ArticleLaboratory animal research2026
Faster immobilization and recovery with remimazolam compared to midazolam in medetomidine-butorphanol balanced anesthesia in male Sprague-Dawley rats: a randomized crossover study.
Article in Laboratory animal research, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundBalanced injectable anesthesia combining an α2-adrenoceptor agonist, a benzodiazepine, and an opioid is widely used in laboratory rodents because it provides sedation, muscle relaxation, and analgesia through complementary pharmacological mechanisms. In Japan, a mixture of medetomidine, midazolam, and butorphanol (MMB) is commonly used as an injectable anesthetic regimen in mice and rats. Remimazolam is an ultra-short-acting benzodiazepine that is rapidly metabolized by tissue esterases and produces no active metabolites. Because of its rapid metabolism and predictable pharmacokinetic profile, remimazolam has attracted attention as a sedative agent in clinical anesthesia and procedural sedation. Replacing midazolam with remimazolam generates a novel balanced anesthetic combination consisting of medetomidine, remimazolam, and butorphanol (MRB). Although this regimen has been investigated in mice, its anesthetic characteristics in rats have not yet been fully evaluated. The present study aimed to compare the anesthetic and physiological effects of MMB and MRB anesthesia in Sprague-Dawley (SD) rats.
resultsBoth mixtures induced anesthesia in all animals. The MRB regimen produced faster immobilization than the MMB regimen, whereas the time to loss of righting reflex did not differ significantly between regimens. Reflex-based anesthetic depth during the observation period was comparable between the two regimens. Physiological monitoring revealed regimen-dependent differences in time-course dynamics, particularly for oxygen saturation and respiratory rate. For oxygen saturation, pointwise comparisons showed no significant difference after Holm correction, whereas the area under the curve (AUC) analysis did show a significant difference. Linear mixed-effects modeling (LMM) further demonstrated significant group, time, and group × time interaction effects for oxygen saturation, and significant time and group × time interaction effects for respiratory rate. Recovery after atipamezole (ATI) administration was faster in the MRB group, as shown by both return of righting reflex and behavioral recovery score analyses.
conclusionsMRB produced a reflex-score profile comparable to that of MMB while accelerating early immobilization and antagonist-assisted recovery. Substitution of midazolam with remimazolam also altered SpO₂ and respiratory-rate trajectories. MRB may therefore be useful when rapid recovery is desired. However, comparability was limited to the reflex-based scoring system; these findings do not establish equivalence for painful or invasive surgical procedures.
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.