Efficacy and Safety of HSK3486 for Anesthesia/Sedation in Patients Undergoing Fiberoptic Bronchoscopy: A Multicenter, Double-Blind, Propofol-Controlled, Randomized, Phase 3 Study

Efficacy and Safety of Ciprofol Versus Propofol as Anesthetic for Patients Undergoing Painless Colonoscopy

INTRODUCTION

Ciprofol is a novel propofol analogue with a characteristic of hemodynamic stability. At present, there is a lack of research comparing the hemodynamic stability of ciprofol and propofol during painless colonoscopy. In this study, we aim to test the hypothesis that ciprofol is superior to propofol in terms of hemodynamic stability for sedation anesthesia in patients undergoing colonoscopy.

METHODS

A total of 222 patients were randomized into two groups. Patients in group P (n = 112) and group C (n = 110) received propofol and ciprofol sedation, respectively. Noninvasive blood pressure were monitored starting from induction (T0) to the end of the procedure, at 2-min intervals (T1 to T10). Heart rate variability (HRV), pain injection, Modified Observer's Assessment of Alertness and Sedation (MOAA/S) score, body movement, doses of norepinephrine, modified Aldrete score, drug-related adverse reactions, and patient satisfaction and endoscopist satisfaction were recorded.

RESULTS

In group C, fewer patients experienced a decrease in blood pressure with a higher HRV after induction sedation, the incidence of pain injection was reduced, the amount of norepinephrine dose was decreased, patient satisfaction was increased compared with group P (all P < 0.05). There were no significant differences in induction time, modified Aldrete score, alertness time, drug-related adverse reactions, and endoscopist satisfaction.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study indicated intravenous induction with ciprofol was superior, with regard to hemodynamic stability and reduced injection pain, than induction with propofol for anesthesia in patients undergoing painless colonoscopy.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR2200061814).

Early sedation using ciprofol for intensive care unit patients requiring mechanical ventilation: a pooled post-hoc analysis of data from phase 2 and phase 3 trials

BACKGROUND

Ciprofol was approved for use in intensive care unit (ICU) patients requiring sedation during mechanical ventilation in July 2022. A pooled post-hoc analysis of phase 2 and phase 3 trials was conducted primarily to explore hypotension-free outcome in ICU patients who required mechanical ventilation and achieved the target light sedation goal at an early stage after being sedated with ciprofol or propofol.

METHODS

All eligible ICU patients who were expected to require sedation for 6-24 h were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to either a ciprofol or propofol group. Ciprofol or propofol was initially infused at loading doses of 0.5 or 1.0 mg/kg followed by maintenance doses of 0.3 or 1.5 mg/kg/h. Ciprofol or propofol dosages were adjusted up or down at rates of 0.05-0.10 mg/kg/h or 0.25-0.50 mg/kg/h, respectively, to achieve the target light sedation (a Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale of -2 to + 1). The primary post-hoc outcome was the hypotension-free rate in patients who had achieved the target sedation goal after 30-min administration of ciprofol or propofol.

RESULTS

In total, 174 patients were enrolled for pooled post-hoc analysis, of whom 116 and 58 were assigned to the ciprofol and propofol groups, respectively. The hypotension-free rate was significantly higher in patients who achieved the target sedation goal after 30-min administration of ciprofol (93.0% vs. 81.0%, P = 0.018), and especially in the subgroups of males and patients aged < 65 years. Multivariable analysis revealed that ciprofol treatment, a younger age and lower baseline body mass index were independent favorable predictors for a higher hypotension-free rate in patients who achieved the target sedation goal after 30-min of drug administration. Moreover, hypotension-free patients who reached the target sedation level after 30 min had a more favorable short-term prognosis including a lower incidence of drug-related treatment-emergent adverse events, shorter time to extubation and fewer dose adjustments of ciprofol or propofol (all P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

ICU patients undergoing mechanical ventilation and sedated with ciprofol had significantly lower rate of hypotension during the early phase of achieving light sedation during a 6-24 h period, leading to a more favorable short-term prognosis (within 24 h).

