Search

Importance: Little is known about the impact of different anesthetic agents used for routine magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) sedation on pulmonary function in children., Objective: To compare the incidence of pulmonary atelectasis after MRI sedation with propofol vs propofol-ketamine., Design, Setting, and Participants: This double-masked randomized clinical trial screened 117 consecutive pediatric patients aged 3 to 12 years with American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status I to II undergoing elective MRI under deep sedation from November 2, 2022, to April 28, 2023, at a tertiary referral center. Four patients met the exclusion criteria, and 5 patients refused to participate. The participants and outcome assessors were masked to the group allocation., Interventions: During the MRI, the propofol group received 0.2 mL/kg of 1% propofol and 2 mL of 0.9% saline followed by a continuous infusion of propofol (200 μg/kg/min) and 0.9% saline (0.04 mL/kg/min). The propofol-ketamine group received 0.2 mL/kg of 0.5% propofol and 1 mg/kg of ketamine followed by a continuous infusion of propofol (100 μg/kg/min) and ketamine (20 μg/kg/min)., Main Outcome and Measure: The incidence of atelectasis assessed by lung ultrasonography examination., Results: A total of 107 children (median [IQR] age, 5 [4-6] years; 62 male [57.9%]), with 54 in the propofol group and 53 in the propofol-ketamine group, were analyzed in this study. Notably, 48 (88.9%) and 31 (58.5%) patients had atelectasis in the propofol and propofol-ketamine groups, respectively (relative risk, 0.7; 95% CI, 0.5-0.8; P < .001). The incidence of desaturation and interruption of the MRI due to airway intervention or spontaneous movement did not significantly differ between the groups. The propofol-ketamine group showed a faster emergence time than the propofol group (15 [9-23] vs 25 [22-27] minutes in the propofol-ketamine vs propofol group; median difference in time, 9.0 minutes; 95% CI, 6.0-12.0 minutes; P < .001). No patient was withdrawn from the trial due to adverse effects., Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial, the propofol-ketamine combination reduced sedation-induced atelectasis while allowing for faster emergence compared with propofol alone., Trial Registration: cris.nih.go.kr Identifier: KCT0007699.

Aims: We explored whether esketamine anesthesia during hysteroscopic surgery can reduce intraoperative hemodynamic fluctuations and improve patient benefit., Methods: A total of 170 patients undergoing hysteroscopic surgery were enrolled, and 151 patients were finally included in the analysis, among which 19 used vasoactive drugs during surgery. Patients were randomly assigned to either the esketamine anesthesia group (E group) or the sufentanil anesthesia group (S group). The primary outcomes were blood pressure and heart rate during the surgery. Secondary outcomes included resistance to laryngeal mask insertion, demand for propofol and remifentanil, nausea and vomiting, Richmond Agitation and Sedation Scale (RASS), dizziness and pain intensity after resuscitation, vasoactive medication treatment, hospitalization time and expenses., Results: E group had a more stable heart rate, systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure and mean blood pressure than the S group (p < 0.001). Patients in E group had a higher demand for propofol (p < 0.001) but better RASS scores (p < 0.001) after resuscitation. The incidence of intraoperative vasoactive medication use was higher in the S group (18.4% vs. 6.7%, p = 0.029). There were no statistically significant differences in terms of resistance to laryngeal mask insertion, remifentanil demand, time required for resuscitation, postoperative pain, dizziness, nausea or vomiting., Conclusions: Compared with sufentanil, esketamine-induced anesthesia during hysteroscopic surgery can reduce intraoperative hemodynamic fluctuations and the incidence of intraoperative vasoactive medication. Although esketamine-induced anesthesia may increase the demand for propofol during surgery, it does not affect the anesthesia recovery time and the quality of patient recovery is better., (© 2024 British Pharmacological Society.)

Study Objective: There is scarce evidence on the hemodynamic stability of remimazolam during anesthetic induction in patients with significant coronary artery disease. This study aims to compare the effects of remimazolam and propofol on post-induction hypotension in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG)., Design: Randomized controlled trial., Setting: Tertiary teaching hospital., Patients: Adult patients undergoing isolated CABG., Interventions: Patients were randomly allocated to received either remimazolam (n = 50) or propofol (n = 50) for anesthetic induction. The remimazolam group received an initial infusion at 6 mg/kg/h, which was later adjusted to 1-2 mg/kg/h to maintain a bispectral index of 40-60 after loss of consciousness. In the propofol group, a 1.5 mg/kg bolus of propofol was administered, followed by 1-1.5% sevoflurane inhalation as needed to achieve the target bispectral index., Measurements: The primary outcome was the area under the curve (AUC) below the baseline mean arterial pressure (MAP) during the first 10 min after anesthetic induction. Secondary outcomes included the AUC for MAP <65 mmHg and the requirement for vasopressors., Main Results: The remimazolam group demonstrated a significantly lower AUC under the baseline MAP compared to the propofol group (mean [SD], 169.8 [101.0] mmHg·min vs. 220.6 [102.4] mmHg·min; mean difference [95% confidence interval], 50.8 [10.4-91.2] mmHg·min; P = 0.014). Additionally, the remimazolam group had a reduced AUC for MAP <65 mmHg (7.3 [10.3] mmHg·min vs. 13.9 [14.9] mmHg·min; P = 0.007) and a lower frequency of vasopressor use compared to the propofol group (60% vs. 88%, P = 0.001)., Conclusions: Remimazolam may offer improved hemodynamic stability during anesthetic induction in patients undergoing CABG, suggesting its potential advantage over propofol for patients with significant coronary artery disease in terms of hemodynamic stability., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest Dr. Yunseok Jeon was funded by Hana Pharmaceutical (Seoul, Korea) for this study (grant no. 06–2022-2740). Other authors have no funding source to disclose., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Propofol is an ultra-fast-acting intravenous anesthetic, which is rapidly metabolized primarily into inactive compounds in the live and then excreted in the urine. The purpose of this study is to explore the risk signals of propofol based on the US FDA Adverse Event Reporting System database. The risk signals of propofol-related adverse reactions in adverse event (AE) reports from 2004 to 2021 in the US FAERS were mined using ratio-report method (ROR) and the ratio-report ratio method (PRR) methods. We screened out 1651 pairs AE reports using propofol as primary suspect (PS) drugs. ROR, PRR, BCPNN and MGPS methods were used to calculate respectively, there are 363 positive preferred terms (PT) signals with 9549 cases. Among them, the top 3 adverse reactions associated with using propofol from the FAERS database were anaphylactic shock, hypotension and propofol infusion syndrome. The top 3 systems of the body associated with adverse reaction of propofol from the FAERS database were General disorders, Cardiac disorders and administration site conditions and Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders. The top 4 indication of using propofol from the FAERS database, including anaesthesia, induction of anaesthesia, sedation, general anaesthesia. There are many adverse reactions that are not included in the drug insert of propofol and involve a wide range of organs and/or systems. Caution should be exercised in the clinical use of propofol.

