A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 197

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 197
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 271
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3165
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 597
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 511
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 317
Function: require_once

Effectiveness of perioperative remimazolam in preventing postoperative delirium: a systematic review and meta-analysis. | LitMetric

Category Ranking

98%

Total Visits

921

Avg Visit Duration

2 minutes

Citations

20

Article Abstract

Background: To compare the POD rates in patients undergoing non-cardiac surgery who received remimazolam perioperatively versus placebo or other sedatives.

Methods: We systematically searched four major databases (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, Embase, and PubMed) for relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) up to July 11, 2024. Literature quality evaluation was used the bias risk table in Review Manager 5.4. The primary outcome of interest was POD, and secondary outcomes were the hypotension risk, bradycardia and, nausea and vomiting.

Results: Across 11 trials involving 1985 participants, we recorded 309 cases of POD during follow-up. In trials where the control group received saline, remimazolam decrease the risk of POD significantly by 70% (RR 0.30, 95% CI [0.19, 0.46]; p < 0.00001). Statistical analysis did not show significant difference in the risk of POD between the remimazolam group and the groups receiving either dexmedetomidine (RR 1.23 [0.64, 2.37]; p = 0.53) or propofol (RR 0.83 [0.60, 1.16]; p = 0.28). Regarding adverse events, remimazolam significantly reduces the morbidity of hypotension compared to dexmedetomidine (RR 0.25 [0.10, 0.65]; p = 0.004) and propofol (RR 0.45 [0.33, 0.60]; p < 0.00001). In addition, there were no significant differences in the incidence of bradycardia (RR 0.85; 95% CI [0.34-2.12], p = 0.72) and nausea and vomiting (RR 1.06; 95% CI [0.74-1.51], p = 0.77) between remimazolam and the control group.

Conclusions: During the perioperative period, using remimazolam can lower POD risk after surgery for patients who had non-cardiac surgery, but remimazolam does not work better than dexmedetomidine or propofol. Compared with the dexmedetomidine and propofol, remimazolam also has apparent advantages in preventing intraoperative hypotension.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11843786PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40001-025-02383-zDOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

controlled trials
8
effectiveness perioperative
4
perioperative remimazolam
4
remimazolam preventing
4
preventing postoperative
4
postoperative delirium
4
delirium systematic
4
systematic review
4
review meta-analysis
4
meta-analysis background
4

Similar Publications