Benzodiazepine use in relation to long-term dementia risk and imaging markers of neurodegeneration: a population-based study.

BACKGROUND: Benzodiazepine use is common, particularly in older adults. Benzodiazepines have well-established acute adverse effects on cognition, but long-term effects on neurodegeneration and dementia risk remain uncertain. METHODS: We included 5443 cognitively healthy (MMSE ≥ 26) participants from the population-based Rotterdam Study (57.4% women, mean age 70.6 years). Benzodiazepine use from 1991 until baseline (2005-2008) was derived from pharmacy dispensing records, from which we determined drug type and cumulative dose. Benzodiazepine use was defined as prescription of anxiolytics (ATC-code: N05BA) or sedative-hypnotics (ATC-code: N05CD) between inception of pharmacy records and study baseline. Cumulative dose was calculated as the sum of the defined daily doses for all prescriptions. We determined the association with dementia risk until 2020 using Cox regression. Among 4836 participants with repeated brain MRI, we further determined the association of benzodiazepine use with changes in neuroimaging markers using linear mixed models. RESULTS: Of all 5443 participants, 2697 (49.5%) had used benzodiazepines at any time in the 15 years preceding baseline, of whom 1263 (46.8%) used anxiolytics, 530 (19.7%) sedative-hypnotics, and 904 (33.5%) used both; 345 (12.8%) participants were still using at baseline assessment. During a mean follow-up of 11.2 years, 726 participants (13.3%) developed dementia. Overall, use of benzodiazepines was not associated with dementia risk compared to never use (HR [95% CI]: 1.06 [0.90-1.25]), irrespective of cumulative dose. Risk estimates were somewhat higher for any use of anxiolytics than for sedative-hypnotics (HR 1.17 [0.96-1.41] vs 0.92 [0.70-1.21]), with strongest associations for high cumulative dose of anxiolytics (HR [95% CI] 1.33 [1.04-1.71]). In imaging analyses, current use of benzodiazepine was associated cross-sectionally with lower brain volumes of the hippocampus, amygdala, and thalamus and longitudinally with accelerated volume loss of the hippocampus and to a lesser extent amygdala. However, imaging findings did not differ by type of benzodiazepines or cumulative dose. CONCLUSIONS: In this population-based sample of cognitively healthy adults, overall use of benzodiazepines was not associated with increased dementia risk, but potential class-dependent adverse effects and associations with subclinical markers of neurodegeneration may warrant further investigation.

Examining Adult Patients' Success with Discontinuing Long-term Benzodiazepine Use: a Qualitative Study.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about patients' experiences with benzodiazepine (BZD) discontinuation, which is thought to be challenging given the physiological and psychological dependence and accompanying potential for significant withdrawal symptoms. The marked decline in BZD prescribing over the past decade in the US Department of Veterans Affairs healthcare system presents an important opportunity to examine the experience of BZD discontinuation among long-term users. OBJECTIVE: Examine the experience of BZD discontinuation among individuals prescribed long-term BZD treatment to identify factors that contributed to successful discontinuation. DESIGN: Descriptive qualitative analysis of semi-structured interviews conducted between April and December of 2020. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 21 Veterans who had been prescribed long-term BZD pharmacotherapy (i.e., > 120 days of exposure in a 12-month period) and had their BZD discontinued. APPROACH: We conducted semi-structured interviews with Veteran participants to learn about their BZD use and the process of discontinuation, with interviews recorded and transcribed verbatim. Data were deductively and inductively coded and coded text entered into a matrix to identify factors that contributed to successful BZD discontinuation. KEY RESULTS: The mean age of interview participants was 63.0 years (standard deviation 3.9); 94.2% were male and 76.2% were white. Of 21 participants, only 1 had resumed BZD treatment (prescribed by a non-VA clinician). Three main factors influenced success with discontinuation: (1) participants' attitudes toward BZDs (e.g., risks of long-term use, perceived lack of efficacy, potential for dependence); (2) limited withdrawal symptoms; and (3) effective alternatives, either from their clinician (e.g., medication, psychotherapy) or identified by participants. CONCLUSIONS: BZD discontinuation after long-term use is relatively well tolerated, and participants appreciated reducing their medication exposure, particularly to one associated with physical dependence. These findings may help reduce both patient and clinician anxiety related to BZD discontinuation.

Real-World Effectiveness of High-Dose Olanzapine and Clozapine for Treatment-Resistant Schizophrenia in Japan: A Retrospective Bidirectional Mirror-Image Study.