Background: Ciprofol, a recently developed anesthetic agent, is not inferior to propofol in terms of efficacy and safety. However, most previous clinical experience with ciprofol was based on a robust population. This study aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of ciprofol for anesthesia induction in female patients with frailty., Methods: This prospective randomized controlled trial included patients with frailty undergoing elective general anesthesia for gynecological surgery. Frailty was assessed using the modified frailty index. The patients were randomly administered propofol (2 mg/kg) or ciprofol (0.5 mg/kg) during anesthesia induction. The depth of anaesthesia was continually monitored by the bispectral index. The primary outcome was the lowest systolic blood pressure (SBP) during anesthesia induction. Secondary outcomes included the incidence of general anesthesia induction failure and adverse events., Results: Among the 69 enrolled patients with frailty, 67 were included in the final analysis. The success rate of anesthesia induction was 100% in both groups. The lowest SBP was significantly higher in the ciprofol group than in the propofol group (103 [96-110] vs. 90 [85-98] mmHg, respectively; P < 0.001), suggesting that the former caused less inhibition of hemodynamics during anesthesia induction in patients with frailty. The incidence of injection pain was lower in the ciprofol group than in the propofol group (3 [8.8%] vs. 11 patients [33.3%], respectively; P = 0.014)., Conclusions: The results of this study suggest that the efficacy of ciprofol for inducing general anesthesia in patients with frailty is comparable to that of propofol, with more stable hemodynamics., Trial Registration: The trial was registered, before patient enrollment, in the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry ( www.chictr.org.cn ) (Clinical trial number: ChiCTR2300075271; https://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.html?proj=205160 , principal investigator's name: Zifeng Xu, date of registration: 31/08/2023)., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Postoperative cognitive dysfunction (POCD) is one of the major complications after surgery, with devastating clinical outcomes. Although POCD is a condition with a multifactorial pathophysiology, blood-brain barrier (BBB) dysfunction and neuronal injury have been shown to play a critical role, especially in the elderly. Previous studies have demonstrated that the choice of anesthetics affect BBB permeability and neuroinflammation. However, most studies are carried out on animals, with limited research undertaken on humans. Therefore, we will compare the effect of intravenous anesthetics and inhaled anesthetics on BBB dysfunction and the change of inflammatory markers after surgery., Methods: One hundred and fifty-four patients who are 60 years of age or older undergoing major surgery for more than 2 h will be randomly allocated to two anesthetics groups (intravenous, inhaled) in a 1:1 ratio. In the intravenous anesthetics group (group P), propofol will be infused with a target-controlled infusion (TCI) system throughout the entire surgery. In the inhaled anesthetics group (group G), bolus injection of propofol will be administered for loss of consciousness, and simultaneously sevoflurane will be initiated for the maintenance of anesthesia. The primary outcome is the change in serum S100 calcium binding protein β (S100β) at four time points: before induction of anesthesia, at the end of surgery, 4 h after surgery, postoperative day 1. Secondary outcomes include changes in the inflammatory markers, serum interleukin (IL)-6, IL-8, tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α, and C-reactive protein; the incidence of delirium; and the change in the cognitive function between groups. In patients pre-scheduled for postoperative intensive care unit admission, the cerebrospinal fluid/serum albumin quotient (Qalb) between the two groups will be compared before and after surgery, and change in inflammatory markers in serum and CSF will be analyzed in relation to the Qalb., Discussion: The current study will compare the effect of intravenous versus inhaled anesthetics on blood-brain barrier permeability and, as a result, the difference in neuroinflammation in elderly patients. Also, the study results will provide additional information to develop intraoperative anesthetic strategies to reduce POCD., Trial Registration: The trial was prospectively registered at Clinical Trials protocol registration with identifier 2310-117-126 on April 9, 2024., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Respiratory depression is a common complication during operative procedures, meanwhile, ciprofol can provide effective sedation for surgical operations. However, there is not enough evidence to prove the advantage of ciprofol in reducing respiratory depression. So, this meta-analysis aimed to assess the efficacy of ciprofol on the incidence of respiratory depression compared with propofol., Methods: Two individual researchers conducted searches for randomized controlled trials in PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. The meta-analysis was performed using Review Manager software., Results: Seven trials with a total of 1408 patients were included in this meta-analysis. The results showed that ciprofol could reduce the incidence of respiratory depression compared with propofol (risk difference [RD] = -0.09, 95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.15 to -0.04). Ciprofol significantly reduced the incidence of respiratory depression when the method of administration was intravenous injection (RD = -0.06, 95% CI: -0.10 to -0.03), or continuous infusion (RD = -0.30, 95% CI: -0.45 to -0.15). Meanwhile, ciprofol significantly reduced the incidence of respiratory depression with the dosage not only greater than or equal to 0.4 mg/kg (RD = -0.11, 95% CI: -0.20 to -0.02), but also <0.4 mg/kg (RD = -0.08, 95% CI: -0.13 to -0.02). And ciprofol significantly reduced the incidence of hypoxemia (risk ratio [RR] = 0.47, 95% CI: 0.28 to 0.80), injection pain (RD = -0.32, 95% CI: -0.46 to -0.17), body movement (RR = 0.60, 95% CI: 0.43 to 0.84), dizziness (RR = 0.75, 95% CI: 0.62 to 0.90). Finally, ciprofol did not increase awakening time (standard mean difference [SMD] = 0.15, 95% CI: -0.02 to 0.31)., Conclusion: From this meta-analysis, it is demonstrated that ciprofol might reduce the incidence of respiratory depression and injection pain. These benefits are important in surgery to ensure safe and rapid postoperative recovery. So, ciprofol may be a safe and appropriate drug with fewer adverse effects used in clinical anesthesia., Competing Interests: The authors have no funding and conflicts of interest to disclose., (Copyright © 2024 the Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.)

Background: A combination of remimazolam and propofol could produce more stable sedation. A good medication regimen should consider not only efficacy but also safety, especially hypotension. The aim of the current study was to compare the incidence and amount of hypotension by propofol versus remimazolam-propofol combinations in day-surgery hysteroscopy., Methods: Patients were randomly assigned to receive either propofol (Group P, n = 125) or remimazolam-propofol combinations (Group RP, n = 125) at a 1:1 ratio. Intravenous injection of sufentanil 0.1ug/kg were administered before sedative medication. In group P, a bolus of 2.5 mg/kg propofol was administered. In group RP, intravenous anesthesia was commenced with 0.125 mg/kg remimazolam and 1 mg/kg propofol. After loss of consciousness, propofol was maintained at 6 mg/kg/h. The primary outcomes were the incidence and amount of hypotension during surgery. Hypotension was defined as a MAP less than 65mmHg for at least 1 min. The amount of hypotension was assessed by time-weighted average intraoperative MAP under a threshold of 65 mmHg. The secondary outcomes were various anesthesia related parameters and some adverse events., Results: In group P, 25 patients (20.0%) experienced hypotension during hysteroscopy compared with 9 patients (7.2%) in group RP, for a difference of 12.8% (RR 2.778, 95%CI [1.352-5.709]). The combination of remimazolam and propofol resulted in significantly lower TWA (Time Weighted Average) threshold 0.14 (0.10-0.56) mmHg in group RP compared to 0.31 (0.15-0.67) mmHg in group P. The total dose of propofol was nearly double in group P compared to group RP. A significantly higher frequency of injection pain and low oxygen saturation was observed in the group P than that of the group RP. Hiccup was observed only in group RP. The incidences of body movement, bradycardia and vomiting were no significant difference between groups., Conclusion: The incidence and amount of hypotension by remimazolam-propofol combinations was significantly less than that by propofol sedation in day-surgery hysteroscopy. The optimization of medication regimen would attenuate the harm of hypotension and contribute to patients' rapid recovery in day surgery., Trial Registration: Chinese Clinical Trial Registry, ChiCTR2400079888 (date: 15/01/2024)., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Competing Interests: Competing interests: RF developed the Peruse Before You Infuse checklist, which is freely available. CS is a co-opted member of the Association of Anaesthetists Environment and Sustainability Committee, vice-chairperson of the World Federation of Societies of Anaesthesiologists Sustainability Committee, and co-chairperson of PCPIE at the Royal College of Anaesthetists Centre for Research and Improvement. GK and AT declare no conflicts of interest.

Background: Postoperative nausea and vomiting occur frequently following thyroid and parathyroid surgery and are associated with worse patient outcomes. We hypothesised that opioid-free propofol anaesthesia would reduce the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting compared with opioid-inclusive propofol anaesthesia in patients undergoing these procedures., Methods: We conducted a randomised, double-blinded controlled trial in adult patients scheduled to undergo thyroid and parathyroid surgery at two medical centres in mainland China. Patients were allocated randomly (1:1, stratified by sex and trial site) to an opioid-free anaesthesia group (esketamine, lidocaine, dexmedetomidine and propofol) or an opioid-inclusive group (sufentanil and propofol). Propofol infusions were titrated to bispectral index 45-55. Patients received prophylaxis for nausea and vomiting using dexamethasone and ondansetron and multimodal analgesia with paracetamol and flurbiprofen axetil. The primary outcome was the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting in the first 48 h after surgery., Results: We assessed 557 patients for eligibility and 394 completed this trial. The incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting in the first postoperative 48 h was lower in the opioid-free anaesthesia group (10/197, 5%) compared with opioid-inclusive group (47/197, 24%) (OR (95%CI) 0.17 (0.08-0.35), p < 0.001), yielding a number needed to treat of 5.3. Additionally, opioid-free propofol anaesthesia was associated with a reduced need for rescue anti-emetics, lower rates of hypotension and desaturation after tracheal extubation, and higher patient satisfaction. Time to tracheal extubation was prolonged slightly in the opioid-free group. The two groups had similar postoperative pain scores and 30-day outcomes., Discussion: Opioid-free propofol anaesthesia reduced postoperative nausea and vomiting in patients undergoing thyroid and parathyroid surgery. An opioid-free anaesthetic regimen can optimise anaesthetic care during thyroid and parathyroid surgery., (© 2024 Association of Anaesthetists.)

Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

Background: Elderly patients comprise an increasing proportion of patients undergoing surgery, and they require special attention due to age-related physiological changes. Propofol is the traditional agent for anaesthesia, and recently, remimazolam, a novel ultra-short-acting benzodiazepine, has emerged as an alternative to propofol in general anaesthesia., Objectives: We aim to compare remimazolam vs . propofol for general anaesthesia in elderly patients regarding hypotension, induction characteristics, haemodynamics and recovery outcomes., Design: Meta-analysis with sensitivity and trial sequential analyses (TSA) to assess inconsistencies. Risk ratios and mean differences with 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) were computed using a random effects model. Subgroups and meta-regression according to anaesthesia methods were also performed., Data Sources: We systematically searched MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) up to January 1, 2024., Eligibility Criteria: Patients at least 60 years old, comparing remimazolam vs . propofol for general anaesthesia., Results: Eleven RCTs (947 patients) were included. Compared with propofol, remimazolam was associated with lower postinduction and intra-operative hypotension (RR 0.41, 95% CI 0.27 to 0.62, P  < 0.001) and incidence of bradycardia (risk ratio 0.58, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.98, P  = 0.04), with a higher heart rate ( P  = 0.01). The incidence of injection pain was lower ( P  < 0.001), but remimazolam was associated with a longer time to loss of consciousness ( P  < 0.001) and a higher bispectral index at loss of consciousness ( P  = 0.04). No differences were found for mean arterial pressure, emergence time, extubation time and incidence of emergence agitation. The TSA was consistent and achieved the required information size for hypotension., Conclusions: Remimazolam significantly reduced the risk of hypotension, bradycardia and injection pain, despite an increase in the time to loss of consciousness. Remimazolam appears to be an effective and well tolerated alternative to propofol in elderly patients undergoing general anaesthesia., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of the European Society of Anaesthesiology.)

Objectives: The Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic markedly influenced mental health care practices, notably regarding electroconvulsive therapy (ECT). This was due to the redistribution of anesthetic agents used during ECT such as propofol, for intensive care units. Because in our center propofol was switched to etomidate to avoid ECT activity discontinuation, we undertook this study in order to compare Propofol and Etomidate regarding electroencephalographic seizure duration and stimulus intensity., Methods: We performed a retrospective and comparative study, each patient being its own control. We included patients with at least two courses of ECT on propofol and two others with etomidate over the period from September 2019 to April 2021, regardless of the psychiatric diagnosis. Our data collection process notably targeted stimulus intensity, seizure duration recorded using electroencephalography, and medication used for anesthetic induction., Results: Overall, we included 18 patients with a male: female ratio of 1:2.6 and a mean (and standard deviation) age of 62.7±13.4 years. We found that the mean intensity of stimulation was significantly lower with etomidate when compared to propofol (425.3±250.0 vs. 658.9±280.2 mC, P=0.001). The mean duration of electroencephalographic seizure was significantly higher with etomidate in comparison to propofol (53.5±16.6 vs. 35.0±12.2seconds, P<0.001)., Conclusion: By using each patient as its own control, our study found that etomidate, while compared to propofol, was related to a lower level of stimulatory intensity and a longer electroencephalographic seizure duration., (Copyright © 2023 L'Encéphale, Paris. Published by Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: The need for safe anesthetic agents with minimal side effects has led to the development of remimazolam, a new benzodiazepine designed to be an alternative to the commonly used drug propofol, which has significant hemodynamic effects. This study aims to compare the hemodynamic effects of remimazolam with propofol during general anesthesia., Evidence Acquisition: A systematic search was conducted in Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Scopus, and PubMed databases on 13/02/2023, following the recommendations of Cochrane Handbook and the PRISMA statement. The measure of association used was Risk Ratio (RR) or standardized mean difference, with 95% confidence intervals (CI) and 95% Prediction intervals (PI). An additional search was conducted on 04/09/2023. A Trial Sequential Analysis and a GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) evidence table were conducted based on the editor's recommendation., Evidence Synthesis: After applying eligibility criteria and removing duplicates, 16 randomized clinical trials comprising 1951 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Significant associations favoring remimazolam over propofol were observed in the following aspects: intraoperative hypotension events (RR=0.47; 95% CI=0.41 to 0.54; 95% PI=0.40 to 0.55); frequency of vasoactive drug administration (RR=0.54; 95% CI=0.46 to 0.64; 95% PI=0.41 to 0.74); intraoperative bradycardia (RR=0.39; 95% CI=0.27 to 0.57; 95% PI=0.26 to 0.66); mean arterial pressure at induction (MD=7.77; 95% CI=6.00 to 9.55; 95% PI=4.39 to 11.15); heart rate at induction (MD=6.40; 95% CI=4.07 to 8.73; 95% PI=0.33 to 12.48); and heart rate at intubation (MD=6.06; 95% CI=2.33 to 9.78; 95% PI=-5.59 to 17.71)., Conclusions: This study provides evidence that remimazolam induces fewer cardiorespiratory depressant effects and has a more favorable side effect profile compared to propofol during general anaesthesia.

Background: Remimazolam is a novel ultra-short-acting benzodiazepine that has been recently introduced as an alternative to propofol for general anesthesia. While both agents have been compared in terms of safety and efficacy, their relative effects on postoperative quality of recovery (QoR) remain unclear. Therefore, this meta-analysis aimed to compare the effects of remimazolam and propofol on subjective QoR in surgical patients who underwent general anesthesia., Methods: Medline, Embase, Google Scholar, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched from inception to May 28, 2024 to identify randomized controlled trials comparing remimazolam and propofol in terms of postoperative QoR. The Cochrane risk-of-bias tool (RoB 2) was used to assess study quality. QoR score on postoperative day (POD) 1 (primary outcome), QoR scores on PODs 2-3, QoR dimensions, time to loss of consciousness, other recovery characteristics, and rescue analgesia requirement were evaluated using random-effects meta-analyses., Results: This meta-analysis included 13 studies published between 2022 and 2024 involving 1,418 patients. QoR was evaluated using either the QoR-15 (10 studies) or QoR-40 (3 studies) questionnaire. The pooled results indicated no significant difference in the QoR scores on POD 1 (standardized mean difference: 0.02, 95% confidence interval [CI]: - 0.20, 0.23, P = 0.88, I 2  = 73%) and PODs 2-3 between remimazolam and propofol. Furthermore, no significant differences were observed in QoR dimensions, length of postanesthesia care unit (PACU) stay, and time to extubation as well as in the risks of agitation and postoperative nausea and vomiting. Patients administered remimazolam exhibited slower anesthetic induction (mean difference (MD): 32.27 s) but faster recovery of consciousness (MD: - 1.60 min) than those administered propofol. Moreover, remimazolam was associated with a lower risk of rescue analgesia requirement in the PACU (risk ratio: 0.62, 95% CI: 0.43, 0.89, P = 0.009, I 2  = 0%) but not in the ward., Conclusion: Remimazolam is a potential alternative to propofol for general anesthesia as it offers similar QoR to the latter and has advantages in terms of consciousness recovery and immediate postoperative analgesia requirement., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: The effects of anesthetics on liver and kidney functions after infantile living-related liver transplantation (LRLT) are unclear. This study aimed to investigate the effects of propofol-based total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) or desflurane-based inhalation anesthesia on postoperative liver and kidney functions in infant recipients after LRLT and to evaluate hepatic ischemia-reperfusion injury (HIRI)., Methods: Seventy-six infants with congenital biliary atresia scheduled for LRLT were randomly divided into two anesthesia maintenance groups: group D with continuous inhalation of desflurane and group P with an infusion of propofol. The primary focus was to assess alterations of liver transaminase and serum creatinine (Scr) levels within the first 7 days after surgery. And the peak aminotransferase level within 72 h post-surgery was used as a surrogate marker for HIRI., Results: There were no differences in preoperative hepatic and renal functions between the two groups. Upon the intensive care unit (ICU) arrival, the levels of aspartate aminotransferase (AST, P = 0.001) and alanine aminotransferase (ALT, P = 0.005) in group P were significantly lower than those in group D. These changes persisted until the fourth and sixth days after surgery. The peak AST and ALT levels within 72 h after surgery were also lower in group P than in group D (856 (552, 1221) vs. 1468 (732, 1969) U/L, P = 0.001 (95% CI: 161-777) and 517 (428, 704) vs. 730 (541, 1100) U/L, P = 0.006, (95% CI: 58-366), respectively). Patients in group P had lower levels of Scr upon the ICU arrival and on the first day after surgery, compared to group D (17.8 (15.2, 22.0) vs. 23.0 (20.8, 30.8) μmol/L, P < 0.001 (95% CI: 3.0-8.7) and 17.1 (14.9, 21.0) vs. 20.5 (16.5, 25.3) μmol/L, P = 0.02 (95% CI: 0.0-5.0) respectively). Moreover, the incidence of severe acute kidney injury was significantly lower in group P compared to that in group D (15.8% vs. 39.5%, P = 0.038)., Conclusions: Propofol-based TIVA might improve liver and kidney functions after LRLT in infants and reduce the incidence of serious complications, which may be related to the reduction of HIRI. However, further biomarkers will be necessary to prove these associations., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: To compare the efficacy and safety of ciprofol, propofol, propofol and etomidate mixture or ciprofol and etomidate mixture in patients undergoing painless gastroscopic anesthesia, and to explore the optimal plan to relieve the patient's discomfort., Methods: A total of 120 patients scheduled for painless gastroscopy were randomly assigned to 4 groups: propofol (Group P), ciprofol (Group C), propofol-etomidate mixture (Group P-E), and ciprofol-etomidate mixture (Group C-E). The success rate of gastroscopy examination, patient satisfaction, incidence of injection pain, hemodynamic parameters, induction time, procedure time, the consumption of drugs, awakening time, and incidence of adverse events were evaluated., Results: All patients in the study successfully completed the gastroscopy. The satisfaction of patients in Group C-E was significantly higher than that in Group P (P < .05), but there was no statistical significance in the patient satisfaction among the other groups. Compared with Group P, the incidence of injection pain in Groups C and C-E significantly decreased (P < .05). There were no significant differences in the SBP, diastolic blood pressure, HR, and SpO2 among the 4 groups (P > .05). The awakening time of Group C was significantly longer than that of Groups P and P-E (P < .05), but there was no statistically significant difference in the awakening time of other groups., Conclusion: Ciprofol demonstrated efficacy in inducing sedation or anesthesia during painless gastroscopy that was similar to propofol, while exhibiting a comparable safety profile. Moreover, the combination of propofol and etomidate, as well as the combination of ciprofol and etomidate, were both shown to be equally safe and effective for this clinical application. These findings suggest that ciprofol can be considered as a safe and effective alternative for painless gastroscopy, and the ciprofol-etomidate mixture may be a better choice., Competing Interests: The authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose., (Copyright © 2024 the Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.)

Background: Ciprofol is a new intravenous sedative / anesthetic drug. In recent years, many clinical studies have also confirmed the sedative effect of ciprofol. However, more clinical research is still needed on its clinical application characteristics in special populations., Objective: The aim of this study was to compare the clinical effects of ciprofol and propofol in general anesthesia induction of elderly patients., Methods: 60 elderly (aged ≥ 75 years) patients underwent hip fracture surgery were randomly into two groups of a 1:1 ratio. Group C (ciprofol group): 0.3mg/kg ciprofol was infused. Group P (propofol group): 1.5mg/kg propofol was infused. The observation period was from the infusion of test drug to 5 min after endotracheal intubation. The primary outcomes included the incidence of severe hypotension and hypotension during the observation period. The secondary outcomes were as follows: the success rate of general anesthesia induction, the number of additional sedation, the time of loss of consciousness (LOC), Δ MAP, Δ HR, adverse events and the frequency of vasoactive drugs used., Results: Finally, 60 subjects completed the study. Compared with Group P, the incidence of severe hypotension in Group C was lower (26.7% vs 53.3%, P = 0.035), the incidence of hypotension was also lower (36.7% vs 63.3%, P = 0.037), Δ MAP in Group C was significantly lower (31.4 ± 11.4 vs 39.6 ± 15.7, P = 0.025), the frequency of ephedrine used and the incidence of injection pain in Group C were also significantly lower., Conclusion: Ciprofol showed similar efficacy to propofol when used for general anesthesia induction in elderly patients underwent hip fracture surgery and could maintain more stable blood pressure., Competing Interests: The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest., (© 2024 Lu et al.)

Objectives: To compare the incidence of delirium and early (at 1 week) postoperative cognitive dysfunction (POCD) between propofol-based total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) and volatile anesthesia with sevoflurane in adult patients undergoing elective coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG) with cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB)., Design: This was a prospective randomized single-blinded study., Setting: The study was conducted at a single institution, the Sree Chitra Tirunal Institute for Medical Sciences and Technology, a tertiary care institution and university-level teaching hospital., Participants: Seventy-two patients undergoing elective CABG under CPB participated in this study., Interventions: This study was conducted on 72 adult patients (>18 years) undergoing elective CABG under CPB who were randomized to receive propofol or sevoflurane. Anesthetic depth was monitored to maintain the bispectral index between 40 and 60. Delirium was assessed using the Confusion Assessment Method for the Intensive Care Unit. Early POCD was diagnosed when there was a reduction of >2 points in the Montreal Cognitive Assessment score compared to baseline. Cerebral oximetry changes using near-infrared spectroscopy (NIRS), atheroma grades, and intraoperative variables were compared between the 2 groups., Measurements & Main Results: Seventy-two patients were randomized to receive propofol (n = 36) or sevoflurane (n = 36). The mean patient age was 59.4 ± 8.6 years. The baseline and intraoperative variables, including atheroma grades, NIRS values, hemoglobin, glycemic control, and oxygenation, were comparable in the 2 groups. Fifteen patients (21.7%) patients developed delirium, and 31 patients (44.9%) had early POCD. The incidence of delirium was higher with sevoflurane (n = 12; 34.2%) compared to propofol (n = 3; 8.8%) (odds ratio [OR], 1.72; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.13-2.62; p = 0.027)*. POCD was higher with sevoflurane (n = 20; 57.1%) compared to propofol (n = 11; 32.3%) (OR, 1.63; 95% CI, 1.01-2.62; p = 0.038)*. In patients aged >65 years, delirium was higher with sevoflurane (7/11; 63.6%) compared to propofol (1/7; 14.2%) (p = 0.03)*., Conclusions: Propofol-based TIVA was associated with a lower incidence of delirium and POCD compared to sevoflurane in this cohort of patients undergoing CABG under CPB. Large-scale, multicenter randomized trials with longer follow-up are needed to substantiate the clinical relevance of this observation., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: The effect of intraoperative anesthetic regimen on pulmonary outcome after minimally invasive esophagectomy for esophageal cancer is yet undetermined. The aim of this study was to determine the effect of volatile anesthesia (sevoflurane or desflurane) compared with propofol-based intravenous anesthesia on pulmonary complications after minimally invasive esophagectomy., Methods: Patients scheduled for minimally invasive esophagectomy were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 general anesthetic regimens (sevoflurane, desflurane, or propofol). The primary outcome was the incidence of pulmonary complications within the 7 days postoperatively, which was a collapsed composite end point, including respiratory infection, pleural effusion, pneumothorax, atelectasis, respiratory failure, bronchospasm, pulmonary embolism, and aspiration pneumonitis. The severity of pulmonary complications, surgery-related complications, and other secondary outcomes were also assessed., Results: Of 647 patients assessed for eligibility, 558 were randomized, and 553 were analyzed. A total of 185 patients were assigned to the sevoflurane group, 185 in the desflurane, and 183 in the propofol group. Patients receiving a volatile anesthetic (sevoflurane or desflurane) had a significantly lower incidence (36.5% vs 47.5%; odds ratio, 0.63; 95% confidence interval, 0.44-0.91; P = .013) and lower severity grade of pulmonary complications ( P = .035) compared to the patients receiving propofol. There were no statistically significant differences in other secondary outcomes between the 2 groups., Conclusions: In patients undergoing minimally invasive esophagectomy, the use of volatile anesthesia (sevoflurane or desflurane) resulted in the reduced risk and severity of pulmonary complications within the first 7 postoperative days as compared to propofol-based intravenous anesthesia., Competing Interests: The authors declare no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2024 International Anesthesia Research Society.)

Background: Acute intraoperative hypercapnia and respiratory acidosis, which can occur during monitored anaesthesia care (MAC), pose significant cardiopulmonary risks for patients with aortic stenosis undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). The goal of the present study is to assess the incidence, risk factors and impact of intraoperative hypercapnia during MAC for patients undergoing transfemoral TAVR., Methods: Data was collected retrospectively from the electronic medical record of 201 consecutive patients with available intraoperative arterial blood gas (ABG) data who underwent percutaneous transfemoral TAVR with MAC using propofol and dexmedetomidine. ABGs (pH, arterial partial pressure of carbon dioxide (PaCO 2 ) and arterial partial pressure of oxygen) were performed at the start of each case (baseline), immediately prior to valve deployment (ValveDepl), and on arrival to the postanaesthesia care unit. Data was analysed using Fisher's exact test, unpaired Student's t-test, Wilcoxon rank sum or univariate linear regression as appropriate based on PaCO 2 and pH during ValveDepl (PaCO 2 -ValveDepl, pH-ValveDepl) and change in PaCO 2 and pH from baseline to ValveDepl (PaCO 2 -%increase, pH-%decrease) to determine their association with preoperative demographic data, intraoperative anaesthetic and vasoactive medications and postoperative outcomes., Results: PaCO 2 increased by a mean of 28.4% and was higher than baseline in 91% of patients. Younger age, male sex, increased weight and increased propofol dose contributed to higher PaCO 2 -ValveDepl and greater PaCO 2 -%increase. Patients with PaCO 2 -ValveDepl>60 mm Hg, pH≤7.2 and greater pH-%decrease were more likely to receive vasoactive medications, but perioperative PaCO 2 and pH were not associated with adverse postoperative outcomes., Conclusions: Transient significant hypercapnia commonly occurs during transfemoral TAVR with deep sedation using propofol and dexmedetomidine. Although the incidence of postoperative outcomes does not appear to be affected by hypercapnia, the need for vasopressors and inotropes is increased. If deep sedation is required for TAVR, hypercapnia and the need for haemodynamic and ventilatory support should be anticipated., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Introduction: To evaluate the recovery quality between remimazolam and propofol after general anesthesia surgery., Methods: We included eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in EMBASE, PubMed, Cochrane Central, Scopus, and Web of Science up to June 26, 2024 for comparison the recovery quality of remimazolam and propofol after general anaesthesia. The primary outcomes were the total Quality of Recovery-15 (QoR-15) and five dimensions of QoR-15 on postoperative day 1 (POD1). Secondary outcomes were adverse events, the Quality of Recovery-40 (QoR-40) on POD1, and the intraoperative and postoperative time characteristics., Results: Thirteen RCTs with a total of 1,305 patients were included in this meta-analysis. Our statistical analysis showed that remimazolam group had higher QoR-15 score on POD1, with no significant difference (Mean Difference (MD) = 1.24; 95% confidence interval (CI), [-1.67-4.15]; I 2 = 75%; P  = 0.41). In the five dimensions of QoR-15, remimazolam group was superior to propofol group in terms of physical independence (MD = 0.79; 95% CI [0.31-1.27]; I 2  = 0%; P  = 0.001). Remimazolam group was lower than propofol group in incidence of hypotension (Risk Ratio (RR) = 0.48; 95% CI [0.40-0.59]; I 2 = 14%; P  < 0.00001), bradycardia (RR = 0.18; 95% CI [0.08-0.38]; I 2 = 0%; P  < 0.0001) and injection pain (RR = 0.03; 95% CI [0.01-0.12]; I 2 = 48%; P  < 0.00001), respectively. The intraoperative and postoperative time characteristics and the QoR-40 were similar in the two groups., Conclusions: Our analysis showed that the recovery quality of the remimazolam group after general anaesthesia was similar to propofol group, while the incidence of adverse events was low in remimazolam group. As a potential anesthetic, remimazolam can be used in place of propofol for surgical general anesthesia., Competing Interests: The authors declare there are no competing interests., (©2024 Zhu et al.)

