Comparison of the Safety and Efficacy of Remimazolam and Propofol for Sedation in Adults Undergoing Colonoscopy: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

<i>Background and Objectives</i>: This meta-analysis evaluates the safety and efficacy of remimazolam versus propofol for sedation during colonoscopy, focusing on hemodynamic and respiratory outcomes. <i>Materials and Methods</i>: A comprehensive search of CENTRAL, Embase, Pu...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Bon-Wook Koo, Hyo-Seok Na, Sang-Hi Park, Seunguk Bang, Hyun-Jung Shin
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: MDPI AG 2025-04-01
Series:Medicina
Subjects:
Online Access:https://www.mdpi.com/1648-9144/61/4/646
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1849714059719475200
author Bon-Wook Koo
Hyo-Seok Na
Sang-Hi Park
Seunguk Bang
Hyun-Jung Shin
author_facet Bon-Wook Koo
Hyo-Seok Na
Sang-Hi Park
Seunguk Bang
Hyun-Jung Shin
author_sort Bon-Wook Koo
collection DOAJ
description <i>Background and Objectives</i>: This meta-analysis evaluates the safety and efficacy of remimazolam versus propofol for sedation during colonoscopy, focusing on hemodynamic and respiratory outcomes. <i>Materials and Methods</i>: A comprehensive search of CENTRAL, Embase, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science up to January 2025 identified randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Outcomes included hypotension (primary outcome), bradycardia, respiratory depression, injection pain, sedation onset time, emergence time, procedure success rate, and recovery room stay. Effect sizes were reported as relative risks (RR) or mean differences (MD) using random-effects models. <i>Results</i>: Fourteen RCTs with 3290 participants were included. Remimazolam significantly reduced the risk of hypotension (RR: 0.44, 95% CI [0.39, 0.51], <i>p</i> = 0.0000), bradycardia (RR: 0.36, 95% CI [0.25, 0.53], <i>p</i> = 0.0000), respiratory depression (RR: 0.32, 95% CI [0.22, 0.45], <i>p</i> = 0.0000), and injection pain (RR: 0.14, 95% CI [0.09, 0.24], <i>p</i> = 0.0000) compared to propofol. Remimazolam had slower sedation onset (MD: 15.97 s, 95% CI [8.30, 23.64], <i>p</i> = 0.0000) but allowed faster emergence (MD: −0.91 min, 95% CI [−1.69, −0.13], <i>p</i> = 0.023) and shorter recovery room stays (MD: −2.20 min, 95% CI [−3.23, −1.17], <i>p</i> = 0.0000). Both drugs had similar procedure success rates. <i>Conclusions</i>: Remimazolam demonstrates superior safety and efficacy compared to propofol, reducing risks of hypotension, bradycardia, respiratory depression, and injection pain while enabling faster recovery. These findings support remimazolam as a viable sedative for colonoscopy, though further large-scale studies are needed to confirm these results.
