Incidence of adverse events among elderly vs non-elderly patients during procedural sedation and analgesia with propofol

Remimazolam has similar anesthetic effect and superior safety compared to propofol in elderly patients: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

The superiority between remimazolam and propofol for anesthesia is controversial in elderly patients (≥60 years). This meta-analysis aimed to systematically compare anesthetic effect and safety profile between remimazolam and propofol in elderly patients under any surgery.

METHODS

Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and PubMed were searched until December 25, 2023 for relevant randomized controlled trials.

RESULTS

Ten studies with 806 patients receiving remimazolam (experimental group) and 813 patients receiving propofol (control group) were included. Time to loss of consciousness [standard mean difference (SMD) (95% confidence interval (CI): 1.347 (-0.362, 3.055), p = 0.122] and recovery time [SMD (95% CI): -0.022 (-0.300, 0.257), p = 0.879] were similar between experimental and control groups. Mean arterial pressure at baseline minus 1 min after induction [SMD (95% CI): -1.800 (-3.250, -0.349), p = 0.015], heart rate at baseline minus 1 min after induction [SMD (95% CI): -1.041 (-1.537, -0.545), p < 0.001], incidences of hypoxemia [relative risk (RR) (95% CI): 0.247 (0.138, 0.444), p < 0.001], respiratory depression [RR (95% CI): 0.458 (0.300, 0.700), p < 0.001], bradycardia [RR (95% CI): 0.409 (0.176, 0.954), p = 0.043], hypotension [RR (95% CI): 0.415 (0.241, 0.714), p = 0.007], and injection pain [RR (95% CI): 0.172 (0.113, 0.263), p < 0.001] were lower in the experimental group compared to the control group. Postoperative nausea and vomiting was not different between groups [RR (95% CI): 1.194 (0.829, 1.718), p = 0.341]. Moreover, this meta-analysis displayed a low risk of bias, minimal publication bias, and good robustness.

CONCLUSION

Remimazolam shows comparative anesthetic effect and better safety profile than propofol in elderly patients under any surgery.

Risk factors for clinically important traumatic brain injury in minor head injury in older people

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

The incidence of traumatic brain injury (TBI) in older individuals is increasing with an increase in the older population. For older people, the required medical interventions and hospitalization following minor head injury have negative impacts, which have not been reported in literature up till now. We aimed to investigate the risk factors for clinically important traumatic brain injury (ciTBI) in older patients with minor head injury.

METHODS

This is a retrospective single-center cohort study. Older patients aged ≥65 years presenting with head injury and a Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) score of ≥13 upon arrival at the hospital between January 1, 2018, and October 31, 2021, were included. Patients with an injury duration of ≥24 h were excluded. The primary outcome was defined as ciTBI (including death, surgery, intubation, medical interventions, and hospital stays of ≥2 nights). Multiple logistic regression analysis was conducted to identify the risk factors.

RESULTS

A total of 296 patients were included initially, and 6 of them were excluded subsequently. ciTBI was identified in 62 cases. According to the results of the multiple logistic regression analysis, GCS scores of ≤14 (OR 3.72, 95% CI 1.89-7.30), high-risk mechanisms of injury (OR 2.80, 95% CI 1.39-5.64), vomiting (OR 5.01, 95% CI 1.19-21.1), and retrograde amnesia (OR 6.90, 95% CI 3.37-14.1) were identified as risk factors.

CONCLUSION

In older patients with minor head injury, GCS ≤14, high-risk mechanisms of injury, vomiting, and retrograde amnesia are risk factors for ciTBI.

Remimazolam versus propofol for sedation in gastrointestinal endoscopy and colonoscopy within elderly patients: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

PURPOSE

Propofol has become the sedative of choice for endoscopy and colonoscopy. However, it has shown associations with various adverse effects, specifically in the geriatric population. In contrast, remimazolam is a novel benzodiazepine, demonstrating a superior clinical safety profile. Hence, this systematic review and meta-analysis aims to clarify the efficacy and safety of remimazolam versus propofol in elderly patients (≥ 60 years) undergoing gastrointestinal endoscopic and colonoscopy procedures.

METHODS

Electronic databases including PubMed, Cochrane Library, ScienceDirect, and Google Scholar were explored from inception till January 7, 2024. The Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool for Randomized Controlled Trials (RoB-2) was utilized to evaluate the quality of each included study reported in this meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Seven randomized control trials were included, resulting in the pooling of 1,466 patients (remimazolam: 731 patients; propofol: 735 patients). Propofol demonstrated a significantly lower time to loss of consciousness (P < 0.00001, 4 studies, 784 patients) and a greater sedation success after first dose (P = 0.05, 5 studies, 1,271 patients). Remimazolam reported a significantly lower risk of bradycardia (P = 0.02, 5 studies, 1,323 patients), hypoxemia (P < 0.00001, 6 studies, 1,389 patients), and pain on injection site (P < 0.00001, 5 studies, 1,184 patients). No statistically significant differences in sedation time, number of supplemental doses, procedural parameters, and other adverse outcomes were reported.

