Dawei Yang, Jie Zhou, Luyu Sun, Min Li, Jianyou Zhang
{"title":"环丙酚和异丙酚在老年髋关节置换术患者术后觉醒的比较:一项单盲、随机、对照试验。","authors":"Dawei Yang, Jie Zhou, Luyu Sun, Min Li, Jianyou Zhang","doi":"10.23736/S0375-9393.24.18263-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The aim of this paper was to compare the impact of continuous infusion of ciprofol versus propofol on postoperative awakening in elderly patients following hip replacement surgery.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patients were randomized into two groups (N.=45 each): the ciprofol group and the propofol group. The ciprofol group received ciprofol for anesthesia induction and maintenance, while the propofol group underwent anesthesia induction and maintenance using propofol. The primary outcome was awakening time. Secondary outcomes included spontaneous breathing recovery time, extubation time, time to modified Aldrete Score ≥9, modified observer's assessment of alertness/sedation (MOAA/S) scores, anesthetic dosage, volume of fluid replacement, urine output and administration of vasoactive drugs.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The Ciprofol group exhibited a significantly prolonged awakening time (11.0±6.4 min vs. 7.4±4.3 min, P=0.003), spontaneous breathing recovery time (9.9±6.3 min vs. 5.9±4.3 min, P=0.001), and extubation time (12.0 [8.0-16.0] min vs. 8.5 [6.0-11.0] min, P=0.005), and reduced requirement for intraoperative fluid replacement (728.9±254.2 mL vs. 908.3±287.5 mL, P=0.003), increased urine output (235.1±102.1 mL vs. 173.5±106.2 mL, P=0.007), decreased likelihood of vasoactive drug administration (15/30 vs. 28/14, P=0.002). No significant differences were observed between the two groups in terms of reaching a modified Aldrete Score ≥9, MOAA/S scores at 0, 5, 15, or 30 minutes post-extubation, or occurrence of adverse reactions (P>0.05). The dosage of remifentanil was significantly higher in the ciprofol group [5.4 (2.7-7.4) μg·kg<sup>-1</sup>·h<sup>-1</sup> vs. 3.4 (1.9-4.3) μg·kg<sup>-1</sup>·h<sup>-1</sup>, P=0.004], with a mean maintenance dose of ciprofol at 0.8 mg·kg<sup>-1</sup>·h<sup>-1</sup> (range: 0.5 to 1.2 mg·kg<sup>-1</sup>·h<sup>-1</sup>).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Compared to propofol, the administration of ciprofol in elderly patients following hip replacement surgery is associated with prolonged awakening time, spontaneous breathing recovery time, and extubation. The average intravenous maintenance dosage of ciprofol in geriatric patients under general anesthesia was 0.8 mg·kg<sup>-1</sup>·h<sup>-1</sup>.</p>","PeriodicalId":18522,"journal":{"name":"Minerva anestesiologica","volume":" ","pages":"1074-1081"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of postoperative awakening between ciprofol and propofol in elderly patients undergoing hip replacement surgery: a single-blind, randomized, controlled trial.\",\"authors\":\"Dawei Yang, Jie Zhou, Luyu Sun, Min Li, Jianyou Zhang\",\"doi\":\"10.23736/S0375-9393.24.18263-6\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The aim of this paper was to compare the impact of continuous infusion of ciprofol versus propofol on postoperative awakening in elderly patients following hip replacement surgery.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patients were randomized into two groups (N.=45 each): the ciprofol group and the propofol group. The ciprofol group received ciprofol for anesthesia induction and maintenance, while the propofol group underwent anesthesia induction and maintenance using propofol. The primary outcome was awakening time. Secondary outcomes included spontaneous breathing recovery time, extubation time, time to modified Aldrete Score ≥9, modified observer's assessment of alertness/sedation (MOAA/S) scores, anesthetic dosage, volume of fluid replacement, urine output and administration of vasoactive drugs.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The Ciprofol group exhibited a significantly prolonged awakening time (11.0±6.4 min vs. 7.4±4.3 min, P=0.003), spontaneous breathing recovery time (9.9±6.3 min vs. 5.9±4.3 min, P=0.001), and extubation time (12.0 [8.0-16.0] min vs. 8.5 [6.0-11.0] min, P=0.005), and reduced requirement for intraoperative fluid replacement (728.9±254.2 mL vs. 908.3±287.5 mL, P=0.003), increased urine output (235.1±102.1 mL vs. 173.5±106.2 mL, P=0.007), decreased likelihood of vasoactive drug administration (15/30 vs. 28/14, P=0.002). No significant differences were observed between the two groups in terms of reaching a modified Aldrete Score ≥9, MOAA/S scores at 0, 5, 15, or 30 minutes post-extubation, or occurrence of adverse reactions (P>0.05). The dosage of remifentanil was significantly higher in the ciprofol group [5.4 (2.7-7.4) μg·kg<sup>-1</sup>·h<sup>-1</sup> vs. 3.4 (1.9-4.3) μg·kg<sup>-1</sup>·h<sup>-1</sup>, P=0.004], with a mean maintenance dose of ciprofol at 0.8 mg·kg<sup>-1</sup>·h<sup>-1</sup> (range: 0.5 to 1.2 mg·kg<sup>-1</sup>·h<sup>-1</sup>).