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Phase 2 trial (clinicaltrials.gov, NCT04147416. Registered November 1, 2019, https://classic.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov/ct2/show/NCT04147416 ) and phase 3 trial (clinicaltrials.gov, NCT04620031. Registered November 6, 2020, https://classic.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov/ct2/show/NCT04620031 ).

Postoperative quality of recovery comparison between ciprofol and propofol in total intravenous anesthesia for elderly patients undergoing laparoscopic major abdominal surgery: A randomized, controlled, double-blind, non-inferiority trial

STUDY OBJECTIVES

We conducted a non-inferiority study to assess the postoperative quality of recovery (QoR) in elderly patients receiving ciprofol or propofol total intravenous anesthersia(TIVA)after elective laparoscopic major abdominal surgery, with QoR-15 scores as the main measure.

DESIGN

A prospective, double-blind, randomized non-inferiority trial was conducted in the theater, post-anesthesia care unit (PACU), and the ward.

PARTICIPANTS

144 elderly patients (age ≥ 65 years) were randomly assigned to either the ciprofol group or the propofol group.

INTERVENTIONS

The ciprofol group received continuous infusion of ciprofol with remifentanil, and the propofol group received infusion of propofol with remifentanil.

OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome was the QoR-15 on the first postoperative day (POD1), assessed in both intention-to-treat and per-protocol populations, with the mean difference between groups compared to a non-inferiority threshold of -8. Additional assessments included QoR-15 scores on POD2, 3, and 5 for both analysis sets. Other evaluated perioperative value factors included hemodynamic parameters and injection discomfort in the intention-to-treat analysis. A linear mixed model was utilized to examine the impact of group-time interactions on hemodynamic data and QoR-15.

MAIN RESULTS

The QoR-15 scores on POD1 in the ciprofol group were non-inferior to those in the propofol group both in intention-to-treat set (mean [95 %CI], 95.9[93.7-98.2] vs. 95.6 [93.3-97.8]; mean difference [95 % CI], 0.4 [-2.8-3.5]; P<0.001 for noninferiority) and per-protocol set (mean [95 %CI], 96.7 [94.4-99.0] vs. 95.7 [93.4-98.0]; mean difference [95 % CI], 1.0 [-2.2-4.3]; P<0.001 for noninferiority). Comparable outcomes were noted on postoperative days 2, 3, and 5 following the procedure in both analysis sets. Additionally: compared with propofol group, the occurrence of injection pain was lower (2.8 % vs. 27.8 %, P < 0.001); the hypotension was less frequent (33.3 % vs. 54.2 %, P = 0.012); the bradycardia was more common (38.9 % vs. 23.6 %, P = 0.048).

CONCLUSIONS

Ciprofol is not inferior to propofol in QoR. Ciprofol can be suitably administered to elderly patients undergoing elective laparoscopic major abdominal surgery.

The efficacy of ciprofol versus propofol on anesthesia in patients undergoing endoscopy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

INTRODUCTION

Ciprofol is a new intravenous anesthetic with a similar chemical structure to propofol. We aimed to compare the incidence of adverse actions like injection pain and time indexes of ciprofol versus propofol on anesthesia in patients undergoing endoscopy. We also compared anesthetists' satisfaction during the procedure.

METHODS

Two independent researchers (Liu and Zeng) searched the Cochrane Library, Embase databases, and PubMed for controlled clinical trials. This meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was performed with the Review Manager, Stata and the Cochrane Risk-of-Bias 2 tool to evaluate methodological quality. Relative risks with 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated for outcomes.

RESULTS

Ten trials, including 1545 patients, were examined in the current meta-analysis. During anesthesia in patients undergoing endoscopy, the incidence of injection pain was significantly reduced in the research group. Compared with propofol, the pooled risk difference (RD) with the use of ciprofol for injection pain for all the procedures was - 0.34 (95% confidence interval [CI], -0.48 to 0.19), and RR for hypotension was 0.73(95% CI:0.58 to 0.92). GRADE showed this meta-analysis has moderate or low confidence. Trial sequential analysis for mortality indicated insufficient sample size for a definitive judgment for lower incidence of hypotension.

CONCLUSION

In painless endoscopy, compared with propofol, ciprofol exhibited non-inferiority anesthesia/sedation in patients, and had a good safety profile with a lower incidence of pain on injection and may reduce the chance of hypotension. Trial sequential analysis suggested the need for more cases, and GRADE highlighted moderate certainty, emphasizing the necessity for further targeted RCTs.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO, CRD42023433627.

Comparison of the ED50 of Ciprofol Combined With or Without Fentanyl for Laryngeal Mask Airway Insertion in Children: A Prospective, Randomized, Open-Label, Dose-Response Trial

Purpose

This study aimed to estimate the effect of different doses of fentanyl on the median effective dose (ED50) of ciprofol for attenuating the airway and motor response to laryngeal mask airway (LMA) insertion response in healthy children.

Patients and Methods

90 healthy preschool patients undergoing inguinal hernia repair surgery were randomly assigned to one of three groups: C0 (ciprofol+saline), C1 (ciprofol + fentanyl 1µg/kg), C2 (ciprofol + fentanyl 2µg/kg). Anesthesia was induced with either prepared fentanyl or saline, followed by ciprofol. The dose of ciprofol for each patient was determined using the up-and-down sequential study design. The primary outcome was the ED50 of ciprofol required for smooth LMA insertion in the three groups. Additionally, the time to loss of consciousness and any perioperative adverse events were recorded.

Results

Compared with the C0 group, the ED50 (95% confidence interval) of ciprofol in the C1 and C2 groups were significantly lower (1.81 [1.73-1.90]mg/kg versus 0.67 [0.64-0.71]mg/kg and 0.48 [0.42-0.54] mg/kg, respectively; P<0.05). Additionally, the ED50 of ciprofol in the C2 group was lower than that in the C1 group (0.42 [0.42-0.54] mg/kg vs 0.67 [0.64-0.71]mg/kg; P<0.05). Furthermore, the time to loss of consciousness in the C1 and C2 groups decreased by 60% and 53%, respectively, compared to the C0 group. There were no significant differences in the incidence of drug-related hypotension after anesthesia induction among the three groups. No adverse events of hypoxia, bradycardia, or injection pain were observed in any groups.

Conclusion

In healthy, non-obese Chinese children undergoing elective inguinal hernia repair surgery, fentanyl 1 µg/kg and 2 µg/kg before ciprofol injection significantly reduced the ED50 of ciprofol for attenuating LMA response, with minimal occurrence of severe side effects.

Efficacy and Safety of General Anesthesia Induction with Ciprofol in Hip Fracture Surgery of Elderly Patients: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Background

Ciprofol is a new intravenous sedative / anesthetic drug. In recent years, many clinical studies have also confirmed the sedative effect of ciprofol. However, more clinical research is still needed on its clinical application characteristics in special populations.

Objective

The aim of this study was to compare the clinical effects of ciprofol and propofol in general anesthesia induction of elderly patients.

Methods

60 elderly (aged ≥ 75 years) patients underwent hip fracture surgery were randomly into two groups of a 1:1 ratio. Group C (ciprofol group): 0.3mg/kg ciprofol was infused. Group P (propofol group): 1.5mg/kg propofol was infused. The observation period was from the infusion of test drug to 5 min after endotracheal intubation. The primary outcomes included the incidence of severe hypotension and hypotension during the observation period. The secondary outcomes were as follows: the success rate of general anesthesia induction, the number of additional sedation, the time of loss of consciousness (LOC), Δ MAP, Δ HR, adverse events and the frequency of vasoactive drugs used.