CONCLUSION

As per the results of our analyses, propofol demonstrated comparatively superior efficacy, however, remimazolam demonstrated comparatively superior safety. The debatable evidence generated from this meta-analysis may not currently be powerful enough to advocate for the use of remimazolam in elderly patients undergoing gastrointestinal procedures; hence, further comprehensive studies are necessary in order to arrive at a robust conclusion.

British Society of Gastroenterology guidelines on sedation in gastrointestinal endoscopy

Over 2.5 million gastrointestinal endoscopic procedures are carried out in the United Kingdom (UK) every year. Procedures are carried out with local anaesthetic r with sedation. Sedation is commonly used for gastrointestinal endoscopy, but the type and amount of sedation administered is influenced by the complexity and nature of the procedure and patient factors. The elective and emergency nature of endoscopy procedures and local resources also have a significant impact on the delivery of sedation. In the UK, the vast majority of sedated procedures are carried out using benzodiazepines, with or without opiates, whereas deeper sedation using propofol or general anaesthetic requires the involvement of an anaesthetic team. Patients undergoing gastrointestinal endoscopy need to have good understanding of the options for sedation, including the option for no sedation and alternatives, balancing the intended aims of the procedure and reducing the risk of complications. These guidelines were commissioned by the British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) Endoscopy Committee with input from major stakeholders, to provide a detailed update, incorporating recent advances in sedation for gastrointestinal endoscopy.This guideline covers aspects from pre-assessment of the elective 'well' patient to patients with significant comorbidity requiring emergency procedures. Types of sedation are discussed, procedure and room requirements and the recovery period, providing guidance to enhance safety and minimise complications. These guidelines are intended to inform practising clinicians and all staff involved in the delivery of gastrointestinal endoscopy with an expectation that this guideline will be revised in 5-years' time.

Incidence of adverse events for procedural sedation and analgesia for cardioversion using thiopental in elderly patients: a multicenter prospective observational study

Aim

The incidence and characteristics of thiopental-related adverse events (AEs) in elderly patients during procedural sedation and analgesia (PSA) have not been well studied. We aimed to characterize thiopental-related AE in elderly patients during PSA and compare the incidence of AE in elderly patients with non-elderly adults.

Methods

This is a secondary analysis of the Japanese Procedural Sedation and Analgesia Registry (JPSTAR). We included all adult patients who received thiopental for PSA in the emergency departments and excluded patients who received concomitant sedative(s) in addition to thiopental or patients with missing body weight data. We compared the incidence of AE between the non-elderly (18-64 years) and elderly groups (≥65 years).

Results

The JPSTAR had data on 379 patients who received thiopental for PSA and included 311 patients for analysis. Most (222/311, 71.3%) were elderly. Cardioversion was the most common reason for PSA (96.1%). The AE incidence between groups overall was similar, however, hypoxia was significantly more frequent in the elderly compared with the non-elderly group (10.3% versus 2.2%; adjusted odds 5.63, 95% confidence interval 1.27-25.0). The initial and total doses of thiopental were significantly lower in the elderly group than in the non-elderly group (1.95 mg/kg versus 2.21 mg/kg and 2.33 mg/kg versus 2.93 mg/kg, respectively).

Conclusions

Although elderly patients received lower doses of thiopental, hypoxic events were significantly more frequent in this group compared with the non-elderly patients. However, the AE incidence was similar.

Effect of remimazolam tosilate on the incidence of hypoxemia in elderly patients undergoing gastrointestinal endoscopy: A bi-center, prospective, randomized controlled study