BACKGROUND: Clozapine is considered the gold standard medication for treatment-resistant schizophrenia (TRS). However, given that clozapine treatment is associated with the burden of regular blood monitoring and the risk of life-threatening adverse effects, high-dose olanzapine can serve as an alternative treatment. We conducted a bidirectional mirror-image study to evaluate the effectiveness of high-dose olanzapine compared with clozapine. METHODS: We included patients with TRS who switched from olanzapine to clozapine or switched from clozapine to olanzapine, and received high-dose (>20 mg/d) olanzapine treatment for ≥4 weeks at Yamanashi Prefectural Kita Hospital. We obtained data on hospitalization, seclusion, and modified electroconvulsive therapy (mECT) during the clozapine phase and the olanzapine phase. RESULTS: A total of 44 patients were included. When patients switched from high-dose olanzapine to clozapine (n = 32), significant reductions were found in the total days of seclusion, the total number of mECT, and the number of patients who received mECT at least once. When patients switched from clozapine to high-dose olanzapine (n = 12), a significant reduction was found in the number of patients who received mECT at least once. When data from both directions of treatment were combined, significant reductions were found in the total days of seclusion, the total number of mECT, and the number of patients who received mECT at least once in favor of clozapine. CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest that high-dose olanzapine may not be as effective as clozapine for patients with TRS in real-world practice. However, it should be noted that there are unique circumstances that restrict the use of clozapine in Japan.

Safety and efficacy of remimazolam versus propofol during EUS: a multicenter randomized controlled study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Propofol, a widely used sedative in GI endoscopic procedures, is associated with cardiorespiratory suppression. Remimazolam is a novel ultrashort-acting benzodiazepine sedative with rapid onset and minimal cardiorespiratory depression. This study compared the safety and efficacy of remimazolam and propofol during EUS procedures. METHODS: A multicenter randomized controlled study was conducted between October 2022 and March 2023 in patients who underwent EUS procedures. Patients were randomly assigned to receive either remimazolam or propofol as a sedative agent. The primary endpoint was cardiorespiratory adverse events (AEs) during the procedure, including desaturation, respiratory depression, hypotension, and tachycardia. Secondary endpoints were the time to achieve sedation, recovery time, quality of sedation, pain at the injection site, and satisfaction of both endoscopists and patients. RESULTS: Four hundred patients enrolled in the study: 200 received remimazolam (10.8 ± 7.7 mg) and 200 received propofol (88.0 ± 49.1 mg). For cardiorespiratory AEs, the remimazolam group experienced fewer occurrences than the propofol group (8.5% vs 16%, P = .022). A nonsignificant trend was found toward less oxygen desaturation (1.0% vs 3.5%, P = .09), respiratory depression (.5% vs 1.5%, P = .62), hypotension (2.5% vs 5.5%, P = .12), and tachycardia (4.5% vs 5.5%, P = .68) with remimazolam than with propofol. Remimazolam showed a shorter induction time than propofol while maintaining comparable awakening and recovery times. Injection site pain was significantly lower in the remimazolam group than in the propofol group. The remimazolam group demonstrated a significantly higher quality of sedation and satisfaction scores than the propofol group, as evaluated by both endoscopists and patients. CONCLUSIONS: Remimazolam was superior to propofol in terms of safety and efficacy during EUS examinations. (Clinical trial registration number: KCT 0007643.).

Remimazolam Attenuates LPS-Derived Cognitive Dysfunction via Subdiaphragmatic Vagus Nerve Target α7nAChR-Mediated Nrf2/HO-1 Signal Pathway.

Sepsis-induced neuroinflammation is significantly associated with sepsis-related brain dysfunction. Remimazolam is a novel ultra-short-acting benzodiazepine anesthetic with multiple organ protective effects. However, it is unknown whether remimazolam can ameliorate LPS-induced brain impairment. In this study, Lipopolysaccharide (5 mg/kg, LPS) severely impaired Sprague-Dawley rats spatial learning ability, memory, and cognitive function. However, remimazolam treatment showed a protective effect on LPS-induced cognitive dysfunction. Remimazolam partly reversed LPS-induced splenomegaly, decreased serum cytokine expression, suppressed hippocampal M1 microglial activation, and mitigated oxidative stress injury and neuroinflammation. Electroacupuncture (EA) or PNU282987 treatment improved LPS-induced cognitive dysfunction and also significantly inhibited neuroinflammation and systemic inflammation. However, MLA, ML385, or subdiaphragmatic vagus nerve (SDV) treatment abolished the protective effects of remimazolam. Further mechanistic studies showed that remimazolam induces protective effects by activating subdiaphragmatic vagus nerve target α7nAChR-mediated Nrf2/HO-1 signaling pathway. These results demonstrate that remimazolam can up-regulate α7nAChR, Cyto-Nrf2, HO-1, and cognitive-related (CREB, BDNF, PSD95) protein expressions, suppress M1 microglia, ameliorate neuroinflammation or systemic inflammation, and reverse cognitive dysfunction. Therefore, this study provides insight into a new therapeutic target for the treatment of sepsis-induced cerebral dysfunction.

Effect of Remimazolam on Emergence Delirium in Children Undergoing Laparoscopic Surgery: A Double-blinded Randomized Trial.

BACKGROUND: Preventing emergence delirium is a clinical goal for pediatric anesthesia, yet there is no consensus on its prevention. This study investigated the hypothesis that a continuous infusion or a single bolus of remimazolam can reduce the incidence of emergence delirium in children. METHODS: A total of 120 children aged 1 to 6 yr were randomly and equally allocated into three groups: group RC, which received a continuous infusion of remimazolam at 1 mg · kg-1 · h-1; group RB, which received a single bolus of remimazolam at 0.2 mg · kg-1 at the beginning of wound closure; and group C, which received a continuous infusion of saline at 1 ml · kg-1 · h-1 and a single bolus of saline at 0.2 ml · kg-1 at the beginning of sutures. The primary outcome was the incidence of emergence delirium assessed by the Pediatric Anesthesia Emergence Delirium scale. Secondary outcomes included the number of rescue propofol administrations in the postanesthesia care unit, recovery time, and adverse events. RESULTS: Emergence delirium was observed in 14 of 40 (35%) patients in group C, 2 of 40 (5%) patients in group RC (vs. group C, P = 0.001; risk ratio, 95% CI: 0.14, 0.04 to 0.59), and 3 of 39 (7.7%) patients in group RB (vs. group C, P = 0.003; risk ratio, 95% CI: 0.22, 0.07 to 0.71). Ten of 40 patients in group C, 2 of 40 patients in group RC (vs. group C, P = 0.012; risk ratio, 95% CI: 0.20, 0.05 to 0.86), and 2 of 39 patients in group RB (vs. group C, P = 0.014; risk ratio, 95% CI: 0.21, 0.05 to 0.88) needed rescue propofol. No differences in the recovery time and adverse effects were detected. CONCLUSIONS: Both continuous infusion and single bolus administration of remimazolam can effectively reduce the occurrence of emergence delirium in children.

Clinical decision-making in benzodiazepine deprescribing by healthcare providers vs. AI-assisted approach.

AIMS: The aim of this study was to compare the clinical decision-making for benzodiazepine deprescribing between a healthcare provider (HCP) and an artificial intelligence (AI) chatbot GPT4 (ChatGPT-4). METHODS: We analysed real-world data from a Croatian cohort of community-dwelling benzodiazepine patients (n = 154) within the EuroAgeism H2020 ESR 7 project. HCPs evaluated the data using pre-established deprescribing criteria to assess benzodiazepine discontinuation potential. The research team devised and tested AI prompts to ensure consistency with HCP judgements. An independent researcher employed ChatGPT-4 with predetermined prompts to simulate clinical decisions for each patient case. Data derived from human-HCP and ChatGPT-4 decisions were compared for agreement rates and Cohen's kappa. RESULTS: Both HPC and ChatGPT identified patients for benzodiazepine deprescribing (96.1% and 89.6%, respectively), showing an agreement rate of 95% (κ = .200, P = .012). Agreement on four deprescribing criteria ranged from 74.7% to 91.3% (lack of indication κ = .352, P < .001; prolonged use κ = .088, P = .280; safety concerns κ = .123, P = .006; incorrect dosage κ = .264, P = .001). Important limitations of GPT-4 responses were identified, including 22.1% ambiguous outputs, generic answers and inaccuracies, posing inappropriate decision-making risks. CONCLUSIONS: While AI-HCP agreement is substantial, sole AI reliance poses a risk for unsuitable clinical decision-making. This study's findings reveal both strengths and areas for enhancement of ChatGPT-4 in the deprescribing recommendations within a real-world sample. Our study underscores the need for additional research on chatbot functionality in patient therapy decision-making, further fostering the advancement of AI for optimal performance.

Opioid-related deaths and their counterpart by occurrence era, age group and coimplicated drugs: Scotland vs. England and Wales.

