{"title":"西哌泊酚用于老年患者无痛消化内镜检查的安全性和有效性:一项随机、双盲、非效性试验。","authors":"Qingqin Xu, Jingdong Zhang, Xiaoyan Yan, Xin Qiao, Wenxiu Zhu, Jingxing Chen, Yun Xue, Wenchao Zhang","doi":"10.1186/s12877-025-06414-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Cipepofol, a novel anesthetic agent, may offer advantages for older patients undergoing painless digestive endoscopy. This study evaluated the safety and efficacy of this approach compared to a combination of etomidate and propofol (EP).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this single-center, double-blind, randomized, non-inferiority trial, 120 older patients(aged 65-90 years) undergoing painless gastroscopy or colonoscopy were randomized to receive either cipepofol (0.3-0.4 mg/kg; n = 60) or EP (1:1 ratio, 0.15-0.2 mL/kg; n = 60). Primary outcomes included sedation duration. Secondary outcomes assessed sedation success, recovery time, discharge readiness, adverse events, and hemodynamic stability.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>All patients achieved successful sedation (100%). Initial sedation duration was comparable between the cipepofol and EP groups (8.73 [5.10, 10.18] vs. 7.41 [5.35, 9.09] minutes; p = 0.165). Recovery times were similar (5.49 [3.51, 7.62] vs. 4.86 [3.36, 8.86] minutes; p = 0.819), while discharge readiness was faster in the cipepofol group (1.67 [0.78, 2.38] vs. 2.96 [1.21, 7.23] minutes; p = 0.002). Adverse events, including hypotension, bradycardia, and hypoxia, were comparable. Injection pain occurred only in the EP group (5%).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In older patients undergoing painless digestive endoscopy, cipepofol is non-inferior to the etomidate-propofol combination in sedation duration and safety. It also shares the characteristic of stable hemodynamics and offers advantages, including reduced injection pain and a shorter time to meet discharge criteria, providing a simplified choice for clinical practice.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>ChiCTR2400088889, Date of Registration: 2024-08-28, https://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.html?proj=212632 .</p>","PeriodicalId":9056,"journal":{"name":"BMC Geriatrics","volume":"25 1","pages":"748"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12482524/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Safety and efficacy of cipepofol for painless digestive endoscopy in older patients: a randomized, double-blind, non-inferiority trial.\",\"authors\":\"Qingqin Xu, Jingdong Zhang, Xiaoyan Yan, Xin Qiao, Wenxiu Zhu, Jingxing Chen, Yun Xue, Wenchao Zhang\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s12877-025-06414-6\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Cipepofol, a novel anesthetic agent, may offer advantages for older patients undergoing painless digestive endoscopy. This study evaluated the safety and efficacy of this approach compared to a combination of etomidate and propofol (EP).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this single-center, double-blind, randomized, non-inferiority trial, 120 older patients(aged 65-90 years) undergoing painless gastroscopy or colonoscopy were randomized to receive either cipepofol (0.3-0.4 mg/kg; n = 60) or EP (1:1 ratio, 0.15-0.2 mL/kg; n = 60). Primary outcomes included sedation duration. Secondary outcomes assessed sedation success, recovery time, discharge readiness, adverse events, and hemodynamic stability.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>All patients achieved successful sedation (100%). Initial sedation duration was comparable between the cipepofol and EP groups (8.73 [5.10, 10.18] vs. 7.41 [5.35, 9.09] minutes; p = 0.165). Recovery times were similar (5.49 [3.51, 7.62] vs. 4.86 [3.36, 8.86] minutes; p = 0.819), while discharge readiness was faster in the cipepofol group (1.67 [0.78, 2.38] vs. 2.96 [1.21, 7.23] minutes; p = 0.002). Adverse events, including hypotension, bradycardia, and hypoxia, were comparable. Injection pain occurred only in the EP group (5%).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In older patients undergoing painless digestive endoscopy, cipepofol is non-inferior to the etomidate-propofol combination in sedation duration and safety. It also shares the characteristic of stable hemodynamics and offers advantages, including reduced injection pain and a shorter time to meet discharge criteria, providing a simplified choice for clinical practice.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>ChiCTR2400088889, Date of Registration: 2024-08-28, https://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.html?proj=212632 .</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9056,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BMC Geriatrics\",\"volume\":\"25 1\",\"pages\":\"748\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12482524/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BMC Geriatrics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12877-025-06414-6\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Geriatrics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12877-025-06414-6","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:西泊酚是一种新型麻醉剂,可能为老年患者进行无痛消化内镜检查提供优势。本研究评估了该方法与依托咪酯和异丙酚(EP)联合使用的安全性和有效性。方法:在这项单中心、双盲、随机、非效性试验中,120例接受无痛胃镜或结肠镜检查的老年患者(65-90岁)随机接受西哌泊酚(0.3-0.4 mg/kg, n = 60)或EP(1:1比例,0.15-0.2 mL/kg, n = 60)。主要结局包括镇静持续时间。次要结局评估镇静成功、恢复时间、出院准备、不良事件和血流动力学稳定性。结果:所有患者镇静成功(100%)。西哌泊酚组和EP组的初始镇静时间相当(8.73 [5.10,10.18]vs. 7.41 [5.35, 9.09] min; p = 0.165)。恢复时间相似(5.49 [3.51,7.62]vs. 4.86 [3.36, 8.86] min, p = 0.819),而西哌泊酚组出院准备时间更快(1.67 [0.78,2.38]vs. 2.96 [1.21, 7.23] min, p = 0.002)。不良事件,包括低血压、心动过缓和缺氧,具有可比性。只有EP组出现注射痛(5%)。结论:老年患者行无痛消化内镜检查时,西哌泊酚在镇静时间和安全性上不逊色于依托咪酯-异丙酚联合用药。它还具有稳定血流动力学的特点和优点,包括减少注射疼痛和更短的时间达到出院标准,为临床实践提供了简化的选择。试验注册号:ChiCTR2400088889,注册日期:2024-08-28,https://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.html?proj=212632。
Safety and efficacy of cipepofol for painless digestive endoscopy in older patients: a randomized, double-blind, non-inferiority trial.
Background: Cipepofol, a novel anesthetic agent, may offer advantages for older patients undergoing painless digestive endoscopy. This study evaluated the safety and efficacy of this approach compared to a combination of etomidate and propofol (EP).
Methods: In this single-center, double-blind, randomized, non-inferiority trial, 120 older patients(aged 65-90 years) undergoing painless gastroscopy or colonoscopy were randomized to receive either cipepofol (0.3-0.4 mg/kg; n = 60) or EP (1:1 ratio, 0.15-0.2 mL/kg; n = 60). Primary outcomes included sedation duration. Secondary outcomes assessed sedation success, recovery time, discharge readiness, adverse events, and hemodynamic stability.
Results: All patients achieved successful sedation (100%). Initial sedation duration was comparable between the cipepofol and EP groups (8.73 [5.10, 10.18] vs. 7.41 [5.35, 9.09] minutes; p = 0.165). Recovery times were similar (5.49 [3.51, 7.62] vs. 4.86 [3.36, 8.86] minutes; p = 0.819), while discharge readiness was faster in the cipepofol group (1.67 [0.78, 2.38] vs. 2.96 [1.21, 7.23] minutes; p = 0.002). Adverse events, including hypotension, bradycardia, and hypoxia, were comparable. Injection pain occurred only in the EP group (5%).
Conclusion: In older patients undergoing painless digestive endoscopy, cipepofol is non-inferior to the etomidate-propofol combination in sedation duration and safety. It also shares the characteristic of stable hemodynamics and offers advantages, including reduced injection pain and a shorter time to meet discharge criteria, providing a simplified choice for clinical practice.
Trial registration: ChiCTR2400088889, Date of Registration: 2024-08-28, https://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.html?proj=212632 .
期刊介绍:
BMC Geriatrics is an open access journal publishing original peer-reviewed research articles in all aspects of the health and healthcare of older people, including the effects of healthcare systems and policies. The journal also welcomes research focused on the aging process, including cellular, genetic, and physiological processes and cognitive modifications.