ABSTRACT
Objective:To evaluate the effects of remazolam and propofol on the hemodynamics during induction of anaesthesia in elderly patients using the area under curve (AUC) method.Methods:Eighty elderly patients of either sex, aged 65-75 yr, with body mass index of 20-28 kg/m 2, of American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status classification Ⅱ or Ⅲ, scheduled for elective non-cardiac surgery, were divided into 2 groups ( n=40 each) by using a random number table method: remazolam group (R group) and propofol group (P group). Remazolam 1 mg/ml or propofol 10 mg/ml was slowly and intravenously injected through titration to achieve loss of responsiveness to verbal command. The accumulative areas under the curve below (AUC MAP-) or above (AUC MAP+ ) baseline mean arterial pressure and under the curve below or above 10% of baseline heart rate at the same time (AUC HR-, AUC HR+ ) were calculated within the first 10 min after administration of propofol or remazolam. The use of vasoactive drugs and injection pain were recorded during this period. The intraoperative awareness during the 24-h follow-up after surgery and development of cardiovascular complications, cerebral infarction and oliguria or anuria within 30 days after surgery were recorded. Results:Compared with R group, AUC MAP- was significantly enlarged (the mean difference 59.375 mmHg·min, 95% confidence interval 26.763-91.987 mmHg·min), AUC HR- was enlarged ( P<0.05), and no significant change was found in AUC MAP+, AUC HR+, requirement for vasoactive drugs, frequency of vasoactive drugs, and postoperative complications in P group ( P>0.05). No injection pain or intraoperative awareness was found in two groups. Conclusions:Remazolam is superior to propofol in maintaining hemodynamic stability during anesthesia induction in elderly patients.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE To obser ve the efficacy and safety of rimazo lom for painless gastroscopy sedation in outpatients. METHODS Totally 84 patients who underwent painless gastroscopy were collected from the outpatient department of the Central Hospital of Enshi Tujia and Miao Autonomous Prefecture from March to June in 2021. By random number table method combined with envelope allocation concealment method ，they were randomly divided into observation group and control group ，with 42 cases in each group. The patients in the observation group were slowly injected with Sufentanil citrate injection 0.1 μg/kg+Rimazole toluenesulfonate for injection 0.2 mg/kg. Patients in the control group were slowly injected with Sufentanil citrate injection 0.1 μg/kg+ Propofol emulsion injection 2 mg/kg. Gastroscopy was performed after the patient ’s consciousness disappeared. The sedative efficiency，sedative onset time ，recovery time and the occurrence of adverse drug reaction were observed in 2 groups. The heart rate（HR），mean arterial pressure （MAP），pulse oxygen saturation （SpO2），modified observer ’s assessment of alertness/sedation （MOAA/S）score and Narcotrend score were recorded in 2 groups after entering the room （T0），after anesthesia induction （T1）， when gastroscope entered the throat （T2），at the end of gastroscope withdrawal （T3），5 min after gastroscopy （T4）. RESULTS There was no significant difference in the effective rate of sedation （100％），the incidence of respiratory depression ， nausea and vomiting between the two groups （P＞0.05）. The qq.com onset time of sedation in the observation group was longer than control group ，and the recovery time and the incidence ofhypotension，hypotension to be tre ated，injection pain and bradycardia in observation group were significantly shorter or lower than control group （P＜0.05）. At T 0，there was no significant difference in HR ，MAP，SpO2，MOAA/S score or Narcotrend score between two groups （P＞0.05）. From T 1 to T 4，the HR of control group was significantly lower than that of the same group at T 0，and significantly lower than observation group at the same time（P＜0.05）. From T 1 to T 3，the MAP of two groups were significantly lower than the same group at T 0（P＜0.05），but there were no significant differences between two groups and between T 4 and T 0（P＞0.05）. There was no significant difference in SpO 2 at different time points between two groups and HR at different time points in observation group （P＞0.05）. From T 1 to T 3，MOAA/S score and Narcotrend score of two groups were significantly lower than the same group at T 0，while the MOAA/S score and Narcotrend score at T 1 and T 3 and Narcotrend score at T 3 of observation group were significantly higher than control group at the same time （P＜0.05），and the Narcotrend score of observation group at T 2 was significantly lower than control group at the same time（P＜0.05）；at T 4，there were no significant differences in MOAA/S score and Narcotrend score between two groups （P＞ 0.05）. CONCLUSIONS Remazolam shows good sedative effect and safety for painless gastroscopy.