Purpose: This study aimed to establish the 95% effective dose (ED95) of esketamine in combination with propofol for hysteroscopy and then to evaluate its efficacy and safety profile., Patients and Methods: This prospective, double-blind, randomized controlled trial consisted of two cohorts. In cohort 1, 45 women aged 18-65 years undergoing hysteroscopy were randomly assigned to either group E (esketamine + propofol) or group A (alfentanil + propofol). Dixon's up-and-down method was used to determine the ED95 of esketamine and alfentanil. In cohort 2, 86 patients were randomized to group E and group A, with the calculated ED95 dose of the study drugs used for induction. The success rate of anesthesia using the ED95% dose, along with parameters related to anesthesia induction, recovery, and adverse events were also recorded., Results: The ED95 of esketamine was 0.254 mg/kg (95% CI: 0.214-1.004), while that of alfentanil was 9.121 μg/kg (95% CI: 8.479-13.364). The anesthesia success rate was 93.0% in group E and 95.2% in group A (p = 0.664). After resuscitation, both groups achieved a 100% success rate. The induction time was significantly shorter in group E (60.0 [55.0-70.0] s) compared to group A (67.0 [61.0-79.3] s) (p = 0.006). Group E had lower rates of respiratory depression (p < 0.001), hypoxia (p = 0.006), minimum perioperative SpO 2 (p = 0.010), and hypotension (p = 0.001). Esketamine had less effect on respiratory rate, heart rate, mean blood pressure, and end-tidal carbon dioxide compared to alfentanil (all p < 0.001). There were no significant differences in postoperative pain between the two groups., Conclusion: This study determined the ED 95 dose of esketamine for intravenous general anesthesia during hysteroscopy. Esketamine showed less respiratory and hemodynamic depression, as well as fewer adverse effects compared to alfentanil. Esketamine is an ideal anesthetic agent compared to alfentanil for hysteroscopic anesthesia., Trial Registration: www.chictr.org.cn, (ChiCTR2300077283); registered November 3, 2023., Competing Interests: The authors report no conflicts of interest with respect to this work., (© 2024 Weng et al.)

Background: Remifentanil, an ultra-short-acting µ-opioid receptor agonist, is commonly used for anesthetic management due to excellent adjustability. Remifentanil is known to cause sinus bradycardia, however, because it has a direct negative chronotropic effect on the cardiac conduction system and there is an indirect negative chronotropic effect via the parasympathetic nervous system., Case Presentation: An 8-year-old Japanese boy was diagnosed with acute hydrocephalus due to a brain tumor in the fourth ventricle and underwent emergency surgery. Imaging examination showed brainstem compression. Endoscopic third ventriculostomy and ventriculoperitoneal shunt surgery were scheduled. Remifentanil was started during induction of general anesthesia, but electrocardiogram showed sinus bradycardia, then Wenckebach-type atrioventricular block, and then complete atrioventricular block. Remifentanil was immediately discontinued, and we administered atropine sulfate. Complete atrioventricular block was restored to sinus rhythm. When remifentanil was restarted, however, the electrocardiogram again showed sinus bradycardia, Wenckebach-type atrioventricular block, and then complete atrioventricular block. Remifentanil was again immediately discontinued, we administered adrenaline, and then complete atrioventricular block was restored to sinus rhythm. Fentanyl was used instead of remifentanil with continuous infusion of dopamine. There has since been no further occurrence of complete atrioventricular block., Conclusions: This is the first known case of complete atrioventricular block in a pediatric patient with increased intracranial pressure seemingly caused by administration of remifentanil., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Two healthy Landrace pigs anaesthetized with propofol suffered rapid onset of fatal sepsis. Clinical signs included severe arterial hypotension, loss of peripheral oxygenation, low end-tidal CO 2 , clinical onset of pulmonary oedema and cardiac dysfunction. Gross and histopathological examination revealed loss of vascular integrity with severe lung oedema and congestion, haemorrhages in several organs and fluid leakage into body cavities. Large numbers of Gram-negative bacteria, primarily Klebsiella sp., were present in the anaesthetic infusion containing propofol and were also cultured from internal organs of both pigs. The propofol was likely contaminated by bacteria after inappropriate handling and storage in the operating room. This report illustrates the potential for severe nosocomial infection when applying propofol in animals and humans and may serve as a reminder of the importance of strict aseptic practice in general, and specifically in the handling of this anaesthetic agent., Competing Interests: Declaration of conflicting interestsThe authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

Background: The comparative effectiveness of volatile anaesthesia and total intravenous anaesthesia (TIVA) in terms of patient outcomes after cardiac surgery remains a topic of debate., Methods: Multicentre randomised trial in 16 tertiary hospitals in China. Adult patients undergoing elective cardiac surgery were randomised in a 1:1 ratio to receive volatile anaesthesia (sevoflurane or desflurane) or propofol-based TIVA. The primary outcome was a composite of predefined major complications during hospitalisation and mortality 30 days after surgery., Results: Of the 3123 randomised patients, 3083 (98.7%; mean age 55 yr; 1419 [46.0%] women) were included in the modified intention-to-treat analysis. The composite primary outcome was met by a similar number of patients in both groups (volatile group: 517 of 1531 (33.8%) patients vs TIVA group: 515 of 1552 (33.2%) patients; relative risk 1.02 [0.92-1.12]; P=0.76; adjusted odds ratio 1.05 [0.90-1.22]; P=0.57). Secondary outcomes including 6-month and 1-yr mortality, duration of mechanical ventilation, length of ICU and hospital stay, and healthcare costs, were also similar for the two groups., Conclusions: Among adults undergoing cardiac surgery, we found no difference in the clinical effectiveness of volatile anaesthesia and propofol-based TIVA., Clinical Trial Registration: Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR-IOR-17013578)., (Copyright © 2024 British Journal of Anaesthesia. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: To investigate whether rhythmic/periodic EEG patterns (RPP) appearing after propofol discontinuation are more likely to be related to the elimination phase of propofol, or are an expression of severe brain damage., Methods: In a retrospective cohort of comatose postanoxic patients, EEG was assessed one hour before (baseline) and on hour after discontinuation of propofol. Presence and duration of RPP were related to (changes in) EEG background pattern and duration of sedation., Results: In eleven (of 36 eligible) patients RPP appeared after propofol discontinuation and disappeared in seven of these patients within one hour. A continuous background pattern at baseline and shorter duration of propofol infusion seemed associated with (earlier) spontaneous disappearance of RPP. In ten patients with RPP at baseline, the EEG did not change, and in one patient it changed into burst-suppression., Conclusion: Our findings suggest that RPP after propofol discontinuation could be propofol-related., Discussion: RPP might be related to propofol discontinuation rather than an expression of severe brain damage, especially in case of, and congruent with, a continuous pattern at the time of propofol discontinuation. This opens a new insight in this phenomenon and its transient nature. In clinical practice, we suggest to consider the timing of propofol discontinuation when assessing the EEG signal in postanoxic patients., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: Many children treated for ALL develop long-term neurocognitive impairments. Increased risk of these impairments is associated with treatment and demographic factors. Exposure to anesthesia is an additional possible risk factor. This study evaluated the impact of cumulative exposure to anesthesia on neurocognitive outcomes among a multicenter cohort of children with ALL., Methods: This study was embedded in AALL1131, a Children's Oncology Group phase III trial for patients with high-risk B-ALL. In consenting patients age 6-12 years, prospective uniform assessments of neurocognitive function were performed during and at 1 year after completion of therapy. Exposure to all episodes of anesthetic agents was abstracted. Multivariable linear regression models determined associations of cumulative anesthetic agents with the primary neurocognitive outcome reaction time/processing speed (age-normed) at 1 year off therapy, adjusting for baseline neurocognitive score, age, sex, race/ethnicity, insurance status (as a proxy for socioeconomic status), and leukemia risk group., Results: One hundred and forty-four children, 76 (52.8%) males, mean age of 9.1 (min-max, 6.0-12.0) years at diagnosis, underwent a median of 27 anesthetic episodes (min-max, 1-37). Almost all patients were exposed to propofol (140/144, 97.2%), with a mean cumulative dose of 112.3 mg/kg. One year after therapy, the proportion of children with impairment ( Z -score ≤-1.5) was significantly higher compared with a normative sample. In covariate-adjusted multivariable analysis, cumulative exposure to propofol was associated with a 0.05 Z -score decrease in reaction time/processing speed per each 10 mg/kg propofol exposure ( P = .03)., Conclusion: In a multicenter and uniformly treated cohort of children with B-ALL, cumulative exposure to propofol was an independent risk factor for impairment in reaction time/processing speed 1 year after therapy. Anesthesia exposure is a modifiable risk, and opportunities to minimize propofol use should be considered.

