Key result
Remimazolam shows no difference versus propofol for 30-day MACE in older hip fracture surgery patients.
Why the study?
Whether remimazolam's hemodynamic advantages translate into reduced postoperative major adverse cardiovascular events compared with propofol in older adults undergoing hip fracture surgery remains uncertain.
Does total intravenous anesthesia with remimazolam reduce 30-day in-hospital MACE compared to propofol in older adults undergoing hip fracture surgery?
Cohort (n=14,027)
Yes
Does total intravenous anesthesia with remimazolam reduce 30-day in-hospital MACE compared to propofol in older adults undergoing hip fracture surgery?
Remimazolam does not significantly reduce short-term cardiovascular outcomes or mortality compared to propofol in older adults undergoing hip fracture surgery.
Remimazolam appears comparable to propofol for MACE risk; should not yet alter practice and leaves open confirmation in RCTs.
BACKGROUND: Remimazolam, a novel short-acting benzodiazepine, is associated with more stable intraoperative hemodynamics than propofol. Older adults undergoing hip fracture surgery represent a vulnerable population at elevated risk for perioperative cardiovascular complications. However, whether remimazolam's hemodynamic advantages translate into reduced major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) in this population remains uncertain, particularly given recent randomized trials questioning the relationship between intraoperative blood pressure management and postoperative outcomes. We aimed to compare 30-day in-hospital MACE and all-cause in-hospital mortality after general anesthesia with remimazolam versus propofol. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study using a target trial emulation framework with data from a multicenter Japanese hospital administrative database (September 1, 2020, to September 30, 2024). Eligible participants were adults aged 65 to 99 years undergoing hip fracture surgery who received total intravenous anesthesia with remimazolam or propofol on the day of surgery. The primary outcome was 30-day in-hospital MACE, and the secondary outcome was 30-day all-cause in-hospital mortality. We estimated the average treatment effect among patients who received remimazolam compared with propofol using propensity score weighting. Risks and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were obtained from weighted cumulative incidence functions with bootstrap resampling. RESULTS: Of 132,422 patients identified, 14,027 were included in the analysis. The primary outcome occurred in 2.86% of the remimazolam group and 2.74% of the propofol group, with no meaningful difference between groups (risk ratio, 1.04 [95% CI, 0.80-1.38]; P = 0.76; risk difference, 0.12% [95% CI, -0.64% to 0.90%]). Thirty-day all-cause in-hospital mortality also did not differ materially between groups (risk ratio, 1.03 [95% CI, 0.61-1.80]; P = 0.91). These findings remained consistent across sensitivity analyses and in subgroup analyses stratified by baseline cardiovascular risk. CONCLUSIONS: Among older adults undergoing hip fracture surgery, 30-day in-hospital MACE and mortality did not differ substantially between remimazolam and propofol, suggesting that anesthetic selection between these agents may not substantially affect short-term cardiovascular outcomes in this high-risk population.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Okazawa et al. (2026) conducted a cohort in Hip fracture surgery (n=14,027). Remimazolam vs. Propofol was evaluated on 30-day in-hospital MACE (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.80-1.38, p=0.76). Remimazolam did not significantly differ from propofol for 30-day in-hospital MACE in older adults undergoing hip fracture surgery (2.86% vs 2.74%; RR 1.04; 95% CI 0.80-1.38; P=0.76).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: