MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций

DOI 10.1097/js9.0000000000003064

Медицинская библиотека · International journal of surgery (London, England) · 2025

Ciprofol vs propofol for gastrointestinal endoscopy sedation: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Yu Yunfeng, Deng Juan, Yin Yuman, Yang Xinyu, Liao Min, Yu Rong

СтатьяМетаанализСистематический обзорСравнительное исследованиеПеревод в очереди

Аннотация

BACKGROUND

Ciprofol, a propofol derivative, is increasingly used for sedation in China. However, the specific benefits of ciprofol in gastrointestinal endoscopic sedation have not been fully evaluated. This meta-analysis aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of ciprofol with propofol in gastrointestinal endoscopy.

METHODS

Four public databases were searched for the relevant literature to February 1, 2025. Studies were excluded based on predefined criteria, and the characteristics and outcome data of each included study were collected. Subsequently, meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis (TSA) were performed using Review Manager 5.3 and TSA 0.9.5.10 Beta, respectively.

RESULTS

Nine studies involving 1860 participants were included in this study. Compared with propofol, ciprofol significantly reduced rates of hypotension (risk ratio [RR] 0.75, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.63-0.89), respiratory depression (RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.56-0.91), hypoxemia (RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.48-0.87), choking cough (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.57-0.95), and injection pain (RR 0.11, 95% CI 0.06-0.22). Awakening time of ciprofol was slightly prolonged (mean difference 0.81 minutes, 95% CI 0.02-1.61), though not clinically significant. Bradycardia, involuntary movement, dizziness, nausea, and vomiting were comparable between the two groups ( P > 0.05). Moreover, TSA demonstrated that the results of hypotension, hypoxemia, respiratory depression, and injection pain observed in the current sample size were decisive. Regression analysis did not reveal any potential publication bias.

CONCLUSIONS

Ciprofol offers notable advantages over propofol in gastrointestinal endoscopic sedation, including a lower incidence of injection pain, hypotension, respiratory depression, and hypoxemia. A dosage of 0.4 mg/kg of ciprofol may be an effective alternative to propofol, as it further reduces the risk of involuntary movements. However, caution is warranted, as ciprofol may increase the risk of dizziness during procedures lasting 10 minutes or longer.

Для цитирования: Yu Yunfeng, Deng Juan, Yin Yuman, Yang Xinyu, Liao Min, Yu Rong. Ciprofol vs propofol for gastrointestinal endoscopy sedation: a systematic review and meta-analysis.. International journal of surgery (London, England). 2025. DOI: 10.1097/js9.0000000000003064.

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.