Suppr超能文献

老年患者胃肠内镜检查和结肠镜检查中瑞米唑仑与丙泊酚镇静效果的比较:一项随机对照试验的荟萃分析

Remimazolam versus propofol for sedation in gastrointestinal endoscopy and colonoscopy within elderly patients: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

作者信息

Ahmer Wania, Imtiaz Sahar, Alam Daniyal Muhammad, Ahmed Khadija, Sajid Barka, Yousuf Juvairia, Asnani Sunny, Fahim Muhammad Ahmed Ali, Ali Rahmeen, Mansoor Marium, Safdar Muhammad Talha, Anjum Muhammad Umair, Hasanain Muhammad, Larik Muhammad Omar

机构信息

Department of Medicine, Dow Medical College, Karachi, Pakistan.

Department of Medicine, Dow International Medical College, Karachi, Pakistan.

出版信息

Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2024 Apr;80(4):493-503. doi: 10.1007/s00228-024-03624-6. Epub 2024 Jan 23.

Abstract

PURPOSE

Propofol has become the sedative of choice for endoscopy and colonoscopy. However, it has shown associations with various adverse effects, specifically in the geriatric population. In contrast, remimazolam is a novel benzodiazepine, demonstrating a superior clinical safety profile. Hence, this systematic review and meta-analysis aims to clarify the efficacy and safety of remimazolam versus propofol in elderly patients (≥ 60 years) undergoing gastrointestinal endoscopic and colonoscopy procedures.

METHODS

Electronic databases including PubMed, Cochrane Library, ScienceDirect, and Google Scholar were explored from inception till January 7, 2024. The Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool for Randomized Controlled Trials (RoB-2) was utilized to evaluate the quality of each included study reported in this meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Seven randomized control trials were included, resulting in the pooling of 1,466 patients (remimazolam: 731 patients; propofol: 735 patients). Propofol demonstrated a significantly lower time to loss of consciousness (P < 0.00001, 4 studies, 784 patients) and a greater sedation success after first dose (P = 0.05, 5 studies, 1,271 patients). Remimazolam reported a significantly lower risk of bradycardia (P = 0.02, 5 studies, 1,323 patients), hypoxemia (P < 0.00001, 6 studies, 1,389 patients), and pain on injection site (P < 0.00001, 5 studies, 1,184 patients). No statistically significant differences in sedation time, number of supplemental doses, procedural parameters, and other adverse outcomes were reported.

CONCLUSION

As per the results of our analyses, propofol demonstrated comparatively superior efficacy, however, remimazolam demonstrated comparatively superior safety. The debatable evidence generated from this meta-analysis may not currently be powerful enough to advocate for the use of remimazolam in elderly patients undergoing gastrointestinal procedures; hence, further comprehensive studies are necessary in order to arrive at a robust conclusion.

摘要

目的

丙泊酚已成为内镜检查和结肠镜检查的首选镇静剂。然而,它已显示出与各种不良反应有关,特别是在老年人群中。相比之下,瑞马唑仑是一种新型苯二氮䓬类药物,具有更好的临床安全性。因此,本系统评价和荟萃分析旨在阐明瑞马唑仑与丙泊酚在接受胃肠内镜和结肠镜检查的老年患者(≥60岁)中的疗效和安全性。

方法

检索了包括PubMed、Cochrane图书馆、ScienceDirect和谷歌学术在内的电子数据库,检索时间从数据库建立至2024年1月7日。本荟萃分析中纳入的每项研究的质量采用Cochrane随机对照试验偏倚风险工具(RoB-2)进行评估。

结果

纳入了7项随机对照试验,共纳入1466例患者(瑞马唑仑组:731例患者;丙泊酚组:735例患者)。丙泊酚组意识消失时间显著更短(P<0.00001,4项研究,784例患者),首次给药后镇静成功率更高(P=0.05,5项研究,1271例患者)。瑞马唑仑组心动过缓风险(P=0.02,5项研究,1323例患者)、低氧血症风险(P<0.00001,6项研究,1389例患者)和注射部位疼痛风险(P<0.00001,5项研究,1184例患者)显著更低。在镇静时间、追加剂量次数、操作参数和其他不良结局方面未报告有统计学显著差异。

结论

根据我们的分析结果,丙泊酚显示出相对更好的疗效,然而,瑞马唑仑显示出相对更好的安全性。本荟萃分析产生的有争议的证据目前可能还不足以支持在接受胃肠检查的老年患者中使用瑞马唑仑;因此,需要进一步进行全面研究以得出可靠结论。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验