Background: Remimazolam tosilate is a new ultra-short-acting benzodiazepine sedative medicine. In this study, we evaluated the effect of remimazolam tosilate on the incidence of hypoxemia during sedation in elderly patients undergoing gastrointestinal endoscopy. Methods: Patients in the remimazolam group received an initial dose of 0.1 mg/kg and a bolus dose of 2.5 mg of remimazolam tosilate, whereas patients in the propofol group received an initial dose of 1.5 mg/kg and a bolus dose of 0.5 mg/kg of propofol. Patients received ASA standard monitoring (heart-rate, non-invasive blood pressure, and pulse oxygen saturation) during the entire examination process. The primary outcome was the incidence of moderate hypoxemia (defined as 85%≤ SpO₂< 90%, >15s) during the gastrointestinal endoscopy. The secondary outcomes included the incidence of mild hypoxemia (defined as SpO₂ 90%-94%) and severe hypoxemia (defined as SpO₂< 85%, >15s), the lowest pulse oxygen saturation, airway maneuvers used to correct hypoxemia, patient's hemodynamic as well as other adverse events. Results: 107 elderly patients (67.6 ± 5.7 years old) in the remimazolam group and 109 elderly patients (67.5 ± 4.9 years old) in the propofol group were analyzed. The incidence of moderate hypoxemia was 2.8% in the remimazolam group and 17.4% in the propofol group (relative risk [RR] = 0.161; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.049 to 0.528; p < 0.001). The frequency of mild hypoxemia was less in the remimazolam group, but not statistically significant (9.3% vs. 14.7%; RR = 0.637; 95% CI, 0.303 to 1.339; p = 0.228). There was no significant difference in the incidence of severe hypoxemia between the two groups (4.7% vs. 5.5%; RR = 0.849; 95% CI, 0.267 to 2.698; p = 0.781). The median lowest SpO₂ during the examination was 98% (IQR, 96.0%-99.0%) in patients in the remimazolam group, which was significantly higher than in patients in the propofol group (96%, IQR, 92.0%-99.0%, p < 0.001). Patients in the remimazolam group received more drug supplementation during endoscopy than patients in the propofol group (p = 0.014). There was a statistically significant difference in the incidence of hypotension between the two groups (2.8% vs. 12.8%; RR = 0.218; 95% CI, 0.065 to 0.738; p = 0.006). No significant differences were found in the incidence of adverse events such as nausea and vomiting, dizziness, and prolonged sedation. Conclusion: This study explored the safety of remimazolam compared with propofol during gastrointestinal endoscopy in elderly patients. Despite the increased supplemental doses during sedation, remimazolam improved risk of moderate hypoxemia (i.e., 85%≤ SpO₂ < 90%) and hypotension in elderly patients.

Challenges for interprofessional simulation-based sedation training courses: Mini review

Sedation for invasive procedures is given for various clinical purposes to patients of all ages worldwide. However, sedation is a continuum to general anesthesia and contains severe inherent risks leading to mortality. Providing a simulation-based sedation training course (SEDTC) to various medical staff could be an effective strategy to improve patient and medical safety associated with sedation. The SEDTC generally includes basic airway management such as upper airway obstruction release or rapid response action toward excessive sedation, utilizing problem-based learning or simulators. However, participation alone in the SEDTC can only achieve Level 1 (reaction) or 2 (learning) in the Kirkpatrick model. A patient safety improvement of Level 3 (transfer) or 4 (result) of the Kirkpatrick model can be achieved when all members related to sedation undergo experiential learning and reach a consensus. Accordingly, in-hospital interprofessional SEDTC focusing on a resilience approach is essential to achieve effective sedation patient safety in Level 3 or 4 of the Kirkpatrick model.

Association between capnography and recovery time after procedural sedation and analgesia in the emergency department

Aim

Capnography is recommended for use in procedural sedation and analgesia (PSA); however, limited studies assess its impact on recovery time. We investigated the association between capnography and the recovery time of PSA in the emergency department (ED).

Methods

This study was a secondary analysis of a multicenter PSA patient registry including eight hospitals in Japan. We included all patients who received PSA in the ED between May 2017 and May 2021 and divided the patients into capnography and no-capnography groups. The primary outcome was recovery time, defined as the time from the end of the procedure to the cessation of monitoring. The log-rank test and multivariable analysis using clustering for institutions were performed.

Results

Of the 1265 screened patients, 943 patients who received PSA were enrolled and categorized into the capnography (n = 150, 16%) and no-capnography (n = 793, 84%) groups. The median recovery time was 40 (interquartile range [IQR]: 25-63) min in the capnography group and 30 (IQR: 14-55) min in the no-capnography group. In the log-rank test, the recovery time was significantly longer in the capnography group (p = 0.03) than in the no-capnography group. In the multivariable analysis, recovery time did not differ between the two groups (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.95; 95% confidence interval, 0.77-1.17; p = 0.61).

Conclusion

In this secondary analysis of the multicenter registry of PSA in Japan, capnography use did not associate with shorter recovery time in the ED.

Effect of Remimazolam Tosilate on Respiratory Depression in Elderly Patients Undergoing Gastroscopy: A Multicentered, Prospective, and Randomized Study

Background

Remimazolam tosilate (RT) is a new type of γ-aminobutyric acid subtype A (GABA_A) receptor agonist, having the possibility to be an ideal sedative drug for procedural sedation. At present, there are few studies on the effect of RT on respiratory depression in elderly patients. We aimed to evaluate the effect of RT on respiratory depression in elderly patients undergoing gastroscopy.

