Background: Although total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) with propofol and remifentanil is frequently used to optimize intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring (IONM), the exact effect of remimazolam on IONM remains unknown. Here, we compared the effects of propofol and remimazolam along with remifentanil on IONM during TIVA. Methods: In this prospective, double-blind, randomized controlled trial, 64 patients requiring IONM during cervical spine surgery were administered either propofol (Group P) or remimazolam (Group R). The preoperative latencies of the somatosensory-evoked potentials (SEP; N20 for the median nerve and P37 for the tibial nerve) were measured. SEP latencies and amplitudes and motor-evoked potential (MEP) amplitudes were measured 30 min after anesthetic induction (T1), 30 min after surgical incision (T2), after laminectomy or discectomy (T3), immediately after plate insertion or pedicle screw fixation (T4), and before surgical wound closure (T5). The primary outcome was the between-group difference in the N20 latency changes measured at T1 and preoperatively. Results: The change in SEP latencies including N20 and P37 at T1 compared with preoperative time was not significantly different between Groups P and R. Except for the amplitude of the right abductor brevis, there was no significant group-by-time interaction effect for intraoperative MEP amplitudes or SEP latencies and amplitudes. Conclusions TIVA with remimazolam and remifentanil for cervical spine surgery yielded stable IONM, comparable to those observed with conventional TIVA with propofol and remifentanil. Further clinical trials are needed in other surgical contexts and with more diverse patient populations to determine the effects of remimazolam on IONM.

Background: Although total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) with propofol and remifentanil is frequently used to optimize intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring (IONM), the exact effect of remimazolam on IONM remains unknown. Here, we compared the effects of propofol and remimazolam along with remifentanil on IONM during TIVA. Methods: In this prospective, double-blind, randomized controlled trial, 64 patients requiring IONM during cervical spine surgery were administered either propofol (Group P) or remimazolam (Group R). The preoperative latencies of the somatosensory-evoked potentials (SEP; N20 for the median nerve and P37 for the tibial nerve) were measured. SEP latencies and amplitudes and motor-evoked potential (MEP) amplitudes were measured 30 min after anesthetic induction (T1), 30 min after surgical incision (T2), after laminectomy or discectomy (T3), immediately after plate insertion or pedicle screw fixation (T4), and before surgical wound closure (T5). The primary outcome was the between-group difference in the N20 latency changes measured at T1 and preoperatively. Results: The change in SEP latencies including N20 and P37 at T1 compared with preoperative time was not significantly different between Groups P and R. Except for the amplitude of the right abductor brevis, there was no significant group-by-time interaction effect for intraoperative MEP amplitudes or SEP latencies and amplitudes. Conclusions TIVA with remimazolam and remifentanil for cervical spine surgery yielded stable IONM, comparable to those observed with conventional TIVA with propofol and remifentanil. Further clinical trials are needed in other surgical contexts and with more diverse patient populations to determine the effects of remimazolam on IONM.

Background: The Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocol has garnered global attention for optimizing perioperative care. It holds significant potential for orthopedic hip surgery, especially in elderly patients requiring rehabilitation. However, largescale studies or meta-analyses specific to this field remain limited. Methods: A systematic search was performed using Medline (PubMed), Embase, and Cochrane Library databases for studies assessing the effects of the ERAS protocol in hip surgery up to August 13, 2024. A double-arm meta-analysis was designed to compare perioperative outcomes, including postoperative pain scores, transfusion rates, medical and surgical complications, and length of hospital stay, between ERAS and control groups. Results: Twenty-one studies were systematically reviewed, and 13 were included in the pooled analysis, comprising 1,004 patients in the ERAS group and 1,159 in the control group. Meta-analysis results demonstrated that the ERAS protocol significantly improved postoperative pain management, reduced blood transfusion requirements, decreased medical complications, and shortened hospital stays compared to standard protocols. Conclusions This meta-analysis supports the hypothesis that the ERAS protocol enhances perioperative outcomes in orthopedic hip surgery.

Background: Although total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) with propofol and remifentanil is frequently used to optimize intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring (IONM), the exact effect of remimazolam on IONM remains unknown. Here, we compared the effects of propofol and remimazolam along with remifentanil on IONM during TIVA. Methods: In this prospective, double-blind, randomized controlled trial, 64 patients requiring IONM during cervical spine surgery were administered either propofol (Group P) or remimazolam (Group R). The preoperative latencies of the somatosensory-evoked potentials (SEP; N20 for the median nerve and P37 for the tibial nerve) were measured. SEP latencies and amplitudes and motor-evoked potential (MEP) amplitudes were measured 30 min after anesthetic induction (T1), 30 min after surgical incision (T2), after laminectomy or discectomy (T3), immediately after plate insertion or pedicle screw fixation (T4), and before surgical wound closure (T5). The primary outcome was the between-group difference in the N20 latency changes measured at T1 and preoperatively. Results: The change in SEP latencies including N20 and P37 at T1 compared with preoperative time was not significantly different between Groups P and R. Except for the amplitude of the right abductor brevis, there was no significant group-by-time interaction effect for intraoperative MEP amplitudes or SEP latencies and amplitudes. Conclusions TIVA with remimazolam and remifentanil for cervical spine surgery yielded stable IONM, comparable to those observed with conventional TIVA with propofol and remifentanil. Further clinical trials are needed in other surgical contexts and with more diverse patient populations to determine the effects of remimazolam on IONM.

Purpose: To investigate the role of combined periprostatic nerve block (PNB) and intrarectal local anesthesia with heated lidocaine gel (ILAHL) in reducing pain during transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided prostate biopsy, compared with PNB alone. Materials and Methods: We performed a prospective randomized trial with 140 participants who underwent systematic TRUS-guid ed, 12-core prostate biopsy from July 2021 to June 2022. These participants were divided into two groups. Before prostate biopsy, group 1 (n=70) received PNB and group 2 (n=70) received PNB combined intrarectal local anesthesia with 20 mL of heated (40ºC) 2% lidocaine gel. The primary outcome was pain score on a 0–10 visual analogue scale (VAS) at four time points (VAS A: during local anesthesia procedure, VAS B: during probe insertion, VAS C: during biopsy procedure, VAS D: 30 minutes after biopsy). The secondary outcome included adverse events during and after the procedure. Results: Mean pain scores were significantly lower in group 2 than in group 1 at VAS A (2.53 vs. 1.60, p=0.001) and VAS B (2.47 vs.1.49, p<0.001). The mean VAS C pain score in group 2 was significantly less than in group 1 (3.07 vs. 2.20, p=0.001), while there was no significant difference in the mean VAS D pain score between two groups (1.06 vs. 0.89, p=0.318). There were no significant differences in the occurrence of complications in both groups. Conclusions The combination of PNB and ILAHL provides more effective pain control than PNB alone without increase of complication rates in patients undergoing TRUS-guided prostate biopsy.

Background: The Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocol has garnered global attention for optimizing perioperative care. It holds significant potential for orthopedic hip surgery, especially in elderly patients requiring rehabilitation. However, largescale studies or meta-analyses specific to this field remain limited. Methods: A systematic search was performed using Medline (PubMed), Embase, and Cochrane Library databases for studies assessing the effects of the ERAS protocol in hip surgery up to August 13, 2024. A double-arm meta-analysis was designed to compare perioperative outcomes, including postoperative pain scores, transfusion rates, medical and surgical complications, and length of hospital stay, between ERAS and control groups. Results: Twenty-one studies were systematically reviewed, and 13 were included in the pooled analysis, comprising 1,004 patients in the ERAS group and 1,159 in the control group. Meta-analysis results demonstrated that the ERAS protocol significantly improved postoperative pain management, reduced blood transfusion requirements, decreased medical complications, and shortened hospital stays compared to standard protocols. Conclusions This meta-analysis supports the hypothesis that the ERAS protocol enhances perioperative outcomes in orthopedic hip surgery.

Background: The Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocol has garnered global attention for optimizing perioperative care. It holds significant potential for orthopedic hip surgery, especially in elderly patients requiring rehabilitation. However, largescale studies or meta-analyses specific to this field remain limited. Methods: A systematic search was performed using Medline (PubMed), Embase, and Cochrane Library databases for studies assessing the effects of the ERAS protocol in hip surgery up to August 13, 2024. A double-arm meta-analysis was designed to compare perioperative outcomes, including postoperative pain scores, transfusion rates, medical and surgical complications, and length of hospital stay, between ERAS and control groups. Results: Twenty-one studies were systematically reviewed, and 13 were included in the pooled analysis, comprising 1,004 patients in the ERAS group and 1,159 in the control group. Meta-analysis results demonstrated that the ERAS protocol significantly improved postoperative pain management, reduced blood transfusion requirements, decreased medical complications, and shortened hospital stays compared to standard protocols. Conclusions This meta-analysis supports the hypothesis that the ERAS protocol enhances perioperative outcomes in orthopedic hip surgery.

Background: The Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocol has garnered global attention for optimizing perioperative care. It holds significant potential for orthopedic hip surgery, especially in elderly patients requiring rehabilitation. However, largescale studies or meta-analyses specific to this field remain limited. Methods: A systematic search was performed using Medline (PubMed), Embase, and Cochrane Library databases for studies assessing the effects of the ERAS protocol in hip surgery up to August 13, 2024. A double-arm meta-analysis was designed to compare perioperative outcomes, including postoperative pain scores, transfusion rates, medical and surgical complications, and length of hospital stay, between ERAS and control groups. Results: Twenty-one studies were systematically reviewed, and 13 were included in the pooled analysis, comprising 1,004 patients in the ERAS group and 1,159 in the control group. Meta-analysis results demonstrated that the ERAS protocol significantly improved postoperative pain management, reduced blood transfusion requirements, decreased medical complications, and shortened hospital stays compared to standard protocols. Conclusions This meta-analysis supports the hypothesis that the ERAS protocol enhances perioperative outcomes in orthopedic hip surgery.

Background: Although total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) with propofol and remifentanil is frequently used to optimize intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring (IONM), the exact effect of remimazolam on IONM remains unknown. Here, we compared the effects of propofol and remimazolam along with remifentanil on IONM during TIVA. Methods: In this prospective, double-blind, randomized controlled trial, 64 patients requiring IONM during cervical spine surgery were administered either propofol (Group P) or remimazolam (Group R). The preoperative latencies of the somatosensory-evoked potentials (SEP; N20 for the median nerve and P37 for the tibial nerve) were measured. SEP latencies and amplitudes and motor-evoked potential (MEP) amplitudes were measured 30 min after anesthetic induction (T1), 30 min after surgical incision (T2), after laminectomy or discectomy (T3), immediately after plate insertion or pedicle screw fixation (T4), and before surgical wound closure (T5). The primary outcome was the between-group difference in the N20 latency changes measured at T1 and preoperatively. Results: The change in SEP latencies including N20 and P37 at T1 compared with preoperative time was not significantly different between Groups P and R. Except for the amplitude of the right abductor brevis, there was no significant group-by-time interaction effect for intraoperative MEP amplitudes or SEP latencies and amplitudes. Conclusions TIVA with remimazolam and remifentanil for cervical spine surgery yielded stable IONM, comparable to those observed with conventional TIVA with propofol and remifentanil. Further clinical trials are needed in other surgical contexts and with more diverse patient populations to determine the effects of remimazolam on IONM.

Background: It is well known that a large number of patients with diabetes also have dyslipidemia, which significantly increases the risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD). This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of combination drugs consisting of metformin and atorvastatin, widely used as therapeutic agents for diabetes and dyslipidemia. Methods: This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group and phase III multicenter study included adults with glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) levels >7.0% and <10.0%, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) >100 and <250 mg/dL. One hundred eighty-five eligible subjects were randomized to the combination group (metformin+atorvastatin), metformin group (metformin+atorvastatin placebo), and atorvastatin group (atorvastatin+metformin placebo). The primary efficacy endpoints were the percent changes in HbA1c and LDL-C levels from baseline at the end of the treatment. Results: After 16 weeks of treatment compared to baseline, HbA1c showed a significant difference of 0.94% compared to the atorvastatin group in the combination group (0.35% vs. −0.58%, respectively; P<0.0001), whereas the proportion of patients with increased HbA1c was also 62% and 15%, respectively, showing a significant difference (P<0.001). The combination group also showed a significant decrease in LDL-C levels compared to the metformin group (−55.20% vs. −7.69%, P<0.001) without previously unknown adverse drug events. Conclusion The addition of atorvastatin to metformin improved HbA1c and LDL-C levels to a significant extent compared to metformin or atorvastatin alone in diabetes and dyslipidemia patients. This study also suggested metformin’s preventive effect on the glucose-elevating potential of atorvastatin in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and dyslipidemia, insufficiently controlled with exercise and diet. Metformin and atorvastatin combination might be an effective treatment in reducing the CVD risk in patients with both diabetes and dyslipidemia because of its lowering effect on LDL-C and glucose.