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
页数:32
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Efficacy and safety of ciprofol versus propofol for anesthesia induction in adult patients received elective surgeries: a meta-analysis
    Ainiwaer, Dilireba
    Jiang, Wanwei
    BMC ANESTHESIOLOGY, 2024, 24 (01)
  • [22] Safety and efficacy of tetrastarches in surgery and trauma: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials
    Chappell, Daniel
    Linden, Philippe van der
    Ripolles-Melchor, Javier
    James, Michael F. M.
    BRITISH JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIA, 2021, 127 (04) : 556 - 568
  • [23] Efficacy and safety of articaine versus lidocaine for irreversible pulpitis treatment: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials
    Su, Naichuan
    Li, Chunjie
    Wang, Hang
    Shen, Jiefei
    Liu, Wenjia
    Kou, Liang
    AUSTRALIAN ENDODONTIC JOURNAL, 2016, 42 (01) : 4 - 15
  • [24] Outcomes of dexmedetomidine versus propofol sedation in critically ill adults requiring mechanical ventilation: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials
    Heybati, Kiyan
    Zhou, Fangwen
    Ali, Saif
    Deng, Jiawen
    Mohananey, Divyanshu
    Villablanca, Pedro
    Ramakrishna, Harish
    BRITISH JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIA, 2022, 129 (04) : 515 - 526
  • [25] Comments on "Postoperative delirium under general anesthesia by remimazolam versus propofol: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials" - Reply
    Suga, Masafumi
    Yasuhara, Jun
    Watanabe, Atsuyuki
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ANESTHESIA, 2025, 103
  • [26] Hemodynamic Influences of Remimazolam Versus Propofol During the Induction Period of General Anesthesia: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
    Peng, Xilin
    Liu, Congqi
    Zhu, Yihao
    Peng, Ling
    Zhang, Xueguang
    Wei, Wei
    Zhu, Tao
    PAIN PHYSICIAN, 2023, 26 (07) : E761 - E773
  • [27] The safety and efficacy of gabapentinoids in the management of neuropathic pain: a systematic review with meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials
    Meaadi, Jawza
    Obara, Ilona
    Eldabe, Sam
    Nazar, Hamde
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PHARMACY, 2023, 45 (03) : 556 - 565
  • [28] The safety and efficacy of gabapentinoids in the management of neuropathic pain: a systematic review with meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials
    Jawza Meaadi
    Ilona Obara
    Sam Eldabe
    Hamde Nazar
    International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy, 2023, 45 : 556 - 565
  • [29] The efficacy and safety of selenium supplementation versus placebo in the treatment of Graves' orbitopathy: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials
    Sharabati, Israa
    Qafesha, Ruaa M.
    Hindawi, Mahmoud D.
    Amro, Sarah
    Ayesh, Baraa M.
    CLINICAL ENDOCRINOLOGY, 2024, 101 (06) : 669 - 681
  • [30] Safety and efficacy of the combination of esketamine and propofol in procedural sedation/analgesia: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Huang, Xiaoci
    Lin, Fong
    Chen, Qi
    Hu, Xianwen
    MINERVA ANESTESIOLOGICA, 2023, 89 (7-8) : 680 - 689