AIMS: Compare by occurrence era and age group how opioid-related deaths (ORDs) and their counterpart evolved in Scotland vs. England and Wales during 2006-2020. For Scotland, compare coimplication rates between ORDs and non-ORDs for any benzodiazepine, cocaine or gabapentin/pregabalin, and consider whether coimplication in ORDs depended on opioid-specificity. METHODS: Cross-tabulations of drug misuse deaths (DMDs) obtained by 3 yearly occurrence era (2006-2008 to 2018-2020) and age group (under 25, 25-34, 35-44, 45-54, 55+ years) for England and Wales and subdivided by whether at least 1 opiate was mentioned on death certificate (DMD-Os or not); and of Scotland's opioid-related deaths (ORDs vs. non-ORDs) together with (i) coimplication by any benzodiazepine, cocaine or gabapentin/pregabalin; and (ii) opioid-specificity of ORDs. ORD is defined by heroin/morphine, methadone or buprenorphine being implicated in DMD. RESULTS: Per era between 2012-2014 and 2018-2020, Scotland's ORDs increased by 54% and non-ORDs by 34%. Increase in DMD-Os in England and Wales was more modest. Cocaine was implicated in 83% of Scotland's 2690 non-ORDs during 2006-2020; and any benzodiazepine in 53% of 8409 ORDs. However, in 2018-2020, coimplication rates in 2926 ORDs (880 non-ORDs) were 81% (33%) for any benzodiazepine, 30% (74%) for cocaine and 38% (22%) for gabapentin/pregabalin. Coimplication rate in 2018-2020 for any benzodiazepine was lowest at 70% (616/877) for heroin/morphine ORDs; and, by age group, at 66% (160/241) for ORDs aged 55+ years. CONCLUSIONS: Drug testing to inform users, shared intelligence between police and public health for earlier detection of changes in supply and monitoring of prescribed daily-dose of methadone are urgent.

Integration of Certified Child Life Specialists to Decrease in Periprocedural Benzodiazepine Use: A Pilot Study.

INTRODUCTION: Periprocedural anxiety is common in pediatric patients and is characterized by tension, anxiety, irritability, and autonomic activation. Periprocedural anxiety increases during certain events including admission to the preoperative area, separation from caregivers, induction of anesthesia, and IV placement. A study of children aged 2-12 showed that perioperative anxiety in children may be influenced by high parental anxiety and low sociability of the child. While these are nonmodifiable variables in the perioperative setting, there are numerous ways to ameliorate both parental and patient anxiety including the use of certified child life specialists (CCLSs) to aid in child comfort. In this study, our objective was to evaluate the integration of CCLS in our perioperative setting on the rate of benzodiazepine use. METHODS: We used a prospectively maintained database to identify patients undergoing outpatient elective surgical and radiologic procedures from July 2022 to September 2023 and January 2023 to September 2023 respectively. CCLSs were used to work with appropriately aged children in order to decrease the use of benzodiazepines and reduce possible adverse events associated with their use. RESULTS: A total of 2175 pediatric patients were seen by CCLS in same day surgery from July 2022 to September 2023. During this period, midazolam use decreased by an average of 11.4% (range 6.2%-19.3%). An even greater effect was seen in the radiologic group with 73% reduction. No adverse events were reported during this period. CONCLUSIONS: CCLSs working with age-appropriate patients in the periprocedural setting is a useful adjunct in easing anxiety in pediatric patients, reducing the need for periprocedural benzodiazepine administration and the risk of exposure to unintended side effects.

Gestational exposure to benzodiazepines or z-hypnotics and neurodevelopmental disorders in offspring: Systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Benzodiazepine (BDZP) and/or z-hypnotic dispensing during pregnancy has increased globally, as have rates of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to estimate the association between gestational exposure to BDZP and/or z-hypnotics and diagnosis of ASD or ADHD in offspring. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and SCOPUS from inception till December 2023 for relevant English-language articles. Outcomes of interest were risk of ASD and ADHD, two independent primary outcomes, in children exposed anytime during pregnancy to BDZP and/or z-hypnotics versus those unexposed. Secondary outcomes were trimester-wise analyses. Using a random effects model, we pooled the overall and trimester-wise hazard ratios (HRs), with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), separately for risk of ASD and ADHD. RESULTS: We found six eligible retrospective cohort studies and no case-control studies. There was no increased risk of ASD associated with anytime gestational BDZP and/or z-hypnotic exposure (primary outcome, HR, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.81-1.50; 4 studies; n = 3,783,417; 80,270 exposed, 3,703,147 unexposed) nor after first trimester exposure (HR, 1.15; 95% CI, 0.83-1.58; 3 studies; n = 1,539,335; 70,737 exposed, 1,468,598 unexposed) or later trimester exposures. A very small but significantly increased risk of ADHD was noted with anytime gestational exposure to these drugs (primary outcome, HR, 1.07; 95% CI, 1.03-1.12; 4 studies; n = 2,000,777; 78,912 exposed, 1,921,865 unexposed) and also with (only) second trimester exposure (HR, 1.07; 95% CI, 1.03-1.12; 3 studies; n = 1,539,281; 33,355 exposed, 1,505,926 unexposed). Findings were consistent in sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSION: Gestational exposure to benzodiazepines or z-hypnotics was not associated with an increased risk of ASD and with only a marginally increased risk of ADHD in offspring. Given the likelihood of confounding by indication and by unmeasured variables in the original studies, our findings should reassure women who need these medications for severe anxiety or insomnia during pregnancy.

Incidence of Adverse Events Using Flumazenil in Patients With Iatrogenic Benzodiazepine Delirium: A Retrospective Study.

BACKGROUND: Flumazenil is a competitive benzodiazepine (BZD) antagonist most used for treating delirium in BZD overdoses. Since its introduction, many have expressed concerns about its safety secondary to the risk of inducing BZD withdrawal and refractory seizures. STUDY QUESTION: What is the incidence of adverse drug events after the administration of flumazenil in patients with suspected iatrogenic BZD delirium? STUDY DESIGN: This is a retrospective cross-sectional study of patients from a single center from 2010 to 2013. Patients experiencing delirium after receiving BZDs in the hospital were included if they had a bedside toxicology consult and were administered flumazenil. Patients were excluded if they were given BZDs for ethanol withdrawal or if they did not have mental status documentation before and after flumazenil administration. Descriptive statistics were calculated. MEASURES AND OUTCOMES: The primary outcome was the incidence of adverse drug events after flumazenil administration. The secondary outcome was the efficacy of flumazenil determined by the patient's mental status. RESULTS: A total of 501 patient records were reviewed, and 206 patients were included in the final analysis. Of those patients, 172 (83.5%) experienced an objective improvement in their mental status within 1 hour after flumazenil administration. A total of 5 patients experienced adverse events (2.4%), 95% confidence interval (0.78, 5.54). Of these, 3 patients experienced minor agitation or restlessness without pharmacologic intervention. Two patients experienced moderate agitation or restlessness that resolved with haloperidol or physostigmine administration. No patients had a reported seizure, 95% confidence interval (0.0, 1.77). CONCLUSIONS: Flumazenil seems to be a safe and effective intervention for the reversal of delirium secondary to iatrogenic BZD administration.

Seizure control and complications in patients switching from clobazam to clonazepam due to drug shortage.

BACKGROUND: Antiseizure medication (ASM) shortages are a global problem that have a negative impact on outcomes such as seizure control in patients with epilepsy (PWE). In the case of clobazam (CLB) shortage, there is no study regarding the management strategy. This study aims to investigate the alteration in seizure frequency and the occurrence of side effects in PWE undergoing an abrupt switch from clobazam (CLB) to clonazepam (CLZ), during CLB shortage. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A retrospective study was conducted from electronic health records at our neurology outpatient clinic from January to July 2022. Change in seizure frequency and percentage of CLZ-associated side effects were determined as primary and secondary outcomes, respectively. Potential drug-drug interactions (Level C and above) were evaluated by using Lexicomp Drug Interaction Checker. RESULTS: The analysis included a total of 29 adult patients (15F, median age: 29). The switching ratio was 10 mg CLB for every 1 mg CLZ (10:1). Seizure frequency was higher during the CLZ period compared to the CLB period (p < 0.05), but no status epilepticus cases were observed. All patients exhibited potential drug-drug interactions, leading to reduced CLZ levels in 12 cases. A total of 36 CLZ-associated side effects were identified, with fatigue (19.4 %), drowsiness (16.6 %), and somnolence (13.8 %) being the most prevalent. A positive and strong correlation was found between CLZ dose and the number of side effects (r: 0.556; p: 0.002). CONCLUSION: The abrupt switch from CLB to CLZ was observed to increase seizure frequency without leading to status epilepticus in PWE. CLZ-associated side effects were found to be tolerable despite the abrupt switch. Future studies may explore the effect of alternative switching ratios.