Methods

This prospective, randomized, single-blinded trial recruited patients from eight centers in China between May 2022 and July 2022. A total of 346 elderly patients undergoing gastroscopy were randomly divided into RT group (0.2 mg/kg) or propofol group (1.5 mg/kg), respectively. The primary outcome was the incidence of respiratory depression. Secondary outcomes include the incidence of sedative-related adverse events, the success rate of sedation, time to fully alert, time to loss of consciousness (LOC), time to ready for discharge, as well as the the patients, endoscopists and anethetists' satisfaction.

Results

The incidence of respiratory depression was significantly reduced in the RT group compared with the propofol group (9.8% vs 17.9%, P=0.042). The time of LOC and fully alert in the RT group were longer than that in the propofol group (P < 0.05). The incidences of hypotention (50.9% vs 32.4%, P=0.001) and hypotension requiring treatment (5.8% vs 1.7%, P=0.031) were significantly higher in the propofol group than that in the RT group. The incidence and severity of injection pain were more frequently recorded in the propofol group than that in the RT group (40.5% vs 12.1%, P<0.05). There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups in terms of sedation success rates, time to ready for discharge, endoscopists and anethetists' satisfaction and other sedative-related adverse events.

Conclusion

RT may be a suitable alternative sedative agent for elderly patients undergoing gastroscopy due to its safety profile.

The Efficacy and Safety of Remimazolam Tosilate versus Etomidate-Propofol in Elderly Outpatients Undergoing Colonoscopy: A Prospective, Randomized, Single-Blind, Non-Inferiority Trial

Objective

The optimal sedation regime during endoscopy remains controversial, especially for elderly outpatients. In this study, we compared the efficacy and safety between remimazolam tosilate (RT) and etomidate-propofol (EP) in elderly outpatients undergoing colonoscopy.

Methods

A total of 260 elderly outpatients undergoing sedative colonoscopy were randomized into two groups. Patients in the RT group received a 0.075-mg/kg maintenance dose of remimazolam following an initial dose of 0.15 mg/kg, whereas patients in the EP group (10 mL:20 mg etomidate plus 10 mL:100 mg propofol) received a 0.05-mL/kg maintenance dose following an initial dose of 0.1 mL/kg to maintain a Modified Observer’s Assessment of Alertness/Sedation score of ≤3 during the procedure. The primary endpoint was the success of the procedure. Secondary endpoints included time metrics, hemodynamics, consumption of fentanyl, etomidate, propofol, and remimazolam, intraoperative body movement, patient and endoscopist satisfaction scores, supplemental dose of sedative and fentanyl, and incidence and severity of adverse events.

Results

The procedure success rate was 96.52% in the RT group and 100% in the EP group. The difference in procedure success rate between the RT and EP groups was −3.48% (95% confidence interval: −6.81%, −0.15%). Four patients in the RT group required rescue midazolam. Compared with patients in the RT group, the onset time of the EP group was significantly lower (p < 0.05), whereas time to fully alert (p = 0.001), ready for discharge (p = 0.001), and hospital discharge (p = 0.002) were all significantly higher in the EP group. However, there were no significant differences in procedure time (p = 0.846) or cecal intubation time (p = 0.320) between the two groups. Although the frequency of intraoperative body movement was higher in the RT group, the difference was not significant (p = 0.508). There were no significant differences in patients’ demographic and baseline characteristics, supplemental doses of sedative and fentanyl, or patient and endoscopist satisfaction scores (p > 0.05). Muscular tremor and pain on injection were recorded more frequently in the EP group (p < 0.05). However, there were no significant differences in hypoxia, respiratory depression, or incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting. The severity of adverse events was all mild (grade 1) across both groups.

Conclusion

RT may have non-inferior efficacy and a higher safety profile than EP in elderly outpatients undergoing colonoscopy, which suggests that RT may be more suitable for elderly outpatients undergoing colonoscopy.

A mini-review of procedural sedation and analgesia in the emergency department

Procedural sedation and analgesia (PSA) is performed for a variety of indications in emergency departments (EDs). Although the practice of PSA in the ED is somewhat unique from other clinical areas, there is currently no guideline for this practice in Japan. Policy statements and guidelines for PSA have been published in Europe and North America. These guidelines suggest first evaluating patients carefully before performing PSA, and then deciding on target sedative level and choice of medications. Patient evaluation requires a combination of continuous visual observation by trained medical staff to assess the depth of sedation and respiration with noninvasive measurements of blood pressure, continuous electrocardiography monitoring, and pulse oximetry. Sedative selection should be based on its characteristics, peak time, effectiveness, and risks. It is important to administer sedatives and analgesics in small, incremental doses while keeping a close eye on the patient’s reaction to avoid adverse events (AEs) until the planned sedation level is reached. Further, additional attention is needed for special populations such as pediatric and elderly patients. PSA is a key element for patient‐centered care in emergency medicine. In this manuscript, we review the available evidence for PSA in the EDs, including guidelines for evaluation, monitoring, pharmacology, AEs, and special populations such as pediatric and elderly patients.