Purpose: We conducted a prospective, real-world study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of balanced propofol sedation (BPS) in bronchoscopy and identify an advantageous sedation regimen for such procedures. Patients and Methods: The participants were placed in four groups based on their sedation regimen (exposure factor): the M-S group (midazolam + sufentanil for traditional sedation), R-S group (remimazolam + sufentanil for traditional sedation), M-S-P group (midazolam + sufentanil + propofol for BPS), and R-S-P group (remimazolam + sufentanil + propofol for BPS). The primary outcomes included satisfaction metrics (satisfaction of the patients, endoscopic physicians, and nurses) and follow-up questionnaires. The secondary outcomes included time metrics (induction time, recovery time, and discharge time), dosage metrics (induction dose, maintenance dose, and total dose of each sedative), completion rate of sedation, intraprocedural dose, and frequency of lidocaine spray in the airway, and incidence of adverse reactions. Results: In total, 418 subjects were included in this study. Compared to traditional sedation, both BPS groups significantly increased the satisfaction of patients, endoscopic physicians, and nurses (P < 0.05) and reduced the incidence of intraprocedural wakefulness (P < 0.05). Additionally, induction and recovery of the BPS group were rapid, with high sedation completion rates and no increase in the incidence of intraprocedural and postprocedural adverse reactions (P < 0.05). The RSP group was better than the MSP group in terms of various time metrics and postprocedural adverse reactions. Conclusion: BPS can be safely and effectively applied during bronchoscopy, with remimazolam and sufentanil combined with a small dose of propofol being an optimal medication regimen. Keywords: balanced propofol sedation, bronchoscopy, remimazolam, midazolam, procedural sedation

Xinyu Wu

Lina Zhang

Zangong Zhou

Lijie Qi

Yinhuan Liu

Xuebin Du

Lixia Ma

Xiangyu Ji

Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management

THERAPEUTICS AND CLINICAL RISK MANAGEMENT 是一本经过同行评审的国际临床治疗和风险管理期刊，专注于对所有治疗领域的临床研究、结果、安全性和有效、安全和持续使用药物的计划进行简明快速的报告，所有临床领域的治疗和手术干预。该杂志欢迎提交涵盖原始研究、临床和流行病学研究、评论、指南、专家意见和评论的投稿。该杂志将考虑案例报告，但前提是它们对文献做出了有价值的原创贡献。自 2019 年 3 月 18 日起，治疗学和临床风险管理将不再考虑发表荟萃分析。该杂志不接受研究方案、基于动物或基于细胞系的研究。

Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management is a peer-reviewed international journal focused on clinical therapy and risk management. The journal aims to provide concise and rapid reports on clinical research, outcomes, safety, and the effective and sustained use of medications across all therapeutic areas. We welcome submissions that include original research, clinical and epidemiological studies, reviews, guidelines, expert opinions, and commentaries. While case reports will be considered, they must provide valuable original contributions to the existing literature. As of March 18, 2019, the journal will no longer consider the publication of meta-analyses. Additionally, we do not accept study protocols or research based on animals or cell lines.

《Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management》是一本经过同行评审的国际期刊，专注于临床治疗和风险管理。该期刊致力于快速、简明地报告所有治疗领域的临床研究、结果、安全性以及药物的有效性和持续使用。我们欢迎提交涵盖原始研究、临床和流行病学研究、评论、指南、专家意见和评论的稿件。虽然我们会考虑案例报告，但前提是这些报告对现有文献做出了有价值的原创贡献。自2019年3月18日起，本期刊将不再考虑发表荟萃分析。同时，我们不接受研究方案、基于动物或细胞系的研究。

Category	Quartile
医学	3
医学, 卫生保健与服务	4

The Efficacy and Safety Profile of Balanced Propofol Sedation for Bronchoscopy

ivySCI AI Smartly Parses PDF, Answers Researchers' Questions, and Helps You Understand Papers in Seconds

Journal Info

Category	Quartile
HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES	2