Skip to content
DraconiticResearch
Search Sources API
203,203 studies31 sourcesUpdated 42 min ago
Peer-reviewedCC BYFrontiers in medicine

Remimazolam versus propofol for elderly patients undergoing laparoscopic gastrointestinal surgery: a randomized trial concentrating on delirium and hemodynamic stability

  • Hongna Fan1
  • Xiaotong Chen1
  • Linlin Xu1
  • Bin Zou1
  • Da Li2
  • Cheng Zhang2
  • Jianyu Zu3
  • Yugang Diao1
  1. 1Department of Anesthesiology, General Hospital of Northern Theater Command , ,
  2. 2Department of General Surgery, General Hospital of Northern Theater Command , ,
  3. 3Department of Anesthesiology, Suzhou BOE Hospital , ,
Read full textPDFDOICite

Abstract

Background: Postoperative delirium (POD) is a common complication in elderly surgical patients that can impede recovery. While remimazolam offers superior hemodynamic stability compared to propofol, its impact on POD incidence remains unclear. This randomized trial aimed to determine whether two induction doses of remimazolam are more effective than propofol in reducing POD and improving hemodynamic stability in older patients undergoing laparoscopic gastrointestinal surgery.

Methods: In this prospective trial, 186 patients (aged 60–80 years) were randomized to receive anesthesia induction with remimazolam 0.15 mg/kg (R1), remimazolam 0.3 mg/kg (R2), or propofol 1.5 mg/kg (P). The primary endpoint was the incidence of POD within 5 days post-surgery, assessed using the 3-Minute Diagnostic Interview for Confusion Assessment Method. Secondary endpoints included hemodynamic parameters, recovery times, and adverse events.

Results: The incidence of POD was 12.9% in the R1 group, 11.3% in the R2 group, and 6.5% in the P group (P = 0.467). Both remimazolam groups exhibited significantly higher mean arterial pressure following induction and intubation (both P < 0.05). Furthermore, remimazolam was associated with a lower incidence of treated hypotension (P = 0.010), fewer bradycardia events (P < 0.001), and reduced vasopressor requirements (P < 0.05). However, the time to loss of consciousness (P < 0.001) and extubation time (P < 0.001) were longer with remimazolam.

Conclusions: Remimazolam at induction doses of 0.15 mg/kg and 0.3 mg/kg did not reduce the incidence of POD compared with propofol. Nevertheless, the study was not adequately powered to exclude a clinically relevant difference in POD incidence given the substantially lower-than-expected event rate, as no statistically significant between-group difference was detected. In addition, remimazolam at these doses was associated with higher post-induction blood pressure, fewer hypotensive events, and lower vasopressor requirements compared with propofol. Therefore, remimazolam at these induction doses may serve as suitable alternatives for this vulnerable patient population.

Clinical trial registration: https://www.chictr.org.cn, Chinese Clinical Trial Registry ChiCTR2400082176.

Related

  1. Comparison of remimazolam total intravenous anesthesia versus sevoflurane inhalational anesthesia on emergence agitation in patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery for gastric or colorectal cancer: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial
    Wenjie Mao, Binbin Yang, Fan Huang +3
    TrialsPeer-reviewedCC BY 4.0Clinical trials & evidence synthesisCrossref
  2. Effect of video-assisted informed consent on preoperative anxiety in patients undergoing laparoscopic gastrointestinal cancer surgery: a randomized controlled trial
    Abdurrahman Başpınar, Fırat Tekeş, Ezgi Altınsoy +5
    Videosurgery and other Miniinvasive TechniquesPeer-reviewedCC BY-NC-SA 4.0Full textSurgery & anaesthesiaPMC
  3. Remimazolam in older surgical patients: postoperative delirium, hemodynamic stability, and mechanistic considerations
    Donglan Peng, Zhaoying Zhong, Ping Zou +6
    Frontiers in MedicinePeer-reviewedCC BY 4.0Full textSurgery & anaesthesiaPMC
  4. Hemodynamic Outcomes and Vasopressor Requirements with Remimazolam-Based Total Intravenous Anesthesia Versus Propofol-Sevoflurane Anesthesia in Robot-Assisted Direct-to-Implant Breast Reconstruction.
    Ji Young Kim, Na Young Kim, Hyun Joo Kim +6
    Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania)Peer-reviewedCC BYFull textSurgery & anaesthesiaEurope PMC
  5. Effects of remimazolam versus propofol on cerebral oxygenation in elderly patients undergoing prone spine surgery: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial
    Betina Lazaro, Zhuan Jin, Yurie Sugaya +1
    BMJ OpenPeer-reviewedCC BY-NC 4.0Full textSurgery & anaesthesiaCrossref