Results

Finally, 60 subjects completed the study. Compared with Group P, the incidence of severe hypotension in Group C was lower (26.7% vs 53.3%, P = 0.035), the incidence of hypotension was also lower (36.7% vs 63.3%, P = 0.037), Δ MAP in Group C was significantly lower (31.4 ± 11.4 vs 39.6 ± 15.7, P = 0.025), the frequency of ephedrine used and the incidence of injection pain in Group C were also significantly lower.

Conclusion

Ciprofol showed similar efficacy to propofol when used for general anesthesia induction in elderly patients underwent hip fracture surgery and could maintain more stable blood pressure.

Efficacy and safety of ciprofol versus propofol for induction of general anaesthesia or sedation: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

Background and Aims

Propofol has been used in medical practice as an anaesthetic drug for producing and sustaining general anaesthesia due to its advantages. However, it also has drawbacks, including injection-related discomfort. Recently, ciprofol has emerged as a promising anaesthetic drug that may overcome many drawbacks associated with propofol. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we assess the efficacy and safety of ciprofol compared to propofol in different anaesthesia procedures.

Methods

The study protocol was registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (ID: CRD42023458170). Central, PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus and WOS were searched for English literature until 26 February 2024. Meta-analysis was performed using RevMan. The risk of bias was assessed using the RoB 2.0 tool. Results were reported as risk ratios (RRs), mean differences (MDs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

Results

Nineteen randomised controlled trials were included in our analysis, with 2841 participants. There was no difference between ciprofol and propofol in the success rate of endoscopy (RR: 1.01, 95% CI: 0.99, 1.02; P = 0.44), while ciprofol showed a significant increase in the success rate of general anaesthesia/sedation (RR: 1.01, 95% CI: 1.00, 1.02; P = 0.04). Ciprofol showed significantly lower pain on injection (RR: 0.14, 95% CI: 0.09, 0.22; P < 0.001), lower adverse events (RR: 0.80, 95% CI: 0.69, 0.92; P = 0.002) and higher patient satisfaction (standardised mean difference (SMD): 0.36, 95% CI: 0.24, 0.48; P < 0.001).

Conclusion

Ciprofol exhibited a comparable efficacy to propofol in inducing general anaesthesia and sedation with fewer adverse events, less pain on injection and higher patient satisfaction. These collective findings may suggest that ciprofol can be used as an alternative drug to ensure effective general anaesthesia/sedation induction in the future.

Efficacy and safety of fospropofol disodium sedation for same-day bidirectional endoscopy in elderly patients: protocol for a prospective, single-center, randomized, double-blind, non-inferiority trial

Introduction

Fospropofol disodium is a novel prodrug that has improved pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties when compared with propofol. This trial aims to compare the efficacy and safety of fospropofol versus propofol sedation for same-day bidirectional endoscopy in elderly patients.

Methods and analysis

This is a prospective, single-center, double-blind, randomized, propofol-controlled, non-inferiority trial. A total of 256 patients aged 65 years or older, who are scheduled for same-day bidirectional endoscopy under sedation, will be randomly allocated, in a 1:1 ratio, to either fospropofol group or propofol group (n = 128 in each group). All patients will receive analgesic pre-treatment with sufentanil 5 μg. Two minutes later, an initial bolus dose of fospropofol 6.5 mg/kg or 1.5 mg/kg propofol and supplemental doses of fospropofol 1.6 mg/kg or 0.5 mg/kg propofol will be titrated as needed to achieve target sedation levels during the procedures. The primary outcome is the success rate of same-day bidirectional endoscopy. Secondary outcomes include the time to successful induction of sedation, duration, time to being fully alert, time to patient discharge, endoscopist satisfaction, patient satisfaction, and the top-up frequency and dosage of sedative medications. The safety endpoints consist of adverse events concerning cough reflex, gag reflexes, body movement, muscular tremor, and pain on injection. Sedation-related AEs, including episodes of desaturation, severe desaturation (SpO2 < 90%), hypotension, severe hypotension (decrease in MBP ≥30% of baseline), and bradycardia, will also be recorded. Data will be analyzed on an intention-to-treat basis.

Discussion

We hypothesize that the efficacy and safety of fospropofol sedation for elderly patients undergoing same-visit bidirectional endoscopy will not be inferior to that of propofol. Our findings will potentially provide a new sedation regimen for same-visit bidirectional endoscopy in elderly patients.

Clinical Trial Registration

clinicaltrials.gov, identifier NCT02875639.

The efficacy and safety of ciprofol and propofol in patients undergoing colonoscopy: A double-blind, randomized, controlled trial

STUDY OBJECTIVE

Propofol is a commonly utilized anesthetic for painless colonoscopy, but its usage is occasionally limited due to its potential side effects, including cardiopulmonary suppression and injection pain. To address this limitation, the novel compound ciprofol has been proposed as a possible alternative for propofol. This study sought to determine whether there are any differences in the safety and efficacy of propofol and ciprofol for painless colonoscopy.

DESIGN

Randomized clinical trial.

SETTING

Single-centre, class A tertiary hospital, November 2021 to November 2022.

PATIENTS

Adult, American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status I to II and body mass index of 18 to 30 kg m-2 patients scheduled to undergo colonoscopy.

INTERVENTIONS

Consecutive patients were randomly allocated in a 1:1 ratio to receive sedation for colonoscopy with ciprofol (group C) or propofol (group P).

MEASUREMENTS

The primary outcome was the success rate of colonoscopy. The secondary outcomes were onset time of sedation, operation time, recovery time and discharge time, patients and endoscopists satisfaction, side effects (e.g. injection pain, myoclonus, drowsiness, dizziness, procedure recall, nausea and vomiting) and incidence rate of cardiopulmonary adverse events.

MAIN RESULTS

No significant difference was found in the success rate of colonoscopy between the two groups (ciprofol 96.3% vs. propofol 97.6%; mean difference - 1.2%, 95% CI: -6.5% to 4.0%, P = 0.650). However, group C showed prolonged sedation (63.4 vs. 54.8 s, P < 0.001) and fully alert times (9 vs 8 min, P = 0.013), as well as reduced incidences of injection pain (0 vs. 40.2%, P < 0.001), respiratory depression (2.4% vs. 13.4%, P = 0.021) and hypotension (65.9% vs. 80.5%, P = 0.034). Patients satisfaction was also higher in Group C (10 vs 9, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Ciprofol can be used independently for colonoscopy. When comparing the sedation efficacy of ciprofol and propofol, a 0.4 mg kg-1 dose of ciprofol proved to be equal to a 2.0 mg kg-1 dose of propofol, with fewer side effects and greater patient satisfaction during the procedure.

The effects of CYP2B6 inactivators on the metabolism of ciprofol

Ciprofol is a novel short-acting intravenous anaesthetic developed in China that is mainly metabolized by cytochrome P450 2B6 (CYP2B6) and uridine diphosphate glucuronosyltransferase 1A9 (UGT1A9). Currently, insufficient evidence is available to support drug‒drug interactions between ciprofol and CYP2B6 inactivators. Here, we established a high-performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (HPLC-MS/MS) method to assess the concentration of ciprofol and investigated the effects of psoralen and clopidogrel on the metabolism of ciprofol in liver microsomes and rats. In rat and human liver microsomes, the median inhibitory concentration (IC50) values of psoralen were 63.31 μmol·L-1 and 34.05 μmol·L-1, respectively, showing mild inhibitory effects on ciprofol metabolism, whereas the IC50 values of clopidogrel were 6.380 μmol·L-1 and 2.565 μmol·L-1, respectively, with moderate inhibitory effects. SD rats were randomly divided into three groups: psoralen (27 mg·kg-1), clopidogrel (7.5 mg·kg-1), and the same volume of 0.5% carboxy methyl cellulose. After 7 days, all rats were injected with 2.4 mg·kg-1 ciprofol. Compared with the control group, the AUC and MRT values of ciprofol in the psoralen and clopidogrel groups were significantly greater, whereas the CL values were significantly lower. In addition, the durations of loss of righting reflex (LORR) in the psoralen and clopidogrel groups were 16.1% and 23.0% longer than that in the control group, respectively. In conclusion, psoralen and clopidogrel inhibit ciprofol metabolism to different degrees and prolong the duration of LORR in rats.

