MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411708721 · doi:10.1097/eja.0000000000002226

Remimazolam tosylate or propofol and delirium in frail elderly patients after hip surgery

2025· article· en· W4411708721 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Wenlan Cai, Fangming Shen, Lan-yue Zhu, Yuqing Xue, Menghan Sun, Xiaoxiang Tan, Kai Shi, Yuzhou Chen, Jie Sun

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Anaesthesiology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicIntensive Care Unit Cognitive Disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePropofolDeliriumIncidence (geometry)AnesthesiaGeneral anaesthesiaAdverse effectSurgeryInternal medicineIntensive care medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Remimazolam tosylate, a novel short-acting benzodiazepine, is increasingly being used in general anaesthesia, but its role in the incidence of postoperative delirium is uncertain, particularly in frail elderly patients. OBJECTIVE: To compare the effects of remimazolam tosylate with propofol on the incidence of postoperative delirium in frail elderly patients undergoing hip surgery. DESIGN: Randomised, single-centre, single-blind controlled trial. SETTING: A tertiary teaching hospital in China, conducted from March to December 2023. PATIENTS: Frail elderly patients (Reported Edmonton Frail Scale Score ≥ 6) undergoing hip surgery under general anaesthesia. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomly assigned to either the propofol or remimazolam group. Both groups received total intravenous anaesthesia following a standardised protocol with either propofol or remimazolam tosylate for induction and maintenance. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was the incidence of postoperative delirium within three postoperative days, assessed twice daily using the 3D Confusion Assessment Method (3D-CAM). The secondary outcomes included the quality of postoperative recovery and adverse events. RESULT: A total of 136 patients were enrolled. The incidence of postoperative delirium was significantly lower in the remimazolam group than in the propofol group [3 of 68 (4.4%) vs. 12 of 68 (17.6%), risk differece (RD) -13.2%, 95% CI -23.5% to -2.9%, relative risk (RR) 0.25, 95% CI 0.074 to 0.847, NNT 7.6, P = 0.0143]. The incidence of hypotension after induction was also lower in the remimazolam group [16 of 68 (23.5%) vs. 32 of 68 (47.1%), RD -23.5%, 95%CI -39.1% to -8.0%, RR 0.5, 95% CI 0.304 to 0.822, NNT 4.3, P = 0.004], with fewer patients requiring vasopressors [55 of 68 (80.9%) vs. 66 of 68 (97.1%), RD -16.2%, 95% CI -26.3 to -6.0, RR 0.8, 95% CI 0.737 to 0.942, NNT 6.2, P = 0.003]. Notably, the remimazolam group exhibited significantly less burst suppression compared with the propofol group, both in terms of burst suppression time (2.2 s [0 to 17.6] vs. 21.9 s [2.3 to 115.3] median difference = 11.98 s, 95% CI 2.44 to 27.90, P < 0.001) and its proportion relative to the total surgery time (0.3‰ [0 to 2.1] vs. 2.8‰ [0.2 to 14.7], median difference 1.30‰, 95% CI 0.27 to 3.34, P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: In frail elderly patients, remimazolam tosylate was associated with a lower incidence of postoperative delirium compared with propofol. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Chinese Clinical Trial Registry, Chictr.org.cn, identifier: ChiCTR2300068632.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.320
Threshold uncertainty score0.939

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.235 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations11
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of AnaesthesiologySame topicIntensive Care Unit Cognitive DisordersFrench-language works237,207