format Article
id doaj-art-e4b26fb13ffa44e89d4dfc59f7fb0258
institution DOAJ
issn 1010-660X
1648-9144
language English
publishDate 2025-04-01
publisher MDPI AG
record_format Article
series Medicina
spelling doaj-art-e4b26fb13ffa44e89d4dfc59f7fb02582025-08-20T03:13:48ZengMDPI AGMedicina1010-660X1648-91442025-04-0161464610.3390/medicina61040646Comparison of the Safety and Efficacy of Remimazolam and Propofol for Sedation in Adults Undergoing Colonoscopy: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled TrialsBon-Wook Koo0Hyo-Seok Na1Sang-Hi Park2Seunguk Bang3Hyun-Jung Shin4Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seongnam 13620, Republic of KoreaDepartment of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seongnam 13620, Republic of KoreaDepartment of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Chungbuk National University Hospital, Cheongju-si 28644, Republic of KoreaDepartment of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Daejeon St. Mary’s Hospital, The Catholic University of Korea College of Medicine, Daejeon 34943, Republic of KoreaDepartment of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seongnam 13620, Republic of Korea<i>Background and Objectives</i>: This meta-analysis evaluates the safety and efficacy of remimazolam versus propofol for sedation during colonoscopy, focusing on hemodynamic and respiratory outcomes. <i>Materials and Methods</i>: A comprehensive search of CENTRAL, Embase, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science up to January 2025 identified randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Outcomes included hypotension (primary outcome), bradycardia, respiratory depression, injection pain, sedation onset time, emergence time, procedure success rate, and recovery room stay. Effect sizes were reported as relative risks (RR) or mean differences (MD) using random-effects models. <i>Results</i>: Fourteen RCTs with 3290 participants were included. Remimazolam significantly reduced the risk of hypotension (RR: 0.44, 95% CI [0.39, 0.51], <i>p</i> = 0.0000), bradycardia (RR: 0.36, 95% CI [0.25, 0.53], <i>p</i> = 0.0000), respiratory depression (RR: 0.32, 95% CI [0.22, 0.45], <i>p</i> = 0.0000), and injection pain (RR: 0.14, 95% CI [0.09, 0.24], <i>p</i> = 0.0000) compared to propofol. Remimazolam had slower sedation onset (MD: 15.97 s, 95% CI [8.30, 23.64], <i>p</i> = 0.0000) but allowed faster emergence (MD: −0.91 min, 95% CI [−1.69, −0.13], <i>p</i> = 0.023) and shorter recovery room stays (MD: −2.20 min, 95% CI [−3.23, −1.17], <i>p</i> = 0.0000). Both drugs had similar procedure success rates. <i>Conclusions</i>: Remimazolam demonstrates superior safety and efficacy compared to propofol, reducing risks of hypotension, bradycardia, respiratory depression, and injection pain while enabling faster recovery. These findings support remimazolam as a viable sedative for colonoscopy, though further large-scale studies are needed to confirm these results.https://www.mdpi.com/1648-9144/61/4/646remimazolampropofolcolonoscopysedationhemodynamicsrespiratory insufficiency
spellingShingle Bon-Wook Koo
Hyo-Seok Na
Sang-Hi Park
Seunguk Bang
Hyun-Jung Shin
Comparison of the Safety and Efficacy of Remimazolam and Propofol for Sedation in Adults Undergoing Colonoscopy: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
Medicina
remimazolam
propofol
colonoscopy
sedation
hemodynamics
respiratory insufficiency
title Comparison of the Safety and Efficacy of Remimazolam and Propofol for Sedation in Adults Undergoing Colonoscopy: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
title_full Comparison of the Safety and Efficacy of Remimazolam and Propofol for Sedation in Adults Undergoing Colonoscopy: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
title_fullStr Comparison of the Safety and Efficacy of Remimazolam and Propofol for Sedation in Adults Undergoing Colonoscopy: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of the Safety and Efficacy of Remimazolam and Propofol for Sedation in Adults Undergoing Colonoscopy: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
title_short Comparison of the Safety and Efficacy of Remimazolam and Propofol for Sedation in Adults Undergoing Colonoscopy: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
title_sort comparison of the safety and efficacy of remimazolam and propofol for sedation in adults undergoing colonoscopy a meta analysis of randomized controlled trials
topic remimazolam
propofol
colonoscopy
sedation
hemodynamics
respiratory insufficiency
url https://www.mdpi.com/1648-9144/61/4/646
work_keys_str_mv AT bonwookkoo comparisonofthesafetyandefficacyofremimazolamandpropofolforsedationinadultsundergoingcolonoscopyametaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials
AT hyoseokna comparisonofthesafetyandefficacyofremimazolamandpropofolforsedationinadultsundergoingcolonoscopyametaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials
AT sanghipark comparisonofthesafetyandefficacyofremimazolamandpropofolforsedationinadultsundergoingcolonoscopyametaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials
AT seungukbang comparisonofthesafetyandefficacyofremimazolamandpropofolforsedationinadultsundergoingcolonoscopyametaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials
AT hyunjungshin comparisonofthesafetyandefficacyofremimazolamandpropofolforsedationinadultsundergoingcolonoscopyametaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials