Suppr超能文献

西罗莫司与雷帕霉素在肾移植受者中应用的比较

Comparison of the efficacy and safety of ciprofol and propofol for ERCP anesthesia in older patients: A single-center randomized controlled clinical study.

机构信息

Department of Anesthesiology, General Hospital of Northern Theater Command, No.83 Wenhua Road, Shenyang 110016, China; Key Laboratory of Perioperative Critical Care Medicine of Liaoning Province, No.83 Wenhua Road, Shenyang 110016, China.

Anesthesia Surgery Center, Anshan Central Hospital, No.77 South Zhonghua Road, Anshan 114001, China.

出版信息

J Clin Anesth. 2024 Dec;99:111609. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinane.2024.111609. Epub 2024 Sep 16.

Abstract

STUDY OBJECTIVES

Ciprofol is a novel agonist at the gamma-aminobutyric acid-A (GABA) receptor, exhibiting better cardiovascular stability and rapid recovery. The objective of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of ciprofol and propofol for endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) anesthesia in older patients.

DESIGN

A single-center, randomized, parallel controlled clinical study.

SETTING

General Hospital of Northern Theater Command.

PATIENTS

We recruited 284 patients and intended to conduct ERCP from November 2021 to June 2022.

INTERVENTIONS

Patients scheduled for ERCP were randomly assigned to two groups (n = 142 each): ciprofol group (anesthesia induction 0.3-0.4 mg/kg, anesthesia maintenance 0.8-1.2 mg/kg/h) and propofol group (anesthesia induction 1.5-2.0 mg/kg, anesthesia maintenance 4-12 mg/kg/h).

MEASUREMENTS

The primary outcome was sedation success rate, defined as the proportion of patients with successful anesthesia induction. Secondary outcomes encompassed the time of successful induction, the time of complete recovery, the time of leaving the room and the incidence rate of adverse events (hypoxemia, hypotension and injection pain).

MAIN RESULTS

The success rate of sedation in both groups was 100 %. The 95 % CI of the difference of sedation success rate was (- 2.63 %, 2.63 %), and the lower limit was greater than the non-inferiority limit of -8 %.The time of successful sedation induction in ciprofol group (38.4 ± 6.5 s) was longer than that in propofol group (30.6 ± 6.2 s, p < 0.05).The time of complete recovery in ciprofol group (12.8 ± 5.8 min) was shorter than that in propofol group (16.9 ± 5.0 min, p < 0.05). The time of leaving the room in ciprofol group (21.8 ± 5.8 min) was shorter than those in propofol group (25.9 ± 5.1 min, p < 0.05). The incidence of injection pain in ciprofol group (2 %) was lower than that in the propofol group (25 %, p < 0.05). Other outcomes didn't show statistical differences.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with propofol, ciprofol exhibited a comparable level of sedation in older patients undergoing ERCP, and recovery was safe and rapid with less injection pain.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

www.chictr.org.cn (Registration number ChiCTR2100053386, Registration date November 20, 2021).

摘要

研究目的

西普罗尔是一种新型的γ-氨基丁酸-A(GABA)受体激动剂,具有更好的心血管稳定性和快速恢复性。本研究的目的是比较西普罗尔和丙泊酚在老年患者内镜逆行胰胆管造影(ERCP)麻醉中的疗效和安全性。

设计

单中心、随机、平行对照的临床研究。

地点

北部战区总医院。

患者

我们招募了 284 名患者,并计划于 2021 年 11 月至 2022 年 6 月进行 ERCP。

干预措施

拟行 ERCP 的患者被随机分为两组(每组 142 人):西普罗尔组(麻醉诱导 0.3-0.4mg/kg,麻醉维持 0.8-1.2mg/kg/h)和丙泊酚组(麻醉诱导 1.5-2.0mg/kg,麻醉维持 4-12mg/kg/h)。

测量

主要结局是镇静成功率,定义为麻醉诱导成功的患者比例。次要结局包括诱导成功时间、完全恢复时间、离开房间时间和不良事件(低氧血症、低血压和注射疼痛)发生率。

主要结果

两组的镇静成功率均为 100%。镇静成功率的 95%置信区间差值为(-2.63%,2.63%),下限大于-8%的非劣效性界限。西普罗尔组诱导成功时间(38.4±6.5s)长于丙泊酚组(30.6±6.2s,p<0.05)。西普罗尔组完全恢复时间(12.8±5.8min)短于丙泊酚组(16.9±5.0min,p<0.05)。西普罗尔组离开房间时间(21.8±5.8min)短于丙泊酚组(25.9±5.1min,p<0.05)。西普罗尔组注射疼痛发生率(2%)低于丙泊酚组(25%,p<0.05)。其他结果无统计学差异。

结论

与丙泊酚相比,西普罗尔在接受 ERCP 的老年患者中具有相当的镇静水平,且恢复安全快速,注射疼痛较轻。

试验注册

www.chictr.org.cn(注册号 ChiCTR2100053386,注册日期 2021 年 11 月 20 日)。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验