Efficacy and safety of ciprofol versus propofol for induction of general anaesthesia or sedation: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

被引:2
作者
Saeed, Abdallah [1 ]
Elewidi, Mariam [1 ]
Nawlo, Ahmad [2 ]
Elzahaby, Amr [1 ]
Khaled, Asmaa [1 ]
Othman, Abdalla [1 ]
Abuelazm, Mohamed [1 ]
Abdelazeem, Basel [3 ]
机构
[1] Tanta Univ, Fac Med, El Bahr St, Tanta, Gharbia, Egypt
[2] Harvard Med Sch, Brigham & Womens Hosp, Div Infect Dis, Boston, MA USA
[3] West Virginia Univ, Dept Cardiol, Morgantown, WV USA
关键词
Ciprofol; general anaesthesia; meta-analysis; pain; propofol; sedation; systematic review; PARALLEL-GROUP; SINGLE-BLIND; MULTICENTER; MAINTENANCE; PHASE-3;
D O I
10.4103/ija.ija_104_24
中图分类号
R614 [麻醉学];
学科分类号
100217 ;
摘要
Background and Aims: Propofol has been used in medical practice as an anaesthetic drug for producing and sustaining general anaesthesia due to its advantages. However, it also has drawbacks, including injection-related discomfort. Recently, ciprofol has emerged as a promising anaesthetic drug that may overcome many drawbacks associated with propofol. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we assess the efficacy and safety of ciprofol compared to propofol in different anaesthesia procedures. Methods: The study protocol was registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (ID: CRD42023458170). Central, PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus and WOS were searched for English literature until 26 February 2024. Meta-analysis was performed using RevMan. The risk of bias was assessed using the RoB 2.0 tool. Results were reported as risk ratios (RRs), mean differences (MDs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Results: Nineteen randomised controlled trials were included in our analysis, with 2841 participants. There was no difference between ciprofol and propofol in the success rate of endoscopy (RR: 1.01, 95% CI: 0.99, 1.02; P = 0.44), while ciprofol showed a significant increase in the success rate of general anaesthesia/sedation (RR: 1.01, 95% CI: 1.00, 1.02; P = 0.04). Ciprofol showed significantly lower pain on injection (RR: 0.14, 95% CI: 0.09, 0.22; P < 0.001), lower adverse events (RR: 0.80, 95% CI: 0.69, 0.92; P = 0.002) and higher patient satisfaction (standardised mean difference (SMD): 0.36, 95% CI: 0.24, 0.48; P < 0.001). Conclusion: Ciprofol exhibited a comparable efficacy to propofol in inducing general anaesthesia and sedation with fewer adverse events, less pain on injection and higher patient satisfaction. These collective findings may suggest that ciprofol can be used as an alternative drug to ensure effective general anaesthesia/sedation induction in the future.
引用
收藏
页码:776 / 794
页数:32
相关论文
共 37 条
[1]  
Abdelfattah AM., 2023, preprint, P1
[2]   Efficacy and safety of Ciprofol compared with Propofol during general anesthesia induction: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCT) [J].
Akhtar, Syed Muhammad Muneeb ;
Fareed, Areeba ;
Ali, Mirha ;
Khan, Muhammad Sohaib ;
Ali, Abraish ;
Mumtaz, Munazza ;
Kirchoff, Robert ;
Asghar, Muhammad Sohaib .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ANESTHESIA, 2024, 94
[3]  
[Anonymous], 2022, JASP (Version 0.16.3)Computer software
[4]   GABA(A) receptor-targeted drug development -New perspectives in perioperative anesthesia [J].
Antkowiak, Bernd ;
Rammes, Gerhard .
EXPERT OPINION ON DRUG DISCOVERY, 2019, 14 (07) :683-699
[5]   Pain and dyspnea control during awake fiberoptic bronchoscopy in critically ill patients: safety and efficacy of remifentanil target-controlled infusion [J].
Caron, Margot ;
Parrot, Antoine ;
Elabbadi, Alexandre ;
Dupeyrat, Sophie ;
Turpin, Matthieu ;
Baury, Thomas ;
Rozencwajg, Sacha ;
Blayau, Clarisse ;
Fulgencio, Jean-Pierre ;
Gibelin, Aude ;
Blanchard, Pierre-Yves ;
Rodriguez, Severine ;
Daigne, Daisy ;
Allain, Marie-Cecile ;
Fartoukh, Muriel ;
Pham, Tai .
ANNALS OF INTENSIVE CARE, 2021, 11 (01)
[6]   The efficacy and safety of ciprofol use for the induction of general anesthesia in patients undergoing gynecological surgery: a prospective randomized controlled study [J].
Chen, Ben-zhen ;
Yin, Xin-yu ;
Jiang, Li-hua ;
Liu, Jin-hui ;
Shi, Yan-yan ;
Yuan, Bi-ying .
BMC ANESTHESIOLOGY, 2022, 22 (01)
[7]   The Effect of Different Doses of Ciprofol in Patients with Painless Gastrointestinal Endoscopy [J].
Chen, Lini ;
Xie, Yongguo ;
Du, Xueke ;
Qin, Weiyong ;
Huang, Lifu ;
Dai, Junmin ;
Qin, Ke ;
Huang, Jianfeng .
DRUG DESIGN DEVELOPMENT AND THERAPY, 2023, 17 :1733-1740
[8]   Comparison and Clinical Value of Ciprofol and Propofol in Intraoperative Adverse Reactions, Operation, Resuscitation, and Satisfaction of Patients under Painless Gastroenteroscopy Anesthesia [J].
Chen, Xingqu ;
Guo, Ping ;
Yang, Li ;
Liu, Zhuoling ;
Yu, Deshui .
CONTRAST MEDIA & MOLECULAR IMAGING, 2022, 2022
[9]   Comparison of the effects of etomidate, propofol, and thiopental on respiratory resistance after tracheal intubation [J].
Eames, WO ;
Rooke, GA ;
Wu, RSC ;
Bishop, MJ .
ANESTHESIOLOGY, 1996, 84 (06) :1307-1311
[10]   Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test [J].
Egger, M ;
Smith, GD ;
Schneider, M ;
Minder, C .
BMJ-BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 1997, 315 (7109) :629-634