0 8

Cited 0 times in

Cited 0 times in

Comparative safety and efficacy of remimazolam versus propofol for endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography with the patient under deep sedation: a multicenter randomized controlled trial

DC Field Value Language
dc.contributor.authorHan, Sung Yong-
dc.contributor.authorOh, Dongwook-
dc.contributor.authorChoe, Jung Wan-
dc.contributor.authorLee, Jong Hyun-
dc.contributor.authorChung, Moon Jae-
dc.contributor.authorJang, Sung Ill-
dc.contributor.authorPark, Se Woo-
dc.contributor.authorPark, Jin Seok-
dc.contributor.authorYang, Min Jae-
dc.contributor.authorKim, Eui Joo-
dc.contributor.authorCho, Jae Hee-
dc.date.accessioned2026-07-09T07:23:27Z-
dc.date.available2026-07-09T07:23:27Z-
dc.date.created2026-07-07-
dc.date.issued2026-06-
dc.identifier.issn0016-5107-
dc.identifier.urihttps://ir.ymlib.yonsei.ac.kr/handle/22282913/212904-
dc.description.abstractBackground and Aims: ERCP requires the patient remain in deep sedation, which is most commonly achieved with propofol. Despite its efficacy, however, propofol is associated with adverse events such as hypoxemia and hypotension. Remimazolam, a short-acting benzodiazepine, has emerged as a potentially safer alternative. This multicenter randomized controlled trial aimed to compare the safety and efficacy of remimazolam versus propofol for deep sedation during ERCP. Methods: A total of 396 patients undergoing ERCP were randomized into the remimazolam (n = 198) or propofol (n = 198) group. The primary endpoint was sedation quality assessed by patient and endoscopist satisfaction. Secondary outcomes included procedural efficacy, incidence of adverse events, and safety parameters. Results: Sedation efficacy was comparable between the groups, with no significant differences in procedural or recovery times. However, patient satisfaction was significantly greater with remimazolam (9.00 [7.00-10.00]) than propofol (8.00 [6.00-10.00]; P = .024). Remimazolam significantly reduced both injection-site pain (19.7% vs 31.3%; P = .008) and moderate-to-severe cardiopulmonary events excluding hypoxemia (1.01% vs 4.54%; = .032). Multivariable analysis identified propofol (risk ratio [RR], 7.47; P = .018), low body mass index (RR, 1.23; P = .028), cardiovascular disease (RR, 6.44; P = .044), and alcohol intake (RR, 7.57; P = .011) as significant risk factors for cardiopulmonary adverse events. Conclusions: Remimazolam is a safe and effective alternative to propofol for sedation during ERCP, demonstrating comparable sedation efficacy, greater patient satisfaction, reduced injection-site pain, and fewer moderate-to-severe cardiopulmonary adverse events. Remimazolam thus has strong clinical utility, particularly patients at a greater risk of sedation-related adverse events. (Gastrointest Endosc 2026;103:1192-200.)-
dc.languageEnglish-
dc.publisherMosby Yearbook-
dc.relation.isPartOfGASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY-
dc.relation.isPartOfGASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY-
dc.subject.MESHAdult-
dc.subject.MESHAged-
dc.subject.MESHBenzodiazepines* / adverse effects-
dc.subject.MESHBenzodiazepines* / therapeutic use-
dc.subject.MESHCholangiopancreatography, Endoscopic Retrograde* / methods-
dc.subject.MESHDeep Sedation* / adverse effects-
dc.subject.MESHDeep Sedation* / methods-
dc.subject.MESHFemale-
dc.subject.MESHHumans-
dc.subject.MESHHypnotics and Sedatives* / adverse effects-
dc.subject.MESHHypnotics and Sedatives* / therapeutic use-
dc.subject.MESHMale-
dc.subject.MESHMiddle Aged-
dc.subject.MESHPatient Satisfaction-
dc.subject.MESHProcedural Pain-
dc.subject.MESHPropofol* / adverse effects-
dc.subject.MESHPropofol* / therapeutic use-
dc.titleComparative safety and efficacy of remimazolam versus propofol for endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography with the patient under deep sedation: a multicenter randomized controlled trial-
dc.typeArticle-
dc.contributor.googleauthorHan, Sung Yong-
dc.contributor.googleauthorOh, Dongwook-
dc.contributor.googleauthorChoe, Jung Wan-
dc.contributor.googleauthorLee, Jong Hyun-
dc.contributor.googleauthorChung, Moon Jae-
dc.contributor.googleauthorJang, Sung Ill-
dc.contributor.googleauthorPark, Se Woo-
dc.contributor.googleauthorPark, Jin Seok-
dc.contributor.googleauthorYang, Min Jae-
dc.contributor.googleauthorKim, Eui Joo-
dc.contributor.googleauthorCho, Jae Hee-
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.gie.2025.11.002-
dc.relation.journalcodeJ00920-
dc.identifier.eissn1097-6779-
dc.identifier.pmid41232615-
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthorChung, Moon Jae-
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthorJang, Sung Ill-
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthorCho, Jae Hee-
dc.identifier.scopusid2-s2.0-105038468187-
dc.identifier.wosid001778891300003-
dc.citation.volume103-
dc.citation.number6-
dc.citation.startPage1192-
dc.citation.endPage1200-
dc.identifier.bibliographicCitationGASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY, Vol.103(6) : 1192-1200, 2026-06-
dc.identifier.rimsid94573-
dc.type.rimsART-
dc.description.journalClass1-
dc.description.journalClass1-
dc.type.docTypeArticle-
dc.description.isOpenAccessN-
dc.description.journalRegisteredClassscie-
dc.description.journalRegisteredClassscopus-
dc.relation.journalWebOfScienceCategoryGastroenterology & Hepatology-
dc.relation.journalResearchAreaGastroenterology & Hepatology-
Appears in Collections:
1. College of Medicine (의과대학) > Dept. of Internal Medicine (내과학교실) > 1. Journal Papers

qrcode

Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.