Incidence of respiratory depression between ciprofol and propofol after anesthesia: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Autor:	Zeng J; Department of Anesthesiology, Wuxi No. 2 People's Hospital (Wuxi Clinical College of Nantong University, Jiangnan University Medical Center), Wuxi, China., Cao Q; Department of Anesthesiology, Wuxi No. 2 People's Hospital (Wuxi Clinical College of Nantong University, Jiangnan University Medical Center), Wuxi, China., Hong A; Department of Anesthesiology, Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing University of Chinese Medicine, Jiangsu Province Hospital of Chinese Medicine, Nanjing, China., Gu Z; Department of Anesthesiology, Wuxi No. 2 People's Hospital (Wuxi Clinical College of Nantong University, Jiangnan University Medical Center), Wuxi, China., Jian J; Department of Anesthesiology, Affiliated Hospital of Jiangnan University, Wuxi, China., Liang X; Department of Anesthesiology, Wuxi No. 2 People's Hospital (Wuxi Clinical College of Nantong University, Jiangnan University Medical Center), Wuxi, China.
Jazyk:	angličtina
Zdroj:	Medicine [Medicine (Baltimore)] 2024 Oct 11; Vol. 103 (41), pp. e40037.
DOI:	10.1097/MD.0000000000040037
Abstrakt:	Background: Respiratory depression is a common complication during operative procedures, meanwhile, ciprofol can provide effective sedation for surgical operations. However, there is not enough evidence to prove the advantage of ciprofol in reducing respiratory depression. So, this meta-analysis aimed to assess the efficacy of ciprofol on the incidence of respiratory depression compared with propofol. Methods: Two individual researchers conducted searches for randomized controlled trials in PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. The meta-analysis was performed using Review Manager software. Results: Seven trials with a total of 1408 patients were included in this meta-analysis. The results showed that ciprofol could reduce the incidence of respiratory depression compared with propofol (risk difference [RD] = -0.09, 95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.15 to -0.04). Ciprofol significantly reduced the incidence of respiratory depression when the method of administration was intravenous injection (RD = -0.06, 95% CI: -0.10 to -0.03), or continuous infusion (RD = -0.30, 95% CI: -0.45 to -0.15). Meanwhile, ciprofol significantly reduced the incidence of respiratory depression with the dosage not only greater than or equal to 0.4 mg/kg (RD = -0.11, 95% CI: -0.20 to -0.02), but also <0.4 mg/kg (RD = -0.08, 95% CI: -0.13 to -0.02). And ciprofol significantly reduced the incidence of hypoxemia (risk ratio [RR] = 0.47, 95% CI: 0.28 to 0.80), injection pain (RD = -0.32, 95% CI: -0.46 to -0.17), body movement (RR = 0.60, 95% CI: 0.43 to 0.84), dizziness (RR = 0.75, 95% CI: 0.62 to 0.90). Finally, ciprofol did not increase awakening time (standard mean difference [SMD] = 0.15, 95% CI: -0.02 to 0.31). Conclusion: From this meta-analysis, it is demonstrated that ciprofol might reduce the incidence of respiratory depression and injection pain. These benefits are important in surgery to ensure safe and rapid postoperative recovery. So, ciprofol may be a safe and appropriate drug with fewer adverse effects used in clinical anesthesia. Competing Interests: The authors have no funding and conflicts of interest to disclose. (Copyright © 2024 the Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.)
Databáze:	MEDLINE
Externí odkaz:	Zobrazit plný text záznamu