Cite

BibTeXRIS
BibTeX
@article{fan2026remimazolam,
  title = {{Remimazolam versus propofol for elderly patients undergoing laparoscopic gastrointestinal surgery: a randomized trial concentrating on delirium and hemodynamic stability}},
  author = {Hongna Fan and Xiaotong Chen and Linlin Xu and Bin Zou and Da Li and Cheng Zhang and Jianyu Zu and Yugang Diao},
  journal = {Frontiers in medicine},
  year = {2026},
  month = oct,
  doi = {10.3389/fmed.2026.1992969},
  url = {https://europepmc.org/article/PMC/PMC13719584},
  note = {CC BY},
}
RIS
TY  - JOUR
TI  - Remimazolam versus propofol for elderly patients undergoing laparoscopic gastrointestinal surgery: a randomized trial concentrating on delirium and hemodynamic stability
AU  - Hongna Fan
AU  - Xiaotong Chen
AU  - Linlin Xu
AU  - Bin Zou
AU  - Da Li
AU  - Cheng Zhang
AU  - Jianyu Zu
AU  - Yugang Diao
PY  - 2026
DA  - 2026/10/16
JO  - Frontiers in medicine
DO  - 10.3389/fmed.2026.1992969
UR  - https://europepmc.org/article/PMC/PMC13719584
AB  - Background: Postoperative delirium (POD) is a common complication in elderly surgical patients that can impede recovery. While remimazolam offers superior hemodynamic stability compared to propofol, its impact on POD incidence remains unclear. This randomized trial aimed to determine whether two induction doses of remimazolam are more effective than propofol in reducing POD and improving hemodynamic stability in older patients undergoing laparoscopic gastrointestinal surgery.  Methods: In this prospective trial, 186 patients (aged 60–80 years) were randomized to receive anesthesia induction with remimazolam 0.15 mg/kg (R1), remimazolam 0.3 mg/kg (R2), or propofol 1.5 mg/kg (P). The primary endpoint was the incidence of POD within 5 days post-surgery, assessed using the 3-Minute Diagnostic Interview for Confusion Assessment Method. Secondary endpoints included hemodynamic parameters, recovery times, and adverse events.  Results: The incidence of POD was 12.9% in the R1 group, 11.3% in the R2 group, and 6.5% in the P group (P = 0.467). Both remimazolam groups exhibited significantly higher mean arterial pressure following induction and intubation (both P < 0.05). Furthermore, remimazolam was associated with a lower incidence of treated hypotension (P = 0.010), fewer bradycardia events (P < 0.001), and reduced vasopressor requirements (P < 0.05). However, the time to loss of consciousness (P < 0.001) and extubation time (P < 0.001) were longer with remimazolam.  Conclusions: Remimazolam at induction doses of 0.15 mg/kg and 0.3 mg/kg did not reduce the incidence of POD compared with propofol. Nevertheless, the study was not adequately powered to exclude a clinically relevant difference in POD incidence given the substantially lower-than-expected event rate, as no statistically significant between-group difference was detected. In addition, remimazolam at these doses was associated with higher post-induction blood pressure, fewer hypotensive events, and lower vasopressor requirements compared with propofol. Therefore, remimazolam at these induction doses may serve as suitable alternatives for this vulnerable patient population.  Clinical trial registration: https://www.chictr.org.cn, Chinese Clinical Trial Registry ChiCTR2400082176.
SN  - 2296-858X
ER  -