MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций

DOI 10.2147/dddt.s522678

Медицинская библиотека · Drug design, development and therapy · 2025

Ciprofol Versus Propofol for Sedation in Gastrointestinal Endoscopy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis in a Chinese Population.

Yang Hongyu, Lai Ping, Qin Xiaoyu, Cui Yiyang, Zhang Xiaojia, Zhang Haiqing, Ding Yichen, Ye Ersheng, Wu Yaping, Ren Bingxu

Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяМетаанализСистематический обзорПеревод в очереди

Аннотация

PURPOSE: Ciprofol (HSK3486) is a novel intravenous anesthetic structurally similar to propofol; however, its advantages over propofol remain unclear. This study aimed to compare the safety, efficacy, and satisfaction outcomes of ciprofol and propofol during gastrointestinal endoscopy.

PATIENTS AND

METHODS

This systematic review incorporated all available comparative trials assessing ciprofol versus propofol for endoscopic sedation following a comprehensive search strategy across eight biomedical databases-Web of Science, Embase, PubMed, and Cochrane Library, along with major Chinese repositories (CNKI, Wanfang, CBM, and VIP)-through September 2023. Evidence synthesis was conducted per PRISMA guidelines, with methodological rigor enhanced through prospective trial registry screening and implementation of GRADE framework for evidence grading.

RESULTS

This systematic review included 45 randomized controlled trials involving 6884 patients who met predefined methodological and clinical eligibility thresholds. Very low to moderate certainty evidence showed that ciprofol induced sedation or anesthesia comparable to that of propofol (relative risk [RR]: 1.00, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.00 to 1.01), with both agents demonstrating similar procedural efficiency. Furthermore, ciprofol was associated with a reduced incidence of complications, including hypotension (RR: 0.60, 95% CI: 0.51 to 0.70), bradycardia (RR: 0.69, 95% CI: 0.56 to 0.85), nausea and vomiting (RR: 0.67, 95% CI: 0.54 to 0.84), hypoxia (RR: 0.38, 95% CI: 0.31 to 0.48), respiratory depression (RR: 0.39, 95% CI: 0.28 to 0.56), apnea (RR: 0.35, 95% CI: 0.23 to 0.53), and injection pain (RR: 0.13, 95% CI: 0.09 to 0.17), while also enhancing patient and anesthesiologist satisfaction.

CONCLUSION

Ciprofol-induced sedation or anesthesia was comparable to propofol, with both drugs demonstrating similar procedural efficiency. However, ciprofol was associated with lower risk of adverse reactions and higher satisfaction among patients and anesthesiologists. Ciprofol may represent a superior sedative option for gastrointestinal endoscopy.

Для цитирования: Yang Hongyu, Lai Ping, Qin Xiaoyu, Cui Yiyang, Zhang Xiaojia, Zhang Haiqing, Ding Yichen, Ye Ersheng, Wu Yaping, Ren Bingxu. Ciprofol Versus Propofol for Sedation in Gastrointestinal Endoscopy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis in a Chinese Population.. Drug design, development and therapy. 2025. DOI: 10.2147/dddt.s522678.

Предметные рубрики MeSH

Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…

История · было → стало

Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.

Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.