Medicine · 2024
Comparative efficacy and safety of ciprofol, propofol, and propofol and etomidate mixture, and ciprofol and etomidate mixture in patients undergoing painless gastroscopy: A randomized, double-blind controlled clinical trial.
СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеСравнительное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
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.
Liu Yanlong, Qian Yihong, Zhang Lilan, Guo Shanliang, Fan Longcheng, Zhang Mingsheng, Liu Zhongyu
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: To compare the efficacy and safety of ciprofol, propofol, propofol and etomidate mixture or ciprofol and etomidate mixture in patients undergoing painless gastroscopic anesthesia, and to explore the optimal plan to relieve the patient's discomfort.
METHODS: A total of 120 patients scheduled for painless gastroscopy were randomly assigned to 4 groups: propofol (Group P), ciprofol (Group C), propofol-etomidate mixture (Group P-E), and ciprofol-etomidate mixture (Group C-E). The success rate of gastroscopy examination, patient satisfaction, incidence of injection pain, hemodynamic parameters, induction time, procedure time, the consumption of drugs, awakening time, and incidence of adverse events were evaluated.
RESULTS: All patients in the study successfully completed the gastroscopy. The satisfaction of patients in Group C-E was significantly higher than that in Group P (P < .05), but there was no statistical significance in the patient satisfaction among the other groups. Compared with Group P, the incidence of injection pain in Groups C and C-E significantly decreased (P < .05). There were no significant differences in the SBP, diastolic blood pressure, HR, and SpO2 among the 4 groups (P > .05). The awakening time of Group C was significantly longer than that of Groups P and P-E (P < .05), but there was no statistically significant difference in the awakening time of other groups.
CONCLUSION: Ciprofol demonstrated efficacy in inducing sedation or anesthesia during painless gastroscopy that was similar to propofol, while exhibiting a comparable safety profile. Moreover, the combination of propofol and etomidate, as well as the combination of ciprofol and etomidate, were both shown to be equally safe and effective for this clinical application. These findings suggest that ciprofol can be considered as a safe and effective alternative for painless gastroscopy, and the ciprofol-etomidate mixture may be a better choice.
METHODS: A total of 120 patients scheduled for painless gastroscopy were randomly assigned to 4 groups: propofol (Group P), ciprofol (Group C), propofol-etomidate mixture (Group P-E), and ciprofol-etomidate mixture (Group C-E). The success rate of gastroscopy examination, patient satisfaction, incidence of injection pain, hemodynamic parameters, induction time, procedure time, the consumption of drugs, awakening time, and incidence of adverse events were evaluated.
RESULTS: All patients in the study successfully completed the gastroscopy. The satisfaction of patients in Group C-E was significantly higher than that in Group P (P < .05), but there was no statistical significance in the patient satisfaction among the other groups. Compared with Group P, the incidence of injection pain in Groups C and C-E significantly decreased (P < .05). There were no significant differences in the SBP, diastolic blood pressure, HR, and SpO2 among the 4 groups (P > .05). The awakening time of Group C was significantly longer than that of Groups P and P-E (P < .05), but there was no statistically significant difference in the awakening time of other groups.
CONCLUSION: Ciprofol demonstrated efficacy in inducing sedation or anesthesia during painless gastroscopy that was similar to propofol, while exhibiting a comparable safety profile. Moreover, the combination of propofol and etomidate, as well as the combination of ciprofol and etomidate, were both shown to be equally safe and effective for this clinical application. These findings suggest that ciprofol can be considered as a safe and effective alternative for painless gastroscopy, and the ciprofol-etomidate mixture may be a better choice.