用于镇静和全身麻醉的异丙酚与丙泊酚的比较:随机对照试验的系统回顾。

Jessica M Currò, Cristina Santonocito, Federica Merola, Simone Messina, Marco Sanfilippo, Serena Brancati, Filippo Drago, Filippo Sanfilippo
{"title":"用于镇静和全身麻醉的异丙酚与丙泊酚的比较:随机对照试验的系统回顾。","authors":"Jessica M Currò, Cristina Santonocito, Federica Merola, Simone Messina, Marco Sanfilippo, Serena Brancati, Filippo Drago, Filippo Sanfilippo","doi":"10.1186/s44158-024-00159-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Propofol is the most commonly used hypnotic agent used during sedation and general anesthesia (GA) practice, offering faster recovery compared to benzodiazepines. However, cardiovascular impact of propofol and pain at injection are commonly encountered side effects. Ciprofol is a novel disubstituted phenol derivative, and there is growing evidence regarding its clinical use.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a systematic literature search (updated on 23 July 2023) to evaluate safety and efficacy of ciprofol in comparison to propofol in patients undergoing procedures under sedation or GA. We focused on randomized controlled trials (RCTs) only, extrapolating data on onset and offset, and on the side effects and the pain at injection.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The search revealed 14 RCTs, all conducted in China. Eight RCTs studied patients undergoing sedation, and six focused on GA. Bolus of ciprofol for sedation or induction of GA varied from 0.2 to 0.5 mg/kg. In four studies using ciprofol for maintenance of GA, it was 0.8-2.4 mg/kg/h. Ciprofol pharmacokinetics seemed characterized by slower onset and offset as compared to propofol. Pain during injection was less frequent in the ciprofol group in all the 13 studies reporting it. Eight studies reported \"adverse events\" as a pooled outcome, and in five cases, the incidence was higher in the propofol group, not different in the remaining ones. Occurrence of hypotension was the most commonly investigated side effects, and it seemed less frequent with ciprofol.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Ciprofol for sedation or GA may be safer than propofol, though its pharmacokinetics may be less advantageous.</p>","PeriodicalId":73597,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Anesthesia, Analgesia and Critical Care (Online)","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11000282/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Ciprofol as compared to propofol for sedation and general anesthesia: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials.\",\"authors\":\"Jessica M Currò, Cristina Santonocito, Federica Merola, Simone Messina, Marco Sanfilippo, Serena Brancati, Filippo Drago, Filippo Sanfilippo\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s44158-024-00159-1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Propofol is the most commonly used hypnotic agent used during sedation and general anesthesia (GA) practice, offering faster recovery compared to benzodiazepines. However, cardiovascular impact of propofol and pain at injection are commonly encountered side effects. Ciprofol is a novel disubstituted phenol derivative, and there is growing evidence regarding its clinical use.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a systematic literature search (updated on 23 July 2023) to evaluate safety and efficacy of ciprofol in comparison to propofol in patients undergoing procedures under sedation or GA. We focused on randomized controlled trials (RCTs) only, extrapolating data on onset and offset, and on the side effects and the pain at injection.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The search revealed 14 RCTs, all conducted in China. Eight RCTs studied patients undergoing sedation, and six focused on GA. Bolus of ciprofol for sedation or induction of GA varied from 0.2 to 0.5 mg/kg. In four studies using ciprofol for maintenance of GA, it was 0.8-2.4 mg/kg/h. Ciprofol pharmacokinetics seemed characterized by slower onset and offset as compared to propofol. Pain during injection was less frequent in the ciprofol group in all the 13 studies reporting it. Eight studies reported \\\"adverse events\\\" as a pooled outcome, and in five cases, the incidence was higher in the propofol group, not different in the remaining ones. Occurrence of hypotension was the most commonly investigated side effects, and it seemed less frequent with ciprofol.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Ciprofol for sedation or GA may be safer than propofol, though its pharmacokinetics may be less advantageous.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":73597,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Anesthesia, Analgesia and Critical Care (Online)\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11000282/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Anesthesia, Analgesia and Critical Care (Online)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s44158-024-00159-1\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Anesthesia, Analgesia and Critical Care (Online)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s44158-024-00159-1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:异丙酚是镇静和全身麻醉(GA)实践中最常用的催眠药,与苯二氮卓类药物相比,它能提供更快的恢复速度。然而,异丙酚对心血管的影响和注射时的疼痛是常见的副作用。异丙酚是一种新型二取代苯酚衍生物,有关其临床应用的证据越来越多:我们进行了一次系统性文献检索(更新日期:2023 年 7 月 23 日),以评估在镇静或 GA 下接受手术的患者中,与异丙酚相比,环丙酚的安全性和有效性。我们只关注了随机对照试验(RCT),推断了关于起效和失效、副作用和注射疼痛的数据:搜索结果显示有 14 项随机对照试验,均在中国进行。其中 8 项研究对接受镇静治疗的患者进行了研究,6 项研究的重点是 GA。用于镇静或诱导 GA 的环丙酚剂量从 0.2 毫克/千克到 0.5 毫克/千克不等。在四项使用环丙酚维持 GA 的研究中,环丙酚的剂量为 0.8-2.4 mg/kg/h。与异丙酚相比,环丙酚的药代动力学特点似乎是起效和失效较慢。在所有 13 项报告了注射疼痛的研究中,环丙酚组的疼痛发生率较低。有 8 项研究将 "不良事件 "作为汇总结果进行了报告,其中 5 项研究中丙泊酚组的不良事件发生率较高,其余研究中丙泊酚组的不良事件发生率并无差异。低血压是最常见的副作用,而使用异丙酚的发生率似乎较低:结论:用于镇静或GA的异丙酚可能比丙泊酚更安全,尽管其药代动力学可能不那么有利。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Ciprofol as compared to propofol for sedation and general anesthesia: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials.

Background: Propofol is the most commonly used hypnotic agent used during sedation and general anesthesia (GA) practice, offering faster recovery compared to benzodiazepines. However, cardiovascular impact of propofol and pain at injection are commonly encountered side effects. Ciprofol is a novel disubstituted phenol derivative, and there is growing evidence regarding its clinical use.

Methods: We conducted a systematic literature search (updated on 23 July 2023) to evaluate safety and efficacy of ciprofol in comparison to propofol in patients undergoing procedures under sedation or GA. We focused on randomized controlled trials (RCTs) only, extrapolating data on onset and offset, and on the side effects and the pain at injection.

Results: The search revealed 14 RCTs, all conducted in China. Eight RCTs studied patients undergoing sedation, and six focused on GA. Bolus of ciprofol for sedation or induction of GA varied from 0.2 to 0.5 mg/kg. In four studies using ciprofol for maintenance of GA, it was 0.8-2.4 mg/kg/h. Ciprofol pharmacokinetics seemed characterized by slower onset and offset as compared to propofol. Pain during injection was less frequent in the ciprofol group in all the 13 studies reporting it. Eight studies reported "adverse events" as a pooled outcome, and in five cases, the incidence was higher in the propofol group, not different in the remaining ones. Occurrence of hypotension was the most commonly investigated side effects, and it seemed less frequent with ciprofol.

Conclusion: Ciprofol for sedation or GA may be safer than propofol, though its pharmacokinetics may be less advantageous.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信