Tang F, Yi JM, Gong HY, Lu ZY, Chen J, Fang B, Chen C, Liu ZY. Remimazolam benzenesulfonate anesthesia effectiveness in cardiac surgery patients under general anesthesia.
World J Clin Cases 2021;
9:10595-10603. [PMID:
35004991 PMCID:
PMC8686148 DOI:
10.12998/wjcc.v9.i34.10595]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 26] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/28/2021] [Revised: 08/28/2021] [Accepted: 10/14/2021] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND
Sedation with propofol injections is associated with a risk of addiction, but remimazolam benzenesulfonate is a comparable anesthetic with a short elimination half-life and independence from cell P450 enzyme metabolism. Compared to remimazolam, remimazolam benzenesulfonate has a faster effect, is more quickly metabolized, produces inactive metabolites and has weak drug interactions. Thus, remimazolam benzenesulfonate has good effectiveness and safety for diagnostic and operational sedation.
AIM
To investigate the clinical value of remimazolam benzenesulfonate in cardiac surgery patients under general anesthesia.
METHODS
A total of 80 patients who underwent surgery in the Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery from August 2020 to April 2021 were included in the study. Using a random number table, patients were divided into two anesthesia induction groups of 40 patients each: remimazolam (0.3 mg/kg remimazolam benzenesulfonate) and propofol (1.5 mg/kg propofol). Hemodynamic parameters, inflammatory stress response indices, respiratory function indices, perioperative indices and adverse reactions in the two groups were monitored over time for comparison.
RESULTS
At pre-anesthesia induction, the remimazolam and propofol groups did not differ regarding heart rate, mean arterial pressure, cardiac index or volume per wave index. After endotracheal intubation and when the sternum was cut off, mean arterial pressure and volume per wave index were significantly higher in the remimazolam group than in the propofol group (P < 0.05). After endotracheal intubation, the oxygenation index and the respiratory index did not differ between the groups. After endotracheal intubation and when the sternum was cut off, the oxygenation index values were significantly higher in the remimazolam group than in the propofol group (P < 0.05). Serum interleukin-6 and tumor necrosis factor-α levels 12 h after surgery were significantly higher than before surgery in both groups (P < 0.05). The observation indices were re-examined 2 h after surgery, and the epinephrine, cortisol and blood glucose levels were significantly higher in the remimazolam group than in the propofol group (P < 0.05). The recovery and extubation times were significantly lower in the remimazolam group than in the propofol group (P < 0.05); there were significantly fewer adverse reactions in the remimazolam group (10.00%) than in the propofol group (30.00%; P < 0.05).
CONCLUSION
Compared with propofol, remimazolam benzenesulfonate benefited cardiac surgery patients under general anesthesia by reducing hemodynamic fluctuations. Remimazolam benzenesulfonate influenced the surgical stress response and respiratory function, thereby reducing anesthesia-related adverse reactions.
Collapse