Suppr超能文献

比较瑞马唑仑和丙泊酚全静脉麻醉在手术中的术后恢复主观质量:一项荟萃分析。

Comparing subjective quality of recovery between remimazolam- and propofol-based total intravenous anesthesia for surgical procedures: a meta-analysis.

机构信息

Department of Anesthesiology, Chi Mei Medical Center, Tainan City, Taiwan.

Department of Anesthesiology, E-Da Hospital, I-Shou University, Kaohsiung City, Taiwan.

出版信息

Syst Rev. 2024 Sep 17;13(1):235. doi: 10.1186/s13643-024-02660-8.

Abstract

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, I = 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, I = 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.

摘要

背景

雷米唑仑是一种新型超短效苯二氮䓬类药物,最近已被用作全身麻醉中丙泊酚的替代品。虽然这两种药物在安全性和疗效方面都进行了比较,但它们对术后恢复质量(QoR)的相对影响仍不清楚。因此,本荟萃分析旨在比较雷米唑仑和丙泊酚对接受全身麻醉的手术患者主观 QoR 的影响。

方法

从建库至 2024 年 5 月 28 日,检索 Medline、Embase、Google Scholar 和 Cochrane 对照试验中心注册库,以确定比较雷米唑仑和丙泊酚在术后 QoR 方面的随机对照试验。使用 Cochrane 偏倚风险工具(RoB 2)评估研究质量。使用随机效应荟萃分析评估术后第 1 天(主要结局)、第 2-3 天的 QoR 评分、QoR 维度、意识丧失时间、其他恢复特征和需要补救镇痛的 QoR 评分。

结果

本荟萃分析纳入了 2022 年至 2024 年期间发表的 13 项研究,共涉及 1418 名患者。使用 QoR-15(10 项研究)或 QoR-40(3 项研究)问卷评估 QoR。汇总结果表明,雷米唑仑和丙泊酚在术后第 1 天(标准化均数差:0.02,95%置信区间[CI]:-0.20,0.23,P=0.88,I=73%)和第 2-3 天的 QoR 评分上无显著差异。此外,两组在 QoR 维度、麻醉后监护病房(PACU)停留时间和拔管时间、躁动和术后恶心呕吐的风险方面也无显著差异。与丙泊酚相比,接受雷米唑仑治疗的患者麻醉诱导时间较慢(平均差[MD]:32.27 s),但意识恢复更快(MD:-1.60 min)。此外,雷米唑仑与 PACU 中需要补救镇痛的风险较低相关(风险比:0.62,95%CI:0.43,0.89,P=0.009,I=0%),但在病房中无此相关性。

结论

雷米唑仑是丙泊酚全身麻醉的潜在替代药物,因为它与后者提供相似的 QoR,并在意识恢复和术后即刻镇痛需求方面具有优势。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/db04/11409698/2055421b1a49/13643_2024_2660_Fig1_HTML.jpg

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