Remimazolam besylate versus propofol for long-term sedation during invasive mechanical ventilation: a pilot study
Yun Tang, Xiaobo Yang, Yuan Yu, Huaqing Shu, Yin Yuan, Hong Liu, Xiaojing Zou, Shiying Yuan, You Shang
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of remimazolam besylate compared with propofol in maintaining mild-to-moderate sedation in patients receiving long-term mechanical ventilation. METHODS: In this single-centered randomized pilot study, adult patients mechanically ventilated longer than 24 h were randomized to receive remimazolam besylate or propofol. The target sedation range was - 3 to 0 on the Richmond Agitation and Sedation Scale (RASS). The primary outcome was the percentage of time in the target sedation range without rescue sedation. The secondary outcomes were ventilator-free days at day 7, the length of ICU stay and 28-day mortality. RESULTS: Thirty patients were assigned to each group. No difference was identified between the remimazolam group and propofol group in median age [60.0 (IQR, 51.5-66.3) years vs. 64.0 (IQR, 55.0-69.3) years, respectively, p = 0.437] or the median duration of study drug infusion [55.0 (IQR, 28.3-102.0) hours vs. 41.0 (IQR, 24.8-74.3) hours, respectively, p = 0.255]. The median percentage of time in the target RASS range without rescue sedation was similar in remimazolam and propofol groups [73.2% (IQR, 41.5-97.3%) vs. 82.8% (IQR, 65.6-100%), p = 0.269]. No differences were identified between the two groups in terms of ventilator-free days at day 7, length of ICU stay, 28-day mortality or adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: This pilot study suggested that remimazolam besylate was effective and safe for long-term sedation in mechanically ventilated patients compared with propofol.