Study Objective: Propofol is a commonly utilized anesthetic for painless colonoscopy, but its usage is occasionally limited due to its potential side effects, including cardiopulmonary suppression and injection pain. To address this limitation, the novel compound ciprofol has been proposed as a possible alternative for propofol. This study sought to determine whether there are any differences in the safety and efficacy of propofol and ciprofol for painless colonoscopy., Design: Randomized clinical trial., Setting: Single-centre, class A tertiary hospital, November 2021 to November 2022., Patients: Adult, American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status I to II and body mass index of 18 to 30 kg m -2 patients scheduled to undergo colonoscopy., Interventions: Consecutive patients were randomly allocated in a 1:1 ratio to receive sedation for colonoscopy with ciprofol (group C) or propofol (group P)., Measurements: The primary outcome was the success rate of colonoscopy. The secondary outcomes were onset time of sedation, operation time, recovery time and discharge time, patients and endoscopists satisfaction, side effects (e.g. injection pain, myoclonus, drowsiness, dizziness, procedure recall, nausea and vomiting) and incidence rate of cardiopulmonary adverse events., Main Results: No significant difference was found in the success rate of colonoscopy between the two groups (ciprofol 96.3% vs. propofol 97.6%; mean difference - 1.2%, 95% CI: -6.5% to 4.0%, P = 0.650). However, group C showed prolonged sedation (63.4 vs. 54.8 s, P < 0.001) and fully alert times (9 vs 8 min, P = 0.013), as well as reduced incidences of injection pain (0 vs. 40.2%, P < 0.001), respiratory depression (2.4% vs. 13.4%, P = 0.021) and hypotension (65.9% vs. 80.5%, P = 0.034). Patients satisfaction was also higher in Group C (10 vs 9, P < 0.001)., Conclusions: Ciprofol can be used independently for colonoscopy. When comparing the sedation efficacy of ciprofol and propofol, a 0.4 mg kg -1 dose of ciprofol proved to be equal to a 2.0 mg kg -1 dose of propofol, with fewer side effects and greater patient satisfaction during the procedure., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Objectives: This study aimed to elucidate the effects of propofol plus adjuvants on postoperative cognitive dysfunction (POCD) and patient satisfaction., Methods: Studies published up to September 2023 on the Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wanfang Data, Sinomed, PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Clinictrials.gov websites were searched. Binary summary of results was used for meta-analyses., Results: We included 18 studies (2691 patients). The combined sedation did not affect the processing speed (ES = 0.02, 95%CI: -0.01, 0.04; I2 = 79.3%, p  < 0.001), attention (ES = 0.02, 95%CI: -0.02, 0.05; I2 = 95.0%, p  < 0.001), nor working memory (ES = 0.02, 95%CI: -0.03, 0.06; I2 = 94.4%, p  < 0.001) in CogState brief battery tool. A significant effect of combined sedation was observed in the domain of visual learning in CogState tool (ES = -0.03, 95%CI: -0.04, -0.02; I2 = 15.8%, p  = 0.306). The TDT (ES = 4.96, 95%CI: 2.92, 7.00) indicates that combined sedation would increase error rates in the tests of cognitive function. The DSST (ES = 0.16, 95% CI: -0.44, 0.75) shown that combined sedation does not affect cognitive function. In addition, an insignificant difference in patient satisfaction between combined sedation and propofol alone was observed (ES = -0.03, 95%CI: -0.09, 0.02)., Conclusion: The available evidence suggests that propofol combined with adjuvants may affect POCD but not patient satisfaction., Registration Number: INPLASY2023110092.

Aims: Esketamine may reduce acute postoperative pain in several settings. However, the effects of low-dose esketamine on postoperative pain after vestibular schwannoma (VS) resection with propofol/remifentanil total intravenous anaesthesia (TIVA) are unclear. The aim of this study is to observe the effects of intraoperative low-dose esketamine on postoperative pain after vestibular schwannoma resection., Methods: This single-centre, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial included 90 adults undergoing VS resection via the retrosigmoid approach with TIVA. The patients were randomly allocated to two groups: esketamine or control (n = 45 in each group). Patients received low-dose esketamine (0.2 mg/kg) or a similar volume of normal saline after dural closure. The primary outcome was the pain score during movement (gentle head movement) at 24 h postoperatively. Secondary outcomes included recovery time, bispectral index (BIS) values and haemodynamic profiles during the first 30 min after esketamine administration, and adverse effects., Results: Low-dose esketamine did not reduce pain scores at rest (P > .05) or with movement (P > .05) within the first 24 h after surgery. Esketamine moderately increased BIS values for at least 30 min after administration (P < .0001) but did not affect heart rate (P = .992) or mean arterial blood pressure (P = .994). Esketamine prolonged extubation time (P = .042, 95% confidence interval: 0.08 to 4.42) and decreased the effect-site concentration of remifentanil at extubation (P = .001, 95% confidence interval: -0.53 to -0.15) but did not affect the time to resumption of spatial orientation. Postoperative nausea and vomiting rates did not differ between groups, and no hallucinations or excessive sedation was observed., Conclusion: Intraoperative low-dose esketamine did not significantly reduce acute pain after VS resection with propofol/remifentanil TIVA. However, BIS values increased for at least 30 min after esketamine administration., (© 2024 British Pharmacological Society.)

Introduction: Pain related to injection of propofol during induction of anesthesia decreases from 66.8% without prevention, to 22-31% of cases when lidocaine is associated. Hypnoanalgesia of the hand is currently used for painful procedures in children but has never been evaluated in this indication. The primary aim of this prospective randomized single-blind study was to evaluate the efficacy of hypnoanalgesia of the hand for the prevention of moderate to severe pain during intravenous injection of propofol alone in comparison to lidocaine admixture. The secondary aim was to compare the global satisfaction of children in both methods., Patients and Methods: One hundred patients aged 7-14 years, ASA 1-2, admitted for scheduled surgery under general anesthesia were randomized into two groups. Group L received a mixture of 1% propofol (3 mg/kg) and 1% Lidocaine (0.3 mg/kg). Group H received 1% propofol (3 mg/kg) after hypnoanalgesia of the hand realized by a single experimented operator. A video was made in order to evaluate the pain related to propofol injection by a blinded observer using the 4-point score of Cameron (painful ≥ 2). The global satisfaction of children was evaluated in postanesthesia care unit and documented if visual analog score was <7/10., Results: Ninety-six patients were analyzed. The rate of painful patients did not differ significantly between groups (8.5% in group H [n = 47] vs 6.1% in group L [n = 49], OR= 0.70; 95% CI [0.13-3.35], p = 0.65), nor did the rate of nonsatisfied patients (10.6 in group H vs. 12.2% in group L, OR = 0.85; 95% CI [0.19-3.65], p = 1)., Conclusions: Our results suggest that hypnoanalgesia of the hand alone is effective to prevent the pain related to propofol injection in children. No significant difference was found in comparison with lidocaine admixture nor for pain or satisfaction., (© 2024 The Authors. Pediatric Anesthesia published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Discussions of the environmental impacts of general anesthetics have focused on greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from inhaled agents, with those of total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) recently coming to the forefront. Clinical experts are calling for the expansion of research toward life cycle assessment (LCA) to comprehensively study the impact of general anesthetics. We provide an overview of proposed environmental risks, including direct GHG emissions from inhaled anesthetics and non-GHG impacts and indirect GHG emissions from propofol. A practical description of LCA methodology is also provided, as well as how it applies to the study of general anesthesia. We describe available LCA studies comparing the environmental impacts of a lower carbon footprint inhaled anesthetic, sevoflurane, to TIVA/propofol and discuss their life cycle steps: manufacturing, transport, clinical use, and disposal. Significant hotspots of GHG emission were identified as the manufacturing and disposal of sevoflurane and use (attributed to the manufacture of the required syringes and syringe pumps) for propofol. However, the focus of these studies was solely on GHG emissions, excluding other environmental impacts of wasted propofol, such as water/soil toxicity. Other LCA gaps included a lack of comprehensive GHG emission estimates related to the manufacturing of TIVA plastic components, high-temperature incineration of propofol, and gas capture technologies for inhaled anesthetics. Considering that scarce LCA evidence does not allow for a definite conclusion to be drawn regarding the overall environmental impacts of sevoflurane and TIVA, we conclude that current anesthetic practice involving these agents should focus on patient needs and established best practices as more LCA research is accumulated., (Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier Masson SAS.)