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Compared to propofol, the administration of ciprofol in elderly patients following hip replacement surgery is associated with prolonged awakening time, spontaneous breathing recovery time, and extubation. The average intravenous maintenance dosage of ciprofol in geriatric patients under general anesthesia was 0.8 mg·kg<sup>-1</sup>·h<sup>-1</sup>.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":18522,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Minerva anestesiologica\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1074-1081\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Minerva anestesiologica\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.23736/S0375-9393.24.18263-6\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/12/3 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ANESTHESIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Minerva anestesiologica","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.23736/S0375-9393.24.18263-6","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/12/3 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:本文的目的是比较持续输注环丙酚和异丙酚对老年髋关节置换术后患者术后觉醒的影响。方法:将患者随机分为环丙酚组和异丙酚组,每组45例。环丙酚组采用环丙酚进行麻醉诱导和维持,异丙酚组采用异丙酚进行麻醉诱导和维持。主要结果是觉醒时间。次要结局包括自主呼吸恢复时间、拔管时间、到达改良Aldrete评分≥9的时间、改良观察者警觉/镇静评分(MOAA/S)、麻醉剂量、补液量、尿量和血管活性药物的使用。结果:环丙酚组唤醒时间(11.0±6.4 min vs. 7.4±4.3 min, P=0.003)、自主呼吸恢复时间(9.9±6.3 min vs. 5.9±4.3 min, P=0.001)、拔管时间(12.0 [8.0-16.0]min vs. 8.5 [6.0-11.0] min, P=0.005)、术中补液需水量减少(728.9±254.2 mL vs. 908.3±287.5 mL, P=0.003)、尿量增加(235.1±102.1 mL vs. 173.5±106.2 mL, P=0.007)。血管活性药物给药可能性降低(15/30 vs 28/14, P=0.002)。两组患者在改良Aldrete评分≥9分、拔管后0、5、15、30分钟MOAA/S评分及不良反应发生方面均无显著差异(P < 0.05)。环丙酚组瑞芬太尼用量明显高于环丙酚组[5.4 (2.7-7.4)μg·kg-1·h-1 vs. 3.4 (1.9-4.3) μg·kg-1·h-1, P=0.004],环丙酚平均维持剂量为0.8 mg·kg-1·h-1(范围:0.5 ~ 1.2 mg·kg-1·h-1)。结论:与异丙酚相比,老年髋关节置换术后患者使用环丙酚会延长患者的觉醒时间、自主呼吸恢复时间和拔管时间。老年患者全身麻醉下环丙酚平均静脉维持剂量为0.8 mg·kg-1·h-1。
Comparison of postoperative awakening between ciprofol and propofol in elderly patients undergoing hip replacement surgery: a single-blind, randomized, controlled trial.
Background: The aim of this paper was to compare the impact of continuous infusion of ciprofol versus propofol on postoperative awakening in elderly patients following hip replacement surgery.
Methods: Patients were randomized into two groups (N.=45 each): the ciprofol group and the propofol group. The ciprofol group received ciprofol for anesthesia induction and maintenance, while the propofol group underwent anesthesia induction and maintenance using propofol. The primary outcome was awakening time. Secondary outcomes included spontaneous breathing recovery time, extubation time, time to modified Aldrete Score ≥9, modified observer's assessment of alertness/sedation (MOAA/S) scores, anesthetic dosage, volume of fluid replacement, urine output and administration of vasoactive drugs.
Results: The Ciprofol group exhibited a significantly prolonged awakening time (11.0±6.4 min vs. 7.4±4.3 min, P=0.003), spontaneous breathing recovery time (9.9±6.3 min vs. 5.9±4.3 min, P=0.001), and extubation time (12.0 [8.0-16.0] min vs. 8.5 [6.0-11.0] min, P=0.005), and reduced requirement for intraoperative fluid replacement (728.9±254.2 mL vs. 908.3±287.5 mL, P=0.003), increased urine output (235.1±102.1 mL vs. 173.5±106.2 mL, P=0.007), decreased likelihood of vasoactive drug administration (15/30 vs. 28/14, P=0.002). No significant differences were observed between the two groups in terms of reaching a modified Aldrete Score ≥9, MOAA/S scores at 0, 5, 15, or 30 minutes post-extubation, or occurrence of adverse reactions (P>0.05). The dosage of remifentanil was significantly higher in the ciprofol group [5.4 (2.7-7.4) μg·kg-1·h-1 vs. 3.4 (1.9-4.3) μg·kg-1·h-1, P=0.004], with a mean maintenance dose of ciprofol at 0.8 mg·kg-1·h-1 (range: 0.5 to 1.2 mg·kg-1·h-1).
Conclusions: Compared to propofol, the administration of ciprofol in elderly patients following hip replacement surgery is associated with prolonged awakening time, spontaneous breathing recovery time, and extubation. The average intravenous maintenance dosage of ciprofol in geriatric patients under general anesthesia was 0.8 mg·kg-1·h-1.
期刊介绍:
Minerva Anestesiologica is the journal of the Italian National Society of Anaesthesia, Analgesia, Resuscitation, and Intensive Care. Minerva Anestesiologica publishes scientific papers on Anesthesiology, Intensive care, Analgesia, Perioperative Medicine and related fields.
Manuscripts are expected to comply with the instructions to authors which conform to the Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Editors by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors.