TY - JOUR
T1 - Comparing subjective quality of recovery between remimazolam- and propofol-based total intravenous anesthesia for surgical procedures
T2 - a meta-analysis
AU - Hung, Kuo Chuan
AU - Wang, Wei Ting
AU - Liu, Wei Cheng
AU - Hsu, Chih Wei
AU - Huang, Yen Ta
AU - Wu, Jheng Yan
AU - Chen, I. Wen
N1 - © 2024. The Author(s).
PY - 2024/9/17
Y1 - 2024/9/17
N2 - Background: Remimazolam is a novel ultra-short-acting benzodiazepine that has been recently introduced as an alternative to propofol for general anesthesia. While both agents have been compared in terms of safety and efficacy, their relative effects on postoperative quality of recovery (QoR) remain unclear. Therefore, this meta-analysis aimed to compare the effects of remimazolam and propofol on subjective QoR in surgical patients who underwent general anesthesia. Methods: Medline, Embase, Google Scholar, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched from inception to May 28, 2024 to identify randomized controlled trials comparing remimazolam and propofol in terms of postoperative QoR. The Cochrane risk-of-bias tool (RoB 2) was used to assess study quality. QoR score on postoperative day (POD) 1 (primary outcome), QoR scores on PODs 2–3, QoR dimensions, time to loss of consciousness, other recovery characteristics, and rescue analgesia requirement were evaluated using random-effects meta-analyses. Results: This meta-analysis included 13 studies published between 2022 and 2024 involving 1,418 patients. QoR was evaluated using either the QoR-15 (10 studies) or QoR-40 (3 studies) questionnaire. The pooled results indicated no significant difference in the QoR scores on POD 1 (standardized mean difference: 0.02, 95% confidence interval [CI]: − 0.20, 0.23, P = 0.88, I2 = 73%) and PODs 2–3 between remimazolam and propofol. Furthermore, no significant differences were observed in QoR dimensions, length of postanesthesia care unit (PACU) stay, and time to extubation as well as in the risks of agitation and postoperative nausea and vomiting. Patients administered remimazolam exhibited slower anesthetic induction (mean difference (MD): 32.27 s) but faster recovery of consciousness (MD: − 1.60 min) than those administered propofol. Moreover, remimazolam was associated with a lower risk of rescue analgesia requirement in the PACU (risk ratio: 0.62, 95% CI: 0.43, 0.89, P = 0.009, I2 = 0%) but not in the ward. Conclusion: Remimazolam is a potential alternative to propofol for general anesthesia as it offers similar QoR to the latter and has advantages in terms of consciousness recovery and immediate postoperative analgesia requirement.
AB - Background: Remimazolam is a novel ultra-short-acting benzodiazepine that has been recently introduced as an alternative to propofol for general anesthesia. While both agents have been compared in terms of safety and efficacy, their relative effects on postoperative quality of recovery (QoR) remain unclear. Therefore, this meta-analysis aimed to compare the effects of remimazolam and propofol on subjective QoR in surgical patients who underwent general anesthesia. Methods: Medline, Embase, Google Scholar, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched from inception to May 28, 2024 to identify randomized controlled trials comparing remimazolam and propofol in terms of postoperative QoR. The Cochrane risk-of-bias tool (RoB 2) was used to assess study quality. QoR score on postoperative day (POD) 1 (primary outcome), QoR scores on PODs 2–3, QoR dimensions, time to loss of consciousness, other recovery characteristics, and rescue analgesia requirement were evaluated using random-effects meta-analyses. Results: This meta-analysis included 13 studies published between 2022 and 2024 involving 1,418 patients. QoR was evaluated using either the QoR-15 (10 studies) or QoR-40 (3 studies) questionnaire. The pooled results indicated no significant difference in the QoR scores on POD 1 (standardized mean difference: 0.02, 95% confidence interval [CI]: − 0.20, 0.23, P = 0.88, I2 = 73%) and PODs 2–3 between remimazolam and propofol. Furthermore, no significant differences were observed in QoR dimensions, length of postanesthesia care unit (PACU) stay, and time to extubation as well as in the risks of agitation and postoperative nausea and vomiting. Patients administered remimazolam exhibited slower anesthetic induction (mean difference (MD): 32.27 s) but faster recovery of consciousness (MD: − 1.60 min) than those administered propofol. Moreover, remimazolam was associated with a lower risk of rescue analgesia requirement in the PACU (risk ratio: 0.62, 95% CI: 0.43, 0.89, P = 0.009, I2 = 0%) but not in the ward. Conclusion: Remimazolam is a potential alternative to propofol for general anesthesia as it offers similar QoR to the latter and has advantages in terms of consciousness recovery and immediate postoperative analgesia requirement.
KW - General anesthesia
KW - Propofol
KW - QoR
KW - Quality of recovery
KW - Remimazolam
KW - Humans
KW - Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
KW - Propofol/administration & dosage
KW - Benzodiazepines/administration & dosage
KW - Anesthesia, General/adverse effects
KW - Anesthesia, Intravenous/adverse effects
KW - Anesthesia Recovery Period
KW - Anesthetics, Intravenous/administration & dosage
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85204284284
U2 - 10.1186/s13643-024-02660-8
DO - 10.1186/s13643-024-02660-8
M3 - 文章
C2 - 39289773
AN - SCOPUS:85204284284
SN - 2046-4053
VL - 13
SP - 235
JO - Systematic Reviews
JF - Systematic Reviews
IS - 1
M1 - 235
ER -