SynthesisFrontiers in medicine2025
The comparison of remimazolam and midazolam in bronchoscopic sedation: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Synthesis in Frontiers in medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Comparative efficacy and safety of remimazolam versus propofol in bronchoscopic procedures: a GRADE-assessed systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC anesthesiology · 2026Pooled it
- Effects of Physical Exercise on Motor Skills in Children With Autism Spectrum Disorder: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.Journal of autism and developmental disorders · 2026Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Effective sedation is critical for bronchoscopy, ensuring patient comfort and procedural success. Midazolam, though widely used, has limitations such as longer induction and recovery times. Remimazolam, a novel ultra-short-acting benzodiazepine, offers rapid onset, faster recovery, and a safer profile, making it a potential alternative. Study design and methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis of four randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving 630 patients compared remimazolam with midazolam for bronchoscopy sedation. Primary outcomes included induction time, recovery time, and rescue sedation rates. Secondary outcomes assessed procedural duration and adverse events. Random-effects models were used for analysis, and evidence quality was graded using GRADE criteria. Results: Remimazolam reduced induction time by 3.2 min (95% CI: -5.51 to -0.91, Conclusion: Remimazolam may reduce induction and recovery times and decrease the need for rescue sedation compared to midazolam. However, due to high heterogeneity and the limited number of studies, these findings should be interpreted with caution. Due to the limited number of studies and observed heterogeneity, further high-quality trials are necessary to confirm these findings. Clinical trial registration: Clinicaltrial.gov, identifier: CRD42024623846.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.