Evidence Hub

Comparing the safety and efficacy of remimazolam-based total intravenous anesthesia versus volatile agent-based anesthesia: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Ji-In Park, Hyo-Seok Na, Keum O Lee, J. Ryu, Hyun-Jung Shin

Korean Journal of Anesthesiology, 2024

969 participants · 8 citations

Abstract

Background Remimazolam is a novel short-acting benzodiazepine that has recently been used for general anesthesia. This study compared the safety and efficacy of remimazolam-based total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) and volatile agent-based anesthesia in adults undergoing general anesthesia. Methods We searched electronic databases including PubMed, Embase, CENTRAL, and Scopus for relevant studies. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients who experienced hypotension during surgery. Secondary outcomes included incidence of bradycardia, extubation time, duration in the post-anesthesia care unit hospital stay, and incidence of postoperative nausea and/or vomiting (PONV). We estimated the relative risk (RR) and mean difference with 95% CIs using a random-effects model. Results A total of 969 patients from 12 randomized controlled trials were included. The incidence of hypotension was 14% and 34% in the remimazolam and volatile agent groups, respectively. Remimazolam significantly lowered the incidence of hypotension (RR: 0.43, 95% CI [0.29–0.63], P = 0.0000, I2 = 26%). The remimazolam group had a PONV incidence of 13%, compared to 28% in the volatile agent group, indicating a significant difference (RR: 0.51, 95% CI [0.37–0.72], P = 0.0001, I2 = 15%). No significant differences were observed in the other outcomes. Conclusions Remimazolam-based TIVA demonstrated favorable hemodynamic effects, with a lower incidence of hypotension and similar bradycardia rates, compared…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 969 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free