Suppr超能文献

瑞马唑仑用于接受上消化道内镜检查的重症监护病房患者镇静的有效性和安全性:一项队列研究

Efficacy and safety of remimazolam-based sedation for intensive care unit patients undergoing upper gastrointestinal endoscopy: a cohort study.

作者信息

Zhao Yuan-Rui, Huang Ke-Sheng, Hou Guo, Yao Lan, Lu Li-Ping, Xu Song, Lian Ying-Tao, Yao Zhun, Yu Zhui

机构信息

Department of Critical Care Medicine, Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan 430060, China.

出版信息

World J Emerg Med. 2023;14(1):31-36. doi: 10.5847/wjem.j.1920-8642.2023.020.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Remimazolam is a novel ultra-short-acting sedative, but its safety and adverse events (AEs) in high-risk patients in the intensive care unit (ICU) setting remain unknown.

METHODS

This was a single-center, retrospective study that compared remimazolam to propofol and midazolam in patients undergoing upper gastrointestinal endoscopy. The primary outcome was the incidence of treatment-related AEs. The secondary outcomes were the time to extubation, the length of ICU stay, and the average cost of sedative per case.

RESULTS

Of the 88 patients analyzed, 47 were treated with remimazolam (mean dose, 7.90±4.84 mg), and 41 were treated with propofol (21.19±17.98 mg) or midazolam (3.08±2.17 mg). There was no statistically significant difference in the average duration of the endoscopic procedure (35.89±13.37 min vs. 44.51±21.68 min, P=0.133) or the time to extubation (15.00±9.75 h vs. 20.59±18.71 h, =0.211) in the remimazolam group (group I) compared to the propofol or midazolam group (group II). ICU stays (5.40±2.93 d vs. 4.63±3.31 d, =0.072) and treatment-related AEs (48.61% vs. 51.38%, =0.056) were similar between groups. The average cost of sedative per case was significantly lower in the group I than in the group II (RMB 16.07±10.58 yuan vs. RMB 24.37±15.46 yuan, =0.016).

CONCLUSION

Remimazolam-based sedation was noninferior to the classic sedatives and had lower average cost per case, indicating that it may be used as a promising sedative for high-risk patients during endoscopic procedures in the ICU setting.

摘要

背景

瑞马唑仑是一种新型超短效镇静剂,但其在重症监护病房(ICU)高危患者中的安全性及不良事件(AE)仍不明确。

方法

这是一项单中心回顾性研究,比较了瑞马唑仑与丙泊酚和咪达唑仑在上消化道内镜检查患者中的应用。主要结局是治疗相关不良事件的发生率。次要结局是拔管时间、ICU住院时间以及每例镇静剂的平均费用。

结果

在分析的88例患者中,47例接受瑞马唑仑治疗(平均剂量,7.90±4.84mg),41例接受丙泊酚(21.19±17.98mg)或咪达唑仑(3.08±2.17mg)治疗。与丙泊酚或咪达唑仑组(II组)相比,瑞马唑仑组(I组)的内镜检查平均持续时间(35.89±13.37分钟对44.51±21.68分钟,P = 0.133)或拔管时间(15.00±9.75小时对20.59±18.71小时,P = 0.211)无统计学显著差异。两组间ICU住院时间(5.40±2.93天对4.63±3.31天,P = 0.072)和治疗相关不良事件(48.61%对51.38%,P = 0.056)相似。I组每例镇静剂的平均费用显著低于II组(16.07±10.58元对24.37±15.46元,P = 0.016)。

结论

基于瑞马唑仑的镇静并不劣于经典镇静剂,且每例平均费用较低,表明其可能作为ICU环境下内镜检查期间高危患者有前景的镇静剂。

相似文献

本文引用的文献

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验