• Minerva anestesiologica · Nov 2024

    Meta Analysis Comparative Study

    Ciprofol versus propofol for adult sedation in gastrointestinal endoscopic procedures: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

    • Guilherme H Ortegal, Eduardo C Barbosa, Pedro C Faria, João V Couto, Guilherme C Silva, Márcio H Souza, Lucas N Ferreira, Vitor R Moraes, Maria C Campos, and Luiza A Campos.
    • Department of Medicine, Evangelical University of Goiás, Anápolis, Brazil.
    • Minerva Anestesiol. 2024 Nov 1; 90 (11): 101310211013-1021.

    IntroductionAlthough propofol is widely preferred as a sedative agent in gastrointestinal endoscopy, its use is commonly associated with hemodynamic adverse events. New sedatives, such as ciprofol, are emerging with promising results. Thus, we aimed to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare efficacy-, safety-, and satisfaction-related outcomes between ciprofol and propofol for adult sedation in gastrointestinal endoscopy.Evidence AcquisitionWe systematically searched MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane databases for randomized controlled trials comparing sedation with ciprofol vs. propofol in adult patients undergoing gastrointestinal endoscopy. Risk ratios (RRs) and mean differences (MDs) with their 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) were employed for dichotomous and continuous outcomes, respectively, using a random-effects model. We conducted all statistical analyses using R software (version 4.2.1).Evidence SynthesisWe included six trials (1225 patients). The ciprofol group had a significantly lower risk of respiratory depression (RR 0.47; 95% CI 0.31, 0.71) and injection pain (RR 0.09; 95% CI 0.04, 0.20) compared with the propofol group, while there were no significant differences in other adverse events between both drugs. There were no significant differences between both groups in time-related outcomes, as well as in the probability of procedure success (RR 1.01; 95% CI 0.99, 1.03). Additionally, ciprofol provided a significantly higher patient satisfaction compared with propofol (MD 0.19; 95% CI 0.08, 0.31).ConclusionsThis systematic review and meta-analysis demonstrated similar clinical efficacy and better safety profile of ciprofol compared with propofol for adult sedation in gastrointestinal endoscopies. Furthermore, patient satisfaction scores were higher with ciprofol.

      Pubmed     Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…