The efficacy and safety of ciprofol use for the induction of general anesthesia in patients undergoing gynecological surgery: a prospective randomized controlled study

• Published in: BMC anesthesiology Vol. 22; no. 1; pp. 1 - 245
• Main Authors: Chen, Ben-zhen, Yin, Xin-yu, Jiang, Li-hua, Liu, Jin-hui, Shi, Yan-yan, Yuan, Bi-ying
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: London BioMed Central Ltd 03-08-2022; BioMed Central; BMC
• Subjects: Adverse events; Anesthesia; Blood pressure; Ciprofol; Clinical trials; Drug dosages; GABA; General anesthesia; Gynecological surgery; Induction; Intubation; Medical research; Medicine, Experimental; Pain; Patient safety; Propofol; Success; Surgery; γ-Aminobutyric acid
• ISSN: 1471-2253; 1471-2253
• DOI: 10.1186/s12871-022-01782-7

Abstract
Background
Ciprofol is a recently developed, short-acting γ-aminobutyric acid receptor agonist sedative that is more potent than propofol, but there have been few clinical studies of this agent to date. Here, we sought to examine the safety and efficacy of ciprofol use for the induction of general anesthesia in individuals undergoing gynecological surgery.
Methods
Women between the ages of 18 and 60 years (ASA physical status 1 or 2) who were scheduled to undergo elective gynecological surgery under general anesthesia were randomly assigned to two equally sized groups in which anesthesia induction was performed using either ciprofol or propofol. General anesthesia induction success rates were the primary outcome for this study, while secondary outcomes included changes in BIS during the 10 min following the first administration of the study drug, the duration of successful induction, and adverse event incidence.
Results
A total of 120 women were included in the study. A 100% rate of successful induction was achieved in both the ciprofol and propofol groups, with no significant differences between these groups with respect to the duration of successful induction (34.8 ± 15.5 s vs 35.4 ± 9.5 s,
P
 = 0.832), the time to the disappearance of the eyelash reflex (33.7 ± 10.6 s vs 34.0 ± 6.5 s,
P
 = 0.860), or tracheal intubation (58.2 ± 31.1 s vs 53.9 ± 25.4 s,
P
 = 0.448). Adverse event rates, including intubation responses, were significantly lower in the ciprofol group as compared to the propofol group(20% vs 48.33%,
P
 = 0.0019). Ciprofol was associated with reduced injection pain relative to propofol (16.7% vs 58.3%,
P
 < 0.001).
Conclusions
Ciprofol exhibits comparable efficacy to that of propofol when used for the induction of general anesthesia in individuals undergoing gynecological surgery and is associated with fewer adverse events.