Background: Postoperative respiratory adverse events are the most common perioperative complications in pediatric anesthesia, particularly prevalent in children undergoing tonsillectomy and adenoidectomy, with an incidence rate as high as 50%. The choice of anesthetic induction regimen directly influences the incidence of respiratory adverse events during the induction period. However, this effect seems to have minimal impact on postoperative outcomes. The occurrence rate of postoperative respiratory adverse events is likely more closely associated with the anesthetic maintenance phase, yet this relationship remains uncertain at present., Methods: The objective of this study was to assess the impact of different anesthetic maintenance regimens on postoperative respiratory adverse events in pediatric patients undergoing tonsillectomy and adenoidectomy. The AmPRAEC study is a multicenter, randomized, double-blind controlled trial. A total of 717 pediatric patients were recruited from 12 medical centers and randomly assigned to three groups: group A (intravenous maintenance group, receiving propofol infusion); group B (intravenous-inhalational combination group, maintained with 1% sevoflurane combined with propofol); and group C (inhalational maintenance group, maintained with 2-3% sevoflurane inhalation). The primary outcome measure was the incidence rate of postoperative respiratory adverse events., Discussion: This clinical trial aims to elucidate the impact of various anesthetic maintenance regimens on postoperative respiratory adverse events in pediatric patients. The outcomes of this study are anticipated to facilitate anesthesiologists in devising more comprehensive perioperative management strategies, enhancing comfort, and improving the clinical outcomes for this patient population., Trial Registration: Chinese Clinical Trial Registry ( http://www.chictr.org.cn ) ChiCTR2300074803. Registered on August 16, 2023., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Postoperative sleep disturbance has a potentially detrimental effect on postoperative recovery. Perioperative patients are affected by several factors. General anesthesia induces a non-physiological state that does not resemble natural sleep. Exposure to propofol/sevoflurane can lead to desynchronization of the circadian rhythm, which may result in postoperative sleep disturbance characterized by mid-cycle advancement of sleep and daytime sleepiness. Dexmedetomidine is a highly selective α2-adrenoceptor agonist with a unique sedative effect that facilitates the transition from sleep to wakefulness. Basic research has shown that dexmedetomidine induces deep sedation, similar to physical sleep, and helps maintain forebrain connectivity, which is likely to reduce delirium after surgery. The aim of this study is to evaluate the influence of exposure to the mono-anesthetic propofol on the development of postoperative sleep disturbance in young and middle-aged female patients undergoing hysteroscopy and whether prophylactic administration of dexmedetomidine influences reducing postoperative sleep disturbance., Methods: This prospective randomized controlled trial (RCT) will include 150 patients undergoing hysteroscopy at the First Affiliated Hospital of Xiamen University. Participants will be randomly assigned to three groups in a 1:1:1 ratio. The dexmedetomidine group will have two subgroups and will receive a nasal spray of 0.2 µg/kg or 0.5 µg/kg 25 min before surgery, while the control group will receive a saline nasal spray. Three groups will undergo hysteroscopy with propofol-based TIVA according to the same scheme. Sleep quality will be measured using a wearable device and double-blind sleep assessments will be performed before surgery and 1, 3, and 7 days after surgery. SPSS 2.0 is used for statistical analysis. A χ 2 test is used to compare groups, and t-test is used to determine statistical the significance of continuous variables., Discussion: The purpose of this study is to investigate the incidence of propofol-associated sleep disorders and to test a combination of dexmedetomidine anesthesia regimen for the prevention of postoperative sleep disorders. This study will help to improve patients' postoperative satisfaction and provide a new strategy for comfortable perioperative medical treatment., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT06281561. Registered on February 24, 2024., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Orthognathic surgery has a high incidence of postoperative nausea (PON) and vomiting (POV), delaying mobility initiation and postoperative recovery. Bleeding is another risk associated with this surgical procedure. We aimed to compare total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) and volatile anesthesia in patients undergoing orthognathic surgery in terms of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) incidence and hemodynamic changes. This retrospective study included 82 patients who underwent bilateral sagittal split ramus osteotomies at Saga University Hospital between April 2016 and April 2021. We compared the effects of TIVA and volatile anesthesia on PONV onset after surgery, acute postoperative hemodynamic changes (blood pressure and heart rate), and factors contributing to PONV. PON was significantly lower in the TIVA group than in the volatile anesthesia group. The total dose of fentanyl contributed to the onset of POV, while the onset of PON was associated with low volumes of fluid infusion and urine in the TIVA and volatile anesthesia groups, respectively. Furthermore, post-extubation hemodynamic change was significantly smaller in the TIVA group than in the volatile anesthesia group. Therefore, TIVA could have a reduced risk of PONV and hemodynamic changes in patients undergoing orthognathic surgery. Employing TIVA could mitigate perioperative complications and enhance patient safety., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: As a new type of intravenous anesthetic, ciprofol has the advantages of fast onset of action, fast recovery and high clearance rate. This study aimed to investigate the effectiveness and safety of ciprofol versus traditional propofol for anesthesia and sedation in and out of the operating room., Methods: We searched the literature in PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Embase databases from January 2021 to December 2023. All clinical studies comparing the sedative effects of propofol and ciprofol, both inside and outside the operating room, were included in our trial. The main outcome measures were induction time and incidence of injection-site pain. Data are merged using risk ratio and standardized mean difference with 95% confidence interval. Subgroup analysis, meta-regression, sensitivity analysis, and publication bias were performed. The study protocol was prospectively registered with PROSPERO (CRD42023447747)., Results: A total of 15 randomized, controlled trials involving 2002 patients were included in this study. Compared with propofol, ciprofol has a longer induction time in the operating room but a shorter induction time in non-operating room settings. Ciprofol can effectively reduce the risk of injection-site pain and respiratory depression both inside and outside the operating room. In addition, the risk of drug-related hypotension induced with ciprofol in the operating room is lower, but the awakening time is also longer. Meta-regression analysis showed that neither age nor BMI were potential sources of heterogeneity. Funnel plot, egger and begg tests showed no significant publication bias. Sensitivity analyzes indicate that our results are robust and reliable., Conclusion: Ciprofol has absolute advantages in reducing the risk of injection-site pain and respiratory depression, both in and outside operating room. Intraoperative use of ciprofol reduces the risk of drug-related hypotension and may also reduce the risk of intraoperative physical movements. However, ciprofol may have longer induction and awakening time than propofol., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: The occurrence of hypotension after induction of general anaesthesia is common in geriatric patients, and should be prevented to minimise perioperative complications. Compared with propofol, remimazolam potentially has a lower incidence of hypotension. This study aimed to compare the incidence of hypotension after general anaesthesia induction with remimazolam or propofol in geriatric patients., Methods: This single-centre, double-blind, randomised trial enrolled 90 patients aged ≥80 yr who received general anaesthesia for scheduled surgery. Patients were randomised to receive remimazolam (12 mg kg -1 h -1 ) or propofol (0.025 mg kg -1 s -1 ) for anaesthesia induction, with remifentanil and sevoflurane. The presence or absence of hypertension on the ward served as the stratification factor. The incidence of hypotension after the induction of general anaesthesia, defined as a noninvasive mean arterial pressure of <65 mm Hg measured every minute from initiation of drug administration to 3 min after tracheal intubation, was the primary outcome. Subgroup analysis was performed for the primary outcome using preoperative ward hypertension, clinical frailty scale, Charlson Comorbidity Index, and age., Results: Three subjects were excluded before drug administration, and 87 subjects were included in the analysis. The incidence of hypotension was 72.1% (31/43) and 72.7% (32/44) with remimazolam or propofol, respectively. No statistically significant differences (adjusted odds ratio, 0.96; 95% confidence interval, 0.37-2.46; P=0.93) were observed between groups. Subgroup analysis revealed no significant differences between groups., Conclusions: Compared with propofol, remimazolam did not reduce the incidence of hypotension after general anaesthesia induction in patients aged ≥80 yr., Clinical Trial Registration: UMIN000042587., (Copyright © 2024 British Journal of Anaesthesia. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Competing Interests: The author declares no conflict of interest.