Remimazolam versus propofol for sedation in gastrointestinal endoscopy and colonoscopy within elderly patients: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

PURPOSE: Propofol has become the sedative of choice for endoscopy and colonoscopy. However, it has shown associations with various adverse effects, specifically in the geriatric population. In contrast, remimazolam is a novel benzodiazepine, demonstrating a superior clinical safety profile. Hence, this systematic review and meta-analysis aims to clarify the efficacy and safety of remimazolam versus propofol in elderly patients (≥ 60 years) undergoing gastrointestinal endoscopic and colonoscopy procedures. METHODS: Electronic databases including PubMed, Cochrane Library, ScienceDirect, and Google Scholar were explored from inception till January 7, 2024. The Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool for Randomized Controlled Trials (RoB-2) was utilized to evaluate the quality of each included study reported in this meta-analysis. RESULTS: Seven randomized control trials were included, resulting in the pooling of 1,466 patients (remimazolam: 731 patients; propofol: 735 patients). Propofol demonstrated a significantly lower time to loss of consciousness (P < 0.00001, 4 studies, 784 patients) and a greater sedation success after first dose (P = 0.05, 5 studies, 1,271 patients). Remimazolam reported a significantly lower risk of bradycardia (P = 0.02, 5 studies, 1,323 patients), hypoxemia (P < 0.00001, 6 studies, 1,389 patients), and pain on injection site (P < 0.00001, 5 studies, 1,184 patients). No statistically significant differences in sedation time, number of supplemental doses, procedural parameters, and other adverse outcomes were reported. CONCLUSION: As per the results of our analyses, propofol demonstrated comparatively superior efficacy, however, remimazolam demonstrated comparatively superior safety. The debatable evidence generated from this meta-analysis may not currently be powerful enough to advocate for the use of remimazolam in elderly patients undergoing gastrointestinal procedures; hence, further comprehensive studies are necessary in order to arrive at a robust conclusion.

Alcohol and substance use in older adults with treatment-resistant depression.

INTRODUCTION: Alcohol and substance use are increasing in older adults, many of whom have depression, and treatment in this context may be more hazardous. We assessed alcohol and other substance use patterns in older adults with treatment-resistant depression (TRD). We examined patient characteristics associated with higher alcohol consumption and examined the moderating effect of alcohol on the association between clinical variables and falls during antidepressant treatment. METHODS: This secondary and exploratory analysis used baseline clinical data and data on falls during treatment from a large randomized antidepressant trial in older adults with TRD (the OPTIMUM trial). Multivariable ordinal logistic regression was used to identify variables associated with higher alcohol use. An interaction model was used to evaluate the moderating effect of alcohol on falls during treatment. RESULTS: Of 687 participants, 51% acknowledged using alcohol: 10% were hazardous drinkers (AUDIT-10 score ≥5) and 41% were low-risk drinkers (score 1-4). Benzodiazepine use was seen in 24% of all participants and in 21% of drinkers. Use of other substances (mostly cannabis) was associated with alcohol consumption: it was seen in 5%, 9%, and 15% of abstainers, low-risk drinkers, and hazardous drinkers, respectively. Unexpectedly, use of other substances predicted increased risk of falls during antidepressant treatment only in abstainers. CONCLUSIONS: One-half of older adults with TRD in this study acknowledged using alcohol. Use of alcohol concurrent with benzodiazepine and other substances was common. Risks-such as falls-of using alcohol and other substances during antidepressant treatment needs further study.

Remimazolam versus propofol for sedation in gastrointestinal endoscopic procedures: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Propofol has a favourable efficacy profile in gastrointestinal endoscopic procedures, however adverse events remain frequent. Emerging evidence supports remimazolam use in gastrointestinal endoscopy. This systematic review and meta-analysis compares remimazolam and propofol, both combined with a short-acting opioid, for sedation of adults in gastrointestinal endoscopy. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane databases for randomised controlled trials comparing efficacy-, safety-, and satisfaction-related outcomes between remimazolam and propofol, both combined with short-acting opioids, for sedation of adults undergoing gastrointestinal endoscopy. We performed sensitivity analyses, subgroup assessments by type of short-acting opioid used and age range, and meta-regression analysis using mean patient age as a covariate. We used R statistical software for statistical analyses. RESULTS: We included 15 trials (4516 subjects). Remimazolam was associated with a significantly lower sedation success rate (risk ratio [RR] 0.991; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.984-0.998; high-quality evidence) and a slightly longer induction time (mean difference [MD] 9 s; 95% CI 4-13; moderate-quality evidence), whereas there was no significant difference between the sedatives in other time-related outcomes. Remimazolam was associated with significantly lower rates of respiratory depression (RR 0.41; 95% CI 0.30-0.56; high-quality evidence), hypotension (RR 0.43; 95% CI 0.35-0.51; moderate-quality evidence), hypotension requiring treatment (RR 0.25; 95% CI 0.12-0.52; high-quality evidence), and bradycardia (RR 0.42; 95% CI 0.30-0.58; high-quality evidence). There was no difference in patient (MD 0.41; 95% CI -0.07 to 0.89; moderate-quality evidence) and endoscopist satisfaction (MD -0.31; 95% CI -0.65 to 0.04; high-quality evidence) between both drugs. CONCLUSIONS: Remimazolam has clinically similar efficacy and greater safety when compared with propofol for sedation in gastrointestinal endoscopies.

