Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Clinical Trial
. 2020 Aug;34(4):543-553.
doi: 10.1007/s00540-020-02788-6. Epub 2020 May 16.

Efficacy and safety of remimazolam versus propofol for general anesthesia: a multicenter, single-blind, randomized, parallel-group, phase IIb/III trial

Affiliations
Clinical Trial

Efficacy and safety of remimazolam versus propofol for general anesthesia: a multicenter, single-blind, randomized, parallel-group, phase IIb/III trial

Matsuyuki Doi et al. J Anesth. 2020 Aug.

Abstract

Purpose: This trial was conducted to confirm the non-inferiority of remimazolam versus propofol in the induction and maintenance of general anesthesia in surgical patients.

Methods: Surgical patients (n = 375) were randomized to remimazolam started at 6 or 12 mg/kg/h by continuous intravenous (IV) infusion until the loss of consciousness (LoC), followed by 1 mg/kg/h to be adjusted as appropriate until the end of surgery or IV propofol administered as a slow bolus of 2.0-2.5 mg/kg until LoC followed by 4-10 mg/kg/h until the end of surgery. Efficacy was measured via the combined primary endpoint of no intraoperative awakening/recall, no need for rescue sedatives, and no body movements. Adverse events and adverse drug reactions (ADRs) were monitored for safety.

Results: Efficacy rates were 100% in all treatment groups, and the non-inferiority of remimazolam was demonstrated [95% confidence interval (- 0.0487; 0.0250)]. The time to LoC was longer in the remimazolam 6 (p < 0.0001) and 12 mg/kg/h (p = 0.0149) groups versus propofol. The time to extubation was longer in both remimazolam groups versus the propofol group (p ≤ 0.0001). The incidence of ADRs was similar in the remimazolam groups (39.3% and 42.7%, respectively) compared with the propofol group (61.3%). Decreased blood pressure occurred in 20.0% and 24.0% of patients treated with 6 and 12 mg/kg/h remimazolam, respectively, compared with 49.3% of patients receiving propofol. Injection site pain was reported in 18.7% of propofol patients but not in those receiving remimazolam.

Conclusions: This trial demonstrated that remimazolam was well tolerated and non-inferior to propofol with regard to efficacy as a sedative hypnotics for general anesthesia.

Clinical trial registration: This trial is registered with the Japan Pharmaceutical Information Center - Clinical Trials Information (JapicCTI). JapicCTI number: 121973.

Keywords: CNS7056; General anesthesia; ONO-2745; Phase 3; Propofol; Remimazolam.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Chitilian HV, Eckenhoff RG. Anesthetic drug development: novel drugs and new approaches. Surg Neurol Int. 2013;4(Suppl1):S2–S10. - PubMed - PMC
    1. Scott RP, Saunders DA. Propofol: clinical strategies for preventing the pain of injection. Anaesthesia. 1988;43:492–4. - DOI
    1. Sneyd JR, Rigby-Jones AE. New drugs and technologies, intravenous anaesthesia is on the move (again). Br J Anaesth. 2010;105:246–54. - DOI
    1. Tuk B, van Oostenbruggen MF. Characterization of the pharmacodynamic interaction between parent drug and active metabolite in vivo: midazolam and alpha-OH-midazolam. J Pharmacol Exp Ther. 1999;289:1067–74. - PubMed
    1. Saari TI, Uusi-Oukari M. Enhancement of GABAergic activity: neuropharmacological effects of benzodiazepines and therapeutic use in anesthesiology. Pharmacol Rev. 2011;63:243–67. - DOI

Publication types

Associated data

LinkOut - more resources