Effects of ciprofol infusion on hemodynamics during induction and maintenance of anesthesia and on postoperative recovery in patients undergoing thoracoscopic lobectomy: Study protocol for a randomized, controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

Ciprofol, a new candidate drug, is effective and safe for the maintenance of anesthesia in non-cardiothoracic and non-neurological elective surgery. However, few studies have been conducted on general anesthesia using ciprofol in patients undergoing thoracoscopic lobectomy. Therefore, this study aims to observe the effects of ciprofol on hemodynamics and on postoperative recovery in patients undergoing thoracoscopic lobectomy.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This randomized controlled trial will include 136 patients aged 18-65 years undergoing elective thoracoscopic lobectomy between April 2023 and December 2024. The participants will be randomly assigned to the propofol or ciprofol group. The primary outcome to be assessed is the hemodynamic fluctuation during the induction and maintenance of anesthesia. The secondary outcomes involve quality of anesthesia induction and quality of recovery from anesthesia. The former includes TLOC (time to loss of consciousness), the use of vasoactive agents, the incidence of injection pain, body movement, muscle twitching and coughing during induction of anesthesia. The latter includes TROC (time to recovery of consciousness), post anesthesia care unit (PACU) time, incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), postoperative agitation, intraoperative awareness and quality of recovery (QoR) score.

DISCUSSION

A number of clinical trials have confirmed that ciprofol, as a new sedative-hypnotic agent, has advantages of better tolerance, higher sedation satisfaction score, and lower incidence of adverse reactions, especially in reducing the incidence of injection pain. But considering that ciprofol was recently developed, limited data are available regarding its use for general anesthesia. This study aims to investigate the effects of ciprofol on hemodynamics and on postoperative recovery of patients undergoing thoracoscopic lobectomy. The results of this study may provide evidence for the safe application of ciprofol, a new choice of general anesthetic for thoracic surgery.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05664386).

ED50 of ciprofol combined with sufentanil for fiberoptic bronchoscopy of different patient populations with pulmonary tuberculosis

BACKGROUND

Ciprofol is a promising sedative. This study aims to explore the median effective dose (ED50) of ciprofol in inhibiting responses to fiberoptic bronchoscopy in patients with pulmonary tuberculosis (PTB) of different genders and ages when combined with 0.15 μg/kg sufentanil, and to evaluate its efficacy and safety, providing a reference for the rational use of ciprofol in clinical practice.

METHODS

PTB patients who underwent bronchoscopy examination and treatment at The Third People's Hospital of Changzhou between May 2023 and June 2023 were selected and divided into four groups using a stratified random method. All patients received intravenous injection of 0.15 μg/kg sufentanil followed by injection of the test dose of ciprofol according to Dixon's up-and-down method. The initial dose of ciprofol in all four groups was 0.4 mg/kg, with an adjacent ratio of 1:1.1. The next patient received a 10% increase in the dose of ciprofol if the previous patient in the same group experienced positive reactions such as choking cough, frowning, and body movements during the endoscopy. Otherwise, it was judged as a negative reaction, and the next patient received a 10% decrease in the dose of ciprofol. The transition from a positive reaction to a negative reaction was defined as a turning point, and the study of the group was terminated when seven turning points occurred. Hemodynamic parameters, oxygen saturation and adverse reactions were recorded at different time points in all groups. The Probit regression analysis method was used to calculate the ED50 of ciprofol in the four groups and compare between the groups.

RESULTS

The ED50 of ciprofol combined with 0.15 μg/kg sufentanil for bronchoscopy in the four groups were 0.465 mg/kg, 0.433 mg/kg, 0.420 mg/kg and 0.396 mg/kg, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The ED50 of ciprofol used for fiberoptic bronchoscopy varied among PTB patients of different genders and ages.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The Chinese Clinical Trial Registry, ChiCTR2300071508, Registered on 17 May 2023.

