Zhang Shuwen, Dong Guimin, Shi Xinyuan, Xiao Hongyi, Nie Peihe, Ji Fanceng
Department of Anesthesiology, Weifang People's Hospital, Weifang, People's Republic of China.
School of Anaesthesiology, Shandong Second Medical University, Weifang, People's Republic of China.
Drug Des Devel Ther. 2025 Aug 19;19:7151-7159. doi: 10.2147/DDDT.S539028. eCollection 2025.
To compare the safety and efficacy of ciprofol and propofol in general anesthesia for gynecological day surgery.
A total of 196 patients undergoing gynecological day surgery under general anesthesia were randomly divided into ciprofol and propofol group. All patients received total intravenous anesthesia. Anesthesia induction in the ciprofol group: ciprofol 0.5 mg/kg was given intravenously within 1 minute, alfentanil 20 μg/kg was given intravenously within 30 seconds, mivacurium 0.2 mg/kg was given intravenously within 30 seconds, and anesthesia maintenance: ciprofol 1.25 mg/kg/h combined with alfentanil 40 μg/kg/h was given intravenously. Anesthesia induction in the propofol group, propofol 2 mg/kg was administered intravenously within 1 min, alfentanil 20μg/kg was given intravenously within 30s, mivacurium 0.2 mg/kg was administered intravenously within 30s, and anesthesia maintenance: propofol 5 mg/kg/h combined with alfentanil 40 μg/kg/h was administered intravenously. The primary outcome was the success rate of anesthesia (defined as the number of additional study drugs administered ≤ 2 times during anesthesia induction and ≤ 2 times within 10 min during anesthesia maintenance). The secondary outcomes included time to loss of consciousness, hemodynamic changes, depth of anesthesia at different time points, additional narcotic drugs during anesthesia, use of vasoactive agents, awakening time, and incidence of adverse reactions.
The success rate of anesthesia in both groups was 100%. There was no difference in the time of consciousness disappearance between the two groups during induction (81.95 vs 79.54s). Compared with the propofol group, the hemodynamics in the ciprofol group were more stable, the depth of anesthesia was better, the number of additional medications was significantly reduced, and the incidence of postoperative adverse reactions was significantly reduced. However, the awakening time of the ciprofol group was significantly longer than that of the propofol group (7.57 vs 5.52 min).
Ciprofol demonstrated non-inferior efficacy to propofol for gynecological day surgery anesthesia, while offering superior hemodynamic stability and reduced adverse effects.
比较环泊酚与丙泊酚用于妇科日间手术全身麻醉的安全性和有效性。
196例接受全身麻醉的妇科日间手术患者随机分为环泊酚组和丙泊酚组。所有患者均采用全静脉麻醉。环泊酚组麻醉诱导：1分钟内静脉注射环泊酚0.5mg/kg，30秒内静脉注射阿芬太尼20μg/kg，30秒内静脉注射米库氯铵0.2mg/kg；麻醉维持：静脉输注环泊酚1.25mg/（kg·h）联合阿芬太尼40μg/（kg·h）。丙泊酚组麻醉诱导：1分钟内静脉注射丙泊酚2mg/kg，30秒内静脉注射阿芬太尼20μg/kg，30秒内静脉注射米库氯铵0.2mg/kg；麻醉维持：静脉输注丙泊酚5mg/（kg·h）联合阿芬太尼40μg/（kg·h）。主要结局为麻醉成功率（定义为麻醉诱导期间追加研究药物次数≤2次且麻醉维持期间10分钟内追加次数≤2次）。次要结局包括意识消失时间、血流动力学变化、不同时间点的麻醉深度、麻醉期间追加麻醉药物情况、血管活性药物使用情况、苏醒时间及不良反应发生率。
两组麻醉成功率均为100%。诱导期两组意识消失时间无差异（81.95秒 vs 79.54秒）。与丙泊酚组相比，环泊酚组血流动力学更稳定，麻醉深度更佳，追加药物次数显著减少，术后不良反应发生率显著降低。然而，环泊酚组苏醒时间显著长于丙泊酚组（7.57分钟 vs 5.52分钟）。
对于妇科日间手术麻醉，环泊酚疗效不劣于丙泊酚，同时具有更好的血流动力学稳定性且不良反应更少。
