Cargando…

Comparison of Remimazolam-Flumazenil versus Propofol for Rigid Bronchoscopy: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial

Background: Remimazolam is a novel ultrashort-acting intravenous benzodiazepine sedative–hypnotic that significantly reduces the times to sedation onset and recovery. This trial was conducted to confirm the recovery time from anesthesia of remimazolam-flumazenil versus propofol in patients undergoin...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Pan, Yafei, Chen, Mo, Gu, Fulei, Chen, Jinyan, Zhang, Wen, Huang, Zhangxiang, Zhu, Dapeng, Song, Jia, Fang, Jun, Yu, Weifeng, Xie, Kangjie
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9821250/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36615057
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm12010257
_version_ 1784865652582907904
author Pan, Yafei
Chen, Mo
Gu, Fulei
Chen, Jinyan
Zhang, Wen
Huang, Zhangxiang
Zhu, Dapeng
Song, Jia
Fang, Jun
Yu, Weifeng
Xie, Kangjie
author_facet Pan, Yafei
Chen, Mo
Gu, Fulei
Chen, Jinyan
Zhang, Wen
Huang, Zhangxiang
Zhu, Dapeng
Song, Jia
Fang, Jun
Yu, Weifeng
Xie, Kangjie
author_sort Pan, Yafei
collection PubMed
description Background: Remimazolam is a novel ultrashort-acting intravenous benzodiazepine sedative–hypnotic that significantly reduces the times to sedation onset and recovery. This trial was conducted to confirm the recovery time from anesthesia of remimazolam-flumazenil versus propofol in patients undergoing endotracheal surgery under rigid bronchoscopy. Methods: Patients undergoing endotracheal tumor resection or stent implantation were randomly allocated into a remimazolam group (Group R) or a propofol group (Group P). The primary outcome was the recovery time from general anesthesia. The secondary outcomes were the time to loss of consciousness (LoC), hemodynamic fluctuations, and adverse events. Results: A total of 34 patients were screened, and 30 patients were enrolled in the study. The recovery time was significantly shorter for Group R (140 ± 52 s) than for Group P (374 ± 195 s) (p < 0.001). The times to LoC were 76 ± 40 s in Group R and 75 ± 25 s in Group P and were not significantly different. There were also no significant differences in hemodynamic fluctuations or adverse events between the two groups. Conclusions: The recovery time from general anesthesia in rigid bronchoscopy patients was shorter using remimazolam-flumazenil than with propofol, with no dramatic hemodynamic fluctuations and adverse events or differences between the agents. Remimazolam-flumazenil allows for faster recovery from anesthesia than propofol.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9821250
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-98212502023-01-07 Comparison of Remimazolam-Flumazenil versus Propofol for Rigid Bronchoscopy: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial Pan, Yafei Chen, Mo Gu, Fulei Chen, Jinyan Zhang, Wen Huang, Zhangxiang Zhu, Dapeng Song, Jia Fang, Jun Yu, Weifeng Xie, Kangjie J Clin Med Article Background: Remimazolam is a novel ultrashort-acting intravenous benzodiazepine sedative–hypnotic that significantly reduces the times to sedation onset and recovery. This trial was conducted to confirm the recovery time from anesthesia of remimazolam-flumazenil versus propofol in patients undergoing endotracheal surgery under rigid bronchoscopy. Methods: Patients undergoing endotracheal tumor resection or stent implantation were randomly allocated into a remimazolam group (Group R) or a propofol group (Group P). The primary outcome was the recovery time from general anesthesia. The secondary outcomes were the time to loss of consciousness (LoC), hemodynamic fluctuations, and adverse events. Results: A total of 34 patients were screened, and 30 patients were enrolled in the study. The recovery time was significantly shorter for Group R (140 ± 52 s) than for Group P (374 ± 195 s) (p < 0.001). The times to LoC were 76 ± 40 s in Group R and 75 ± 25 s in Group P and were not significantly different. There were also no significant differences in hemodynamic fluctuations or adverse events between the two groups. Conclusions: The recovery time from general anesthesia in rigid bronchoscopy patients was shorter using remimazolam-flumazenil than with propofol, with no dramatic hemodynamic fluctuations and adverse events or differences between the agents. Remimazolam-flumazenil allows for faster recovery from anesthesia than propofol. MDPI 2022-12-29 /pmc/articles/PMC9821250/ /pubmed/36615057 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm12010257 Text en © 2022 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Pan, Yafei
Chen, Mo
Gu, Fulei
Chen, Jinyan
Zhang, Wen
Huang, Zhangxiang
Zhu, Dapeng
Song, Jia
Fang, Jun
Yu, Weifeng
Xie, Kangjie
Comparison of Remimazolam-Flumazenil versus Propofol for Rigid Bronchoscopy: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial
title Comparison of Remimazolam-Flumazenil versus Propofol for Rigid Bronchoscopy: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial
title_full Comparison of Remimazolam-Flumazenil versus Propofol for Rigid Bronchoscopy: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial
title_fullStr Comparison of Remimazolam-Flumazenil versus Propofol for Rigid Bronchoscopy: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of Remimazolam-Flumazenil versus Propofol for Rigid Bronchoscopy: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial
title_short Comparison of Remimazolam-Flumazenil versus Propofol for Rigid Bronchoscopy: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial
title_sort comparison of remimazolam-flumazenil versus propofol for rigid bronchoscopy: a prospective randomized controlled trial
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9821250/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36615057
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm12010257
work_keys_str_mv AT panyafei comparisonofremimazolamflumazenilversuspropofolforrigidbronchoscopyaprospectiverandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT chenmo comparisonofremimazolamflumazenilversuspropofolforrigidbronchoscopyaprospectiverandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT gufulei comparisonofremimazolamflumazenilversuspropofolforrigidbronchoscopyaprospectiverandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT chenjinyan comparisonofremimazolamflumazenilversuspropofolforrigidbronchoscopyaprospectiverandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT zhangwen comparisonofremimazolamflumazenilversuspropofolforrigidbronchoscopyaprospectiverandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT huangzhangxiang comparisonofremimazolamflumazenilversuspropofolforrigidbronchoscopyaprospectiverandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT zhudapeng comparisonofremimazolamflumazenilversuspropofolforrigidbronchoscopyaprospectiverandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT songjia comparisonofremimazolamflumazenilversuspropofolforrigidbronchoscopyaprospectiverandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT fangjun comparisonofremimazolamflumazenilversuspropofolforrigidbronchoscopyaprospectiverandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT yuweifeng comparisonofremimazolamflumazenilversuspropofolforrigidbronchoscopyaprospectiverandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT xiekangjie comparisonofremimazolamflumazenilversuspropofolforrigidbronchoscopyaprospectiverandomizedcontrolledtrial