Suppr超能文献

臂丛神经阻滞下上肢手术患者术中使用丙泊酚、右美托咪定和瑞马唑仑镇静的恢复情况比较:一项随机对照试验

Comparison of the recovery profiles of propofol, dexmedetomidine, and remimazolam for intraoperative sedation in patients undergoing upper limb surgery under brachial plexus blockade: a randomized controlled trial.

作者信息

Kim Ha-Jung, Kim Yeon Ju, Lee Jungmin, Jeong Daun, Shin Young Ho, Ro Young-Jin, Kim Hyungtae, Koh Won Uk

机构信息

Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.

Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.

出版信息

Can J Anaesth. 2025 Jun 13. doi: 10.1007/s12630-025-02987-3.

Abstract

PURPOSE

The ideal sedative should have a rapid onset, short duration, and quick and predictable recovery. Despite the increasing use of the recently developed sedative remimazolam for intraoperative sedation, there is a paucity of research on its comparative recovery profile. Our aim was to compare the recovery profiles of intraoperative sedation with propofol, dexmedetomidine, and remimazolam in patients undergoing surgery under regional anesthesia.

METHODS

We included 119 patients scheduled to undergo upper limb surgery under brachial plexus blockade in a randomized controlled trial. We randomized patients to receiving intraoperative sedation with propofol, dexmedetomidine, or remimazolam. The primary outcome was the recovery time (from the completion of infusion to attaining a Modified Observer's Assessment of Alertness and Sedation score of 5). As secondary outcomes, we assessed other recovery profiles, including length of stay, quality of recovery, and the Aldrete score.

RESULTS

The mean (95% confidence interval [CI]) recovery time was 19 min (95% CI, 16 to 22) for patients in the dexmedetomidine group, 17 min (95% CI, 15 to 19) for the remimazolam group, and 12 min (95% CI, 10 to 13) for the propofol group (P < 0.001). Post hoc analysis revealed that the recovery time in the remimazolam group was longer compared to that in the propofol group (mean difference, 5 min; 95% CI, 3 to 8; Bonferroni adjusted P < 0.001). We found no significant differences among the three groups in the recovery-related secondary outcomes (all P > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients in the propofol group exhibited the most rapid recovery time from intraoperative sedation under regional anesthesia, followed by those in the remimazolam and dexmedetomidine groups. We found no differences in the recovery-related secondary outcomes.

STUDY REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov ( NCT05688345 ); first submitted 30 December 2022.

摘要

目的

理想的镇静剂应起效迅速、作用时间短且恢复迅速且可预测。尽管最近开发的镇静剂瑞马唑仑在术中镇静中的使用越来越多,但关于其相对恢复情况的研究却很少。我们的目的是比较区域麻醉下手术患者使用丙泊酚、右美托咪定和瑞马唑仑进行术中镇静后的恢复情况。

方法

我们纳入了119例计划在臂丛神经阻滞下进行上肢手术的患者,进行一项随机对照试验。我们将患者随机分为接受丙泊酚、右美托咪定或瑞马唑仑术中镇静组。主要结局是恢复时间(从输注结束到达到改良观察者警觉与镇静评分5分)。作为次要结局,我们评估了其他恢复情况,包括住院时间、恢复质量和Aldrete评分。

结果

右美托咪定组患者的平均(95%置信区间[CI])恢复时间为19分钟(95%CI,16至22),瑞马唑仑组为17分钟(95%CI,15至19),丙泊酚组为12分钟(95%CI,10至13)(P<0.001)。事后分析显示,瑞马唑仑组的恢复时间比丙泊酚组长(平均差异,5分钟;95%CI,3至8;Bonferroni校正P<0.001)。我们发现三组在与恢复相关的次要结局方面无显著差异(所有P>0.05)。

结论

丙泊酚组患者在区域麻醉下术中镇静后的恢复时间最快,其次是瑞马唑仑组和右美托咪定组。我们发现与恢复相关的次要结局无差异。

研究注册

ClinicalTrials.gov(NCT05688345);于2022年12月30日首次提交。

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