Nie Jia, Zhang Yongguo, Wang Yan, Fang Liang, Ma Huanhuan, Zhang Yu, Wang Hai-Ying
Department of Anesthesiology, Affiliated Hospital of Zunyi Medical University, Zunyi, China.
Department of Anesthesiology, Guizhou Qiannan People's Hospital, Zunyi, China.
Front Med (Lausanne). 2025 May 19;12:1498010. doi: 10.3389/fmed.2025.1498010. eCollection 2025.
This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of ciprofol-remifentanil versus propofol-remifentanil in patients undergoing fiberoptic bronchoscopy (FOB).
In this prospective, randomized, double-blind, non-inferiority trial, 209 patients undergoing FOB were enrolled and equally divided into two groups ( = 106 each). The trial was registered in the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR) under the registration number ChiCTR2400081603. Patients in the ciprofol-remifentanil group received ciprofol at a dose of 0.4 mg/kg, while those in the propofol-remifentanil group received propofol at a dose of 2.5 mg/kg. Both groups were pre-medicated with 1 μg/kg of remifentanil. Anesthesia was maintained with additional doses of the respective anesthetic agent as required to achieve a Modified Observer's Assessment of Alertness and Sedation (MOAA/S) scale score of ≤1. The primary outcome was the successful completion rate of FOB. Secondary outcomes included hemodynamic stability, incidence of adverse events such as hypoxemia and hypotension, patient and physician satisfaction, and the incidence of pain on injection.
The successful completion rate of FOB was 92.45% (98 of 106) in the ciprofol-remifentanil group and 90.57% (96 of 106) in the propofol-remifentanil group ( > 0.05). The ciprofol-remifentanil group demonstrated more stable hemodynamics, with significantly lower incidences of hypotension and hypoxemia compared to the propofol-remifentanil group ( < 0.05). Patient and physician satisfaction scores were significantly higher in the ciprofol-remifentanil group ( < 0.05). Additionally, the incidence of pain on injection was significantly lower in the ciprofol-remifentanil group ( < 0.01). Other adverse events, including coughing severity and intraoperative awareness, were similar between the two groups ( > 0.05).
Ciprofol-remifentanil was non-inferior to propofol-remifentanil in terms of sedation during fiberoptic bronchoscopy;. Furthermore, ciprofol-remifentanil was associated with greater hemodynamic stability, reduced pain on injection, and higher satisfaction scores, suggesting that it may be a preferable alternative to propofol-remifentanil for FOB procedures.
https://www.chictr.org.cn/, ChiCTR2400081603.
本研究旨在比较环泊酚 - 瑞芬太尼与丙泊酚 - 瑞芬太尼在接受纤维支气管镜检查(FOB)患者中的疗效和安全性。
在这项前瞻性、随机、双盲、非劣效性试验中,209例接受FOB的患者被纳入并平均分为两组(每组 = 106例)。该试验在中国临床试验注册中心(ChiCTR)注册,注册号为ChiCTR2400081603。环泊酚 - 瑞芬太尼组患者接受0.4mg/kg剂量的环泊酚,而丙泊酚 - 瑞芬太尼组患者接受2.5mg/kg剂量的丙泊酚。两组均预先给予1μg/kg的瑞芬太尼。根据需要追加相应麻醉药物以维持麻醉,使改良的观察者警觉与镇静评分(MOAA/S)量表得分≤1。主要结局是FOB的成功完成率。次要结局包括血流动力学稳定性、低氧血症和低血压等不良事件的发生率、患者和医生的满意度以及注射时的疼痛发生率。
环泊酚 - 瑞芬太尼组FOB的成功完成率为92.45%(106例中的98例),丙泊酚 - 瑞芬太尼组为90.57%(106例中的96例)(>0.05)。与丙泊酚 - 瑞芬太尼组相比,环泊酚 - 瑞芬太尼组的血流动力学更稳定,低血压和低氧血症的发生率显著更低(<0.05)。环泊酚 - 瑞芬太尼组患者和医生的满意度评分显著更高(<0.05)。此外,环泊酚 - 瑞芬太尼组注射时的疼痛发生率显著更低(<0.01)。两组之间的其他不良事件,包括咳嗽严重程度和术中知晓情况,相似(>0.05)。
在纤维支气管镜检查期间的镇静方面,环泊酚 - 瑞芬太尼不劣于丙泊酚 - 瑞芬太尼;此外,环泊酚 - 瑞芬太尼具有更好的血流动力学稳定性、更低的注射疼痛和更高的满意度评分,表明它可能是FOB手术中丙泊酚 - 瑞芬太尼的更优替代方案。