Efficacy and safety of ciprofol versus propofol for induction and maintenance of general anesthesia: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Author:

Hudaib MuhammadORCID,Malik HuraisORCID,Zakir Syeda JaveriaORCID,Rabbani SamraORCID,Gnanendran Dhanushan,Syed Abdul Rehman ShahORCID,Suri Noor FatimaORCID,Khan JaveriaORCID,Iqbal ArhamORCID,Hussain NowalORCID,Abdullah MuhammadORCID,Kumar Satesh,Khatri Mahima,Varrassi GiustinoORCID

Abstract

Abstract Background Propofol has been the gold standard for anesthesia induction and maintenance due to its rapid onset and favorable pharmacokinetic properties. However, the search for alternative agents with improved safety and efficacy has led to the emergence of ciprofol (HSK3486), a structural analog of propofol. This systematic review and meta-analysis aim to comprehensively assess the safety and efficacy of ciprofol compared to propofol for anesthesia induction and maintenance in adult patients undergoing surgical procedures. Methods This study included only double-arm RCTs in which participants were aged eighteen or older undergoing surgery. For the statistical analysis of the extracted data, we employed RevMan 5.4.1. Results Ciprofol demonstrated a promising trend of higher anesthesiologists’ satisfaction during the induction phase (MD 0.14, 95%, CI − 0.28 to 0.56, p = 0.51), whereas Propofol was favored during maintenance. Propofol also exhibited advantages with a shorter time to successful anesthesia induction (MD 0.08 min, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.15, p = 0.04), and quicker attainment of full alertness (MD 0.11 min, 95% CI − 1.29 to 1.52, p = 0.87), suggesting its efficiency in clinical practice. Importantly, there were no significant disparities in the success rate of anesthesia. Conclusion Both ciprofol and propofol demonstrate comparable efficacy and safety for anesthesia induction and maintenance in adult patients undergoing surgery. While propofol provides a faster onset of induction, ciprofol exhibits advantages in terms of pain management. Clinicians should consider these findings when selecting anesthetic agents, and tailoring choices to individual patient needs and clinical scenarios.

Publisher

Springer Science and Business Media LLC

Cited by 3 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3