Hypotension after general anaesthesia induction using remimazolam or propofol in geriatric patients undergoing sevoflurane anaesthesia with remifentanil: a single-centre, double-blind, randomised controlled trial.

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.

Exposure to Sedation and Analgesia Medications: Short-term Cognitive Outcomes in Pediatric Critical Care Survivors With Acquired Brain Injury.

Background/Objective: Pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) survivors risk significant cognitive morbidity, particularly those with acquired brain injury (ABI) diagnoses. Studies show sedative and analgesic medication may potentiate neurologic injury, but few studies evaluate impact on survivor outcomes. This study aimed to evaluate whether exposures to analgesic and sedative medications are associated with worse neurocognitive outcome. Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted of 91 patients aged 8 to 18 years, undergoing clinical neurocognitive evaluation approximately 1 to 3 months after PICU discharge. Electronic health data was queried for sedative and analgesic medication exposures, including opioids, benzodiazepines, propofol, ketamine, and dexmedetomidine. Doses were converted to class equivalents, evaluated by any exposure and cumulative dose exposure per patient weight. Cognitive outcome was derived from 8 objective cognitive assessments with an emphasis on executive function skills using Principal Components Analysis. Then, linear regression was used to control for baseline cognitive function estimates to calculate a standardized residualized neurocognitive index (rNCI) z-score. Multivariable linear regression evaluated the association between rNCI and medication exposure controlling for covariates. Significance was defined as P < .05. Results: Most (n = 80; 88%) patients received 1 or more study medications. Any exposure and higher cumulative doses of benzodiazepine and ketamine were significantly associated with worse rNCI in bivariate analyses. When controlling for Medicaid, preadmission comorbid conditions, length of stay, delirium, and receipt of other medication classes, receipt of benzodiazepine was associated with significantly worse rNCI (ß-coefficient = -0.48, 95% confidence interval = -0.88, -0.08). Conclusions: Exposure to benzodiazepines was independently associated with worse acute phase cognitive outcome using objective assessments focused on executive function skills when controlling for demographic and illness characteristics. Clinician decisions regarding medication regimens in the PICU may serve as a modifiable factor to improve outcomes. Additional inquiry into associations with long-term cognitive outcome and optimal medication regimens is needed.

Patterns of filled prescriptions and the association with risk of drug-induced death. A population-based nested case-control register study.

PURPOSE: Opioid analgesics (OA) and other pharmaceuticals have been associated with drug-induced deaths. However, there is a lack of knowledge regarding patterns of use of these pharmaceuticals in the population and regarding such associations. We identify and describe subgroups of people with different patterns of filled prescriptions of OA and other relevant pharmaceuticals and examine associations with drug-induced deaths. In addition, we estimate the proportion of drug-induced deaths with a filled OA prescription and OA as cause of death. METHODS: A Norwegian population-based nested case-control register study with cases (drug-induced deaths 2010-2018, N = 2388) and population controls matched for age, gender and year of inclusion (N = 21 465). Patterns of filled prescriptions for opioid analgesics (OA), benzodiazepines and benzodiazepine-related drugs, gabapentinoids, ADHD medication and antidepressants/antipsychotics were explored by k-means cluster analysis. Associations with drug-induced deaths were estimated by conditional logistic regression adjusted for sociodemographic characteristics. Overlap of filled OA prescriptions and OA as cause of death was estimated. RESULTS: Five clusters were identified: 'few prescriptions', 'weak OA', 'ADHD medication', 'sedative/psychiatric morbidity' and 'strong OA'. The 'strong OA' cluster had higher socioeconomic status compared to the other groupings. The risk of drug-induced death was also highest in this cluster (OR = 35.5; CI 25.6-49.3) and, for 68% (CI 64-73) of cases, filled prescriptions for OA was indicated as the underlying cause of death. CONCLUSIONS: The cluster analysis identified a subgroup with filled prescriptions of OA and other pharmaceuticals and a higher socioeconomic status than other subgroups. This subgroup had a high risk of drug-induced death that needs to be addressed.

Prescription Patterns and Predisposing Factors of Benzodiazepine and Z-Hypnotic Use During Pregnancy: A Nationwide Cohort Study.

PURPOSE: The use of benzodiazepines and Z-hypnotics during pregnancy has raised significant concerns in recent years. However, there are limited data that capture the prescription patterns and predisposing factors in use of these drugs, particularly among women who have been long-term users of benzodiazepines and Z-hypnotics before pregnancy. METHODS: This population-based cohort study comprised 2 930 988 pregnancies between 2004 and 2018 in Taiwan. Women who were dispensed benzodiazepines or Z-hypnotics during pregnancy were identified and further stratified into groups based on their status before pregnancy: long-term users (with a supply of more than 180 days within a year), short-term users (with a supply of less than 180 days within a year), and nonusers. Trends in the use of benzodiazepines or Z-hypnotics and concomitant use with antidepressants or opioids were assessed. Logistic regression models were utilized to identify factors associated with use of these drugs during pregnancy, and interrupted time series analyses (ITSA) were employed to evaluate utilization patterns of these drugs across different pregnancy-related periods. RESULTS: The overall prevalence of benzodiazepine and Z-hypnotic use was 3.5% during pregnancy. Among prepregnancy long-term users, an upward trend was observed. The concomitant use of antidepressants or opioids among exposed women increased threefold (from 8.6% to 23.1%) and sixfold (from 0.3% to 1.7%) from 2004 to 2018, respectively. Women with unhealthy lifestyle behaviors, such as alcohol abuse (OR 2.48; 95% CI, 2.02-3.03), drug abuse (OR 10.34; 95% CI, 8.46-12.64), and tobacco use (OR 2.19; 95% CI, 1.96-2.45), as well as those with psychiatric disorders like anxiety (OR 6.99; 95% CI, 6.77-7.22), insomnia (OR 15.99; 95% CI, 15.55-16.45), depression (OR 9.43; 95% CI, 9.07-9.80), and schizophrenia (OR 21.08; 95% CI, 18.76-23.69), and higher healthcare utilization, were more likely to use benzodiazepines or Z-hypnotics during pregnancy. ITSA revealed a sudden decrease in use of benzodiazepines and Z-hypnotics after recognition of pregnancy (level change -0.55 percentage point; 95% CI, -0.59 to -0.51). In contrast, exposures to benzodiazepines and Z-hypnotics increased significantly after delivery (level change 0.12 percentage point; 95% CI, 0.09 to 0.16). CONCLUSIONS: In this cohort study, an increased trend of benzodiazepine and Z-hypnotic use during pregnancy among prepregnancy long-term users, as well as concomitant use with antidepressants or opioids were found. The findings have highlighted the existence of various risk factors associated with the use of these drugs during pregnancy. Utilization patterns varied across different stages of pregnancy, highlighting the need for prescription guidelines and educational services for women using these drugs during pregnancy.

Comparison emergence of sedation, using dexmedetomidine and remimazolam, in spinal anaesthesia - double blinded randomized controlled trial.

Background: Continuous intravenous infusion of remimazolam may be suitable for sedation in patients undergoing regional anaesthesia. However, there have been no studies comparing remimazolam and dexmedetomidine for this purpose. This study compared emergence from sedation between dexmedetomidine and remimazolam following continuous intravenous infusion in patients undergoing spinal anaesthesia. Methods: This double-blinded, randomised controlled trial assessed the sedative effects of dexmedetomidine and remimazolam. Following spinal anaesthesia, patients were sedated using continuous intravenous infusion of either dexmedetomidine (D group) or remimazolam (R group).The D group received dexmedetomidine administered at 6 mL/kg/h (6 µg/kg/h) for 10 minutes, followed by 1 mL/kg/h (1 µg/kg/h). The R group received remimazolam administered at 6 mL/kg/h (6 mg/kg/h) for 10 minutes, followed by 1 mL/kg/h (1 mg/kg/h). Sedation levels were evaluated using the Modified Observer's Assessment of Alertness/Sedation (MOAA/S) scale. The time to reach MOAA/S ≤ 3 from the start of drug infusion and the time to reach MOAA/S = 5 from the end of infusion were recorded. Hemodynamic parameters and respiratory rate were also monitored. Results: The R group reached MOAA/S ≤ 3 significantly faster than the D group during induction of sedation (4 ± 1 minutes and 11 ± 3 minutes, respectively, p < 0.001). The R group also reached MOAA/S = 5 significantly faster than the D group during emergence from sedation (11 ± 3 minutes and 16 ± 5 minutes, respectively, p < 0.001). Both groups maintained stable hemodynamic parameters and respiratory rate without any significant differences, although the mean heart rate was significantly lower in the D group than in the R group after the start of infusion. Conclusion: Remimazolam demonstrated significantly faster induction of and emergence from sedation compared to dexmedetomidine, with no significant differences in haemodynamics or respiratory depression.