along with a lower incidence of hypotension and reduced need for high-dose norepinephrine (p < 0.05). No significant differences were observed in change in heart rate, hypertension, bradycardia, tachycardia, fluid resuscitation, nausea or vomiting, or major clinical outcomes including duration of mechanical ventilation, ICU and hospital stay, and 28-day mortality.
conclusionsIn this retrospective matched analysis, remimazolam was associated with fewer blood pressure fluctuations and less hypotension compared with propofol, while overall clinical outcomes were similar. Prospective multicenter studies are needed to further confirm these findings.
trial registrationChinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR2200063981).
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.