Background: Propofol and sevoflurane are two of the most commonly used anaesthetics for paediatric surgery. Data from some clinical trials suggest that postoperative pain incidence is lower when propofol is used for maintenance of anaesthesia compared with sevoflurane, although this is not clear., Methods: This meta-analysis compared postoperative pain following maintenance of anaesthesia with propofol or sevoflurane in paediatric surgeries. PubMed Medline, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science and Cochrane Library were searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared postoperative pain between sevoflurane and propofol anaesthesia in children. After quality assessment, a meta-analysis was carried out using bias-adjusted inverse heterogeneity methods, heterogeneity using I 2 and publication bias using Doi plots., Results: In total, 13 RCTs with 1174 children were included. The overall synthesis suggested nearly two-fold higher odds of overall postoperative pain in the sevoflurane group compared with the propofol group (odds ratio [OR] 1.88, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.12-3.15, I 2 =58.2%). Further, children in the sevoflurane group had higher odds of having higher pain scores (OR 3.18, 95% CI 1.83-5.53, I 2 =20.9%), and a 60% increase in the odds of requiring postoperative rescue analgesia compared with propofol (OR 1.60, 95% CI 0.89-2.88, I 2 =58.2%)., Conclusions: Children maintained on inhalational sevoflurane had higher odds of postoperative pain compared with those maintained on propofol. The results also suggest that sevoflurane is associated with higher odds of needing postoperative rescue analgesia compared with propofol., Registration: The protocol for this systematic review and meta-analysis was registered on the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) with registration ID CRD42023445913., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) are frequent after volatile anesthesia. We hypothesized that coadministration of propofol with volatile anesthetic compared to pure volatile anesthetics would decrease the need for postoperative antiemetic treatments and shorten recovery time in the postanesthesia care unit (PACU)., Methods: We retrospectively identified adult patients who underwent procedures using general anesthesia with volatile agents, with or without propofol infusion, from May 2018 through December 2020, and who were admitted to the PACU. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) analysis was performed using generalized estimating equations with robust variance estimates to assess whether propofol was associated with decreased need for rescue antiemetics., Results: Among 47,847 patients, overall IPTW rescue antiemetic use was 4.7% for 17,573 patients who received propofol and 8.2% for 30,274 who did not (odds ratio [OR], 0.55; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.49-0.61; P <.001). This effect associated with propofol was present regardless of the intensity of antiemetic prophylaxis (OR, 0.59, 0.51, and 0.58 for 0-1, 2, and ≥3 antiemetics used, respectively), procedural duration (OR, 0.54, 0.62, and 0.47 for ≤2.50, 2.51-4.00, ≥4.01 hours), and type of volatile agent (OR, 0.51, 0.52, and 0.57 for desflurane, isoflurane, and sevoflurane) (all P <.001). This effect was dose dependent, with little additional benefit for the reduction in the use of PACU antiemetics when propofol rate exceeded 100 μg/kg/min. Patients who received rescue antiemetics required longer PACU recovery time than those who did not receive antiemetics (ratio of the geometric mean, 1.31; 95% CI, 1.28-1.33; P <.001), but use of propofol did not affect PACU recovery time (ratio of the geometric mean, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.98-1.01; P =.56)., Conclusions: The addition of propofol infusions to volatile-based anesthesia is associated with a dose-dependent reduction in the need for rescue antiemetics in the PACU regardless of the number of prophylactic antiemetics, duration of procedure, and type of volatile agent used, without affecting PACU recovery time., Competing Interests: Conflicts of Interest: See Disclosures at the end of the article., (Copyright © 2024 International Anesthesia Research Society.)

Background: The incidence of arterial hypotension during induction of general anesthesia is influenced by the method of propofol administration, but there is a dearth of randomized clinical trials comparing bolus injection and target-controlled infusion in relation to arterial hypotension. This study seeks to compare the incidence of arterial hypotension between these two methods of propofol administration., Methods: This prospective, randomized, single-center, non-blinded study included 60 patients (aged 35 to 55 years), classified as ASA physical status I or II, who were undergoing non-cardiac surgeries. They were randomly allocated using a computer to two groups based on the method of propofol administration during the induction of general anesthesia: the Target Group, receiving target-controlled infusion at 4 μg.mL -1 , and the Bolus Group, receiving a bolus infusion of 2 mg.kg -1 . Both groups also received midazolam 2 mg, fentanyl 3 μg.kg -1 , and rocuronium 0.6 mg.kg -1 . Over the first 10 minutes of anesthesia induction, Mean Arterial Pressure (MAP), Heart Rate (HR), level of Consciousness (qCON), and Suppression Rate (SR) were recorded every 2 minutes., Results: Twenty-seven patients remained in the TCI group, while 28 were in the Bolus group. Repeated measure analysis using mixed-effects models could not reject the null hypothesis for the effect of group-time interactions in MAP (p = 0.85), HR (p = 0.49), SR (p = 0.44), or qCON (p = 0.72). The difference in means for qCON (60.2 for TCI, 50.5 for bolus, p < 0.001), MAP (90.3 for TCI, 86.2 for bolus, p < 0.006), HR (76.2 for TCI, 76.9 for bolus, p = 0.93), and SR (0.01 for TCI, 5.5 for bolus, p < 0.001), irrespective of time (whole period means), revealed some significant differences., Conclusion: Patients who received propofol bolus injection exhibited a lower mean arterial pressure, a greater variation in the level of consciousness, and a higher suppression rate compared to those who received it as a target-controlled infusion. However, the interaction effect between groups and time remains inconclusive., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2024 Sociedade Brasileira de Anestesiologia. Published by Elsevier España S.L.U. All rights reserved.)

Objective: Postoperative cognitive dysfunction (POCD) is a serious surgical complication. We assessed the different POCD incidences between anesthesia using sevoflurane and sevoflurane combined with dexmedetomidine, with propofol-based sedation in elderly patients who underwent a thoracic surgical procedure., Methods: A total of 90 patients aged 65 to 80 years old who underwent a thoracic surgical procedure at our hospital and 15 nonsurgical participants as controls, were enrolled in this study. Patients were divided in a randomized 1:1:1 ratio into 3 groups. All participants were randomized into a trial with three anesthesia groups (P, PS, PSD) or a control group (C) of healthy matches. All trial groups received distinct anesthetic combinations during surgery, while controls mirrored patient criteria.Group P (propofol and remifentanil were maintained during the surgery), Group PS (propofol, remifentanil, and sevoflurane were maintained during the surgery), and Group PSD (propofol, remifentanil, sevoflurane, and dexmedetomidine were maintained during the surgery).All participants were rated using a series of cognitive assessment scales before and three days after surgery. All participants were interviewed over the telephone, 7 days, 30 days, and 90 days postoperatively., Results: POCD incidences in the PSD (combined anesthetization with propofol, sevoflurane, and dexmedetomidine) group was significantly lower than that in the PS (combined anesthetization with propofol and sevoflurane) group, 1 day post-surgery (10.0% vs. 40.0%, P = 0.008), and the results were consistent at 3 days post-surgery. When the patients were assessed 7 days, 30 days, and 90 days postoperatively, there was no significant difference in POCD incidence among the three groups. Multivariate logistic regression analysis of POCD one day after surgery showed that education level was negatively correlated with incidence of POCD (P = 0.018) and single lung ventilation time was positively correlated with incidence of POCD (P = 0.001)., Conclusion: For elderly patients who underwent a thoracic surgical procedure, dexmedetomidine sedation shows an obvious advantage on improving short-term POCD incidence, which is caused by sevoflurane., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Postinduction hypotension (PIHO) is a hemodynamic abnormality commonly observed during the induction of general anesthesia. Etomidate is considered a safer drug for the induction of anesthesia because it has only minor adverse effects on the cardiovascular and pulmonary systems. Recent evidence indicates that the novel benzodiazepine remimazolam has minimal inhibitory effects on the circulation and respiration. However, the efficacy and safety of remimazolam versus etomidate in the induction of anesthesia are unclear., Objective: To further understand the potential of remimazolam in anesthesia induction, it is necessary to design a meta-analysis to compare its effects versus the classic safe anesthetic etomidate. The aim of this study is to determine which drug has more stable hemodynamics and a lower incidence of PIHO. Our study will also yield data on sedation efficiency, time to loss of consciousness, time to awakening, incidence of injection pain, and postoperative nausea and vomiting with the two drugs., Methods: We plan to search the Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Embase, PubMed, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, and Wanfang databases from the date of their creation until March 31, 2025. The language is limited to English and Chinese. The search terms are "randomized controlled trials," "etomidate," and "remimazolam." The incidence of PIHO is the primary outcome measure. Secondary outcomes include depth of anesthesia after induction, sedation success rate, time to loss of consciousness, hemodynamic profiles, recovery time, incidence of injection pain, and postoperative nausea and vomiting. Reviews, meta-analyses, case studies, abstracts from conferences, and commentaries will not be included. The heterogeneity of the results will be evaluated by sensitivity and subgroup analyses. RevMan software and Stata software will be used for data analysis. We will evaluate the quality of included studies using version 2 of the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool. The confidence of the evidence will be assessed through the Grading of Recommendations, Assessments, Developments, and Evaluations system., Results: The protocol was registered in the international PROSPERO (Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews) registry in November 2023. As of June 2024, we have performed a preliminary article search and retrieval for further review. The review and analyses are expected to be completed in March 2025. We expect to submit manuscripts for peer review by the end of June 2025., Conclusions: By synthesizing the available evidence and comparing remimazolam and etomidate, we hope to provide valuable insights into the selection of anesthesia-inducing drugs to reduce the incidence of PIHO and improve patient prognosis., Trial Registration: PROSPERO CRD42023463120; https://tinyurl.com/333jb8bm., International Registered Report Identifier (irrid): PRR1-10.2196/55948., (©Li Zhao, Yiping Guo, Xuelei Zhou, Wei Mao, Linlin Chen, Ying Xie, Linji Li. Originally published in JMIR Research Protocols (https://www.researchprotocols.org), 12.06.2024.)

Serotonin syndrome (SS) is a life-threatening condition caused by serotonergic medications. We describe a unique case of SS likely caused by prolonged exposure to propofol and remifentanil alone. A young male presented for vestibular schwannoma resection. Several hours into the case, the patient demonstrated hyperthermia and hemodynamic instability, followed by clonus, rigidity, shivering, and tachycardia after emergence. SS was diagnosed using Hunter's criteria and improved with supportive measures. While the patient endorsed a history of methamphetamine use, his urine drug screen was negative. The possibility of SS should be considered when administering propofol and remifentanil, particularly with prolonged infusions., Competing Interests: The authors declare no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2024 International Anesthesia Research Society.)