Skip to content

Comparison of IONM Between Remimazolam and Propofol

Comparison of Intraoperative Neurophysiological Monitoring According to the Use of Anesthetics During Total Intravenous Anesthesia in Spine Surgery Patients

Status
Completed
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT04968054
Enrollment
66
Registered
2021-07-20
Start date
2021-07-20
Completion date
2023-05-02
Last updated
2023-10-18

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy, Ossification Posterior Longitudinal Ligament

Brief summary

Inhalation anesthetics significantly can delay latency and reduce amplitude of cortical MEPs and SSEPs signals compared to intravenous anesthetics by acting on not only GABA (γ-aminobutyric acid) receptors but also NMDA (N-methyl-D-aspartate) receptors, so total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) have been more preferred for neurophysiological monitoring follow-up during surgery. However, just less than inhalation anesthetics, the decrease of amplitude and the delay of latency also occur according to the dose dependant of propofol. Moreover, it can cause various adverse effects such as delayed recovery after anesthesia or propofol infusion syndrome, consequently, combined methods with other agents or conversion to other relative anesthetics are being made. Remimazolam is a ultra-short-acting benzodiazepine, and unlike conventional benzodiazepine drugs, it is rapidly metabolized in plasma and not accumulates in the body for long periods of infusion or even with high dose administration. Recently, there have been repored that continuous infusion of 0.5-1.5 mg/kg of remimazolam has little effect on the motor evoked potential (MEPs) of cervical spine surgery patients, but this is a case report without the control group; further prospective studies are definitely needed. Therefore, in the case of using propofol or remimazolam for total intravenous anesthesia, we aim to investigate which intravenous anesthetic is more appropriate for intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring by comparing the results of the somatosensory evoked potential (SSEPs) and MEPs according to these anesthetics.

Interventions

DRUGArm I (Propofol)

Propofol group will be inducted and maintained total intravenous anesthesia with propofol 2% and remifentanil under Shinider and Minto target controlled infusion (TCI) model, respevtively.

DRUGArm II (Remimazolam)

Remimazolam group started total intravenous anesthesia with remiamazolam at 6 mg/kg/h at the time of anesthesia induction, and maintained at 0.5-1.5 mg/kg/h.

Sponsors

Gangnam Severance Hospital
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
OTHER
Masking
TRIPLE (Subject, Investigator, Outcomes Assessor)

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
20 Years to 70 Years
Healthy volunteers
Yes

Inclusion criteria

* Adult patients who aged 20-70 years with ASA-PS 1-3, diagnosed of ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament or cervical spondylotic myelopathy, in need of intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring

Exclusion criteria

* Tolerance or hypersensitivity to benzodiazepine or propofol * Dependence or addiction to psychotropic drugs or alcohol * Previous brain-related neurosurgery * Inserted status of pacemaker * Inserted status of intracranial device * Steroids use during surgery * Pregnant women, subjects who lack the ability to make decisions and susceptible to voluntary participation decisions

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Latency of SSEPsAt the 30 minutes after anesthetic induction (before surgical incision)The difference of SSEPs between the two groups (propofol vs. remimazolam) compared with baseline SSEPs

Countries

South Korea

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026