Efficacy and safety of Ciprofol compared with Propofol during general anesthesia induction: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCT)

BACKGROUND

Ciprofol, a newer entrant with similarities to propofol, has shown promise with a potentially improved safety profile, making it an attractive alternative for induction of general anesthesia. This meta-analysis aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of ciprofol compared with propofol during general anesthesia induction.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted using PubMed, Clinical Trial.gov, and Cochrane Library databases from inception to July 2023 to identify relevant studies. All statistical analyses were conducted using R statistical software version 4.1.2.

RESULTS

Thirteen Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) encompassing a total of 1998 participants, were included in our analysis. The pooled analysis indicated that Ciprofol was associated with a notably lower incidence of pain upon injection [RR: 0.15; 95% CI: 0.10 to 0.23; I^2 = 43%, p < 0.0000001] and was non-inferior to propofol in terms of anesthesia success rate [RR: 1.00; 95% CI: 0.99 to 1.01; I^2 = 0%; p = 0.43]. In terms of safety, the incidence of hypotension was significantly lower in the ciprofol group [RR:0.82; 95% CI:0.68 to 0.98; I^2 = 48%; p = 0.03]. However, no statistically significant differences were found for postoperative hypertension, bradycardia, or tachycardia.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, Ciprofol is not inferior to Propofol in terms of its effectiveness in general anesthesia. Ciprofol emerges as a valuable alternative sedative with fewer side effects, especially reduced injection pain, when compared to Propofol.

SUMMARY

Propofol, frequently utilized as an anesthetic, provides swift onset and quick recovery. However, it has drawbacks such as a narrow effective dosage range and a high occurrence of adverse effects, particularly pain upon injection. Ciprofol, a more recent drug with propofol-like properties, has demonstrated promise and may have an improved safety profile, making it a compelling alternative for inducing general anesthesia. This meta-analysis compared the safety and effectiveness of Ciprofol with Propofol for general anesthesia induction in a range of medical procedures, encompassing thirteen Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) and 1998 individuals. The pooled analysis indicated that Ciprofol was associated with a notably lower incidence of pain upon injection [RR: 0.15; 95% CI: 0.10 to 0.23; I^2 = 43%, p < 0.0000001] and was non-inferior to propofol in terms of anesthesia success rate [RR: 1.00; 95% CI: 0.99 to 1.01; I^2 = 0%; p = 0.43]. In terms of safety, the incidence of hypotension was significantly lower in the ciprofol group [RR:0.82; 95% CI:0.68 to 0.98; I^2 = 48%; p = 0.03]. However, no statistically significant differences were found for hypertension, bradycardia, or tachycardia. In conclusion, ciprofol is equally effective at inducing and maintaining general anesthesia as propofol. When compared to propofol, ciprofol is a better alternative sedative for operations including fiberoptic bronchoscopy, gynecological procedures, gastrointestinal endoscopic procedures, and elective surgeries because it has less adverse effects, most notably less painful injections.

Ciprofol ameliorates ECS-induced learning and memory impairment by modulating aerobic glycolysis in the hippocampus of depressive-like rats

Electroconvulsive shock (ECS) is utilized to treat depression but may cause learning/memory impairments, which may be ameliorated by anesthetics through the modulation of hippocampal synaptic plasticity. Given that synaptic plasticity is governed by aerobic glycolysis, it remains unclear whether anesthetics modulate aerobic glycolysis to enhance learning and memory function. Depression-like behavior in rats was induced by chronic mild unpredictable stress (CUMS), with anhedonia assessed via sucrose preference test (SPT). Depressive-like behaviors and spatial learning/memory were assessed with forced swim test (FST), open field test (OFT), and Morris water maze (MWM) test. Changes in aerobic glycolysis and synaptic plasticity in the hippocampal region of depressive-like rats post-ECS were documented using immunofluorescence analysis, Western blot, Lactate Assay Kit and transmission electron microscopy. Both the OFT and FST indicated that ECS was effective in alleviating depressive-like behaviors. The MWM test demonstrated that anesthetics were capable of attenuating ECS-induced learning and memory deficits. Immunofluorescence analysis, Western blot, Lactate Assay Kit and transmission electron microscopy revealed that the decline in learning and memory abilities in ECS-induced depressive-like rats was correlated with decreased aerobic glycolysis, and that the additional use of ciprofol or propofol ameliorated these alterations. Adding the glycolysis inhibitor 2-DG diminished the ameliorative effects of the anesthetic. No significant difference was observed between ciprofol and propofol in enhancing aerobic glycolysis in astrocytes and synaptic plasticity after ECS. These findings may contribute to understanding the mechanisms by which anesthetic drugs modulate learning and memory impairment after ECS in depressive-like behavior rats.

Investigation into the application of remimazolamin conjunction with low-dose propofolfor pediatricfiberoptic bronchoscopy

This study delves into the effectiveness of combining remimazolam with low-dose propofol in pediatric fiberoptic bronchoscopy. Ninety children scheduled for fiberoptic bronchoscopy in our hospital were enrolled as research participants. Based on the intraoperative anesthetic drug regimen, the children were divided into three groups: group R (remimazolam 0.2-0.4 mg/kg), group P (propofol 1-3 mg/kg), and group RP (remimazolam0.2 mg/kg, propofol 0.5 mg/kg). Immediately post-anesthesia, group P exhibited lower blood pressure and heart rate (HR) compared to both group R and group RP (P < 0.05). As bronchoscope approached the glottis and epiglottis, group P continued to display lower blood pressure and HR compared to group R and group RP (P < 0.05). During lavage, group P maintained lower blood pressure and HR compared to both the R and RP groups (P < 0.05). Immediately post-anesthesia, group P demonstrated lower SpO2 compared to the R and RP groups (P < 0.05).During lavage, group P maintained lower SpO2 than group R and group RP (P < 0.05). In comparison with group R and group PR, group P showed shortened induction and recovery times (P < 0.05). The one-time entry success rate into the microscope was higher in group R than in group P, with the RP group showing an intermediate decreased (P < 0.05). Moreover, the cough score in R group was higher than in the P and RP groups (P < 0.05). Furthermore, the satisfaction rates of the RP group exceeded those of the R and P groups (P < 0.05). Remimazolam combined with low-dose propofol effectively balances the strengths and weaknesses of remimazolam and propofol, ensuring more stable hemodynamics, a lower incidence of adverse reactions, and optimal surgical conditions in pediatric fiberoptic bronchoscopy.

Ciprofol as compared to propofol for sedation and general anesthesia: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Propofol is the most commonly used hypnotic agent used during sedation and general anesthesia (GA) practice, offering faster recovery compared to benzodiazepines. However, cardiovascular impact of propofol and pain at injection are commonly encountered side effects. Ciprofol is a novel disubstituted phenol derivative, and there is growing evidence regarding its clinical use.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic literature search (updated on 23 July 2023) to evaluate safety and efficacy of ciprofol in comparison to propofol in patients undergoing procedures under sedation or GA. We focused on randomized controlled trials (RCTs) only, extrapolating data on onset and offset, and on the side effects and the pain at injection.

RESULTS

The search revealed 14 RCTs, all conducted in China. Eight RCTs studied patients undergoing sedation, and six focused on GA. Bolus of ciprofol for sedation or induction of GA varied from 0.2 to 0.5 mg/kg. In four studies using ciprofol for maintenance of GA, it was 0.8-2.4 mg/kg/h. Ciprofol pharmacokinetics seemed characterized by slower onset and offset as compared to propofol. Pain during injection was less frequent in the ciprofol group in all the 13 studies reporting it. Eight studies reported "adverse events" as a pooled outcome, and in five cases, the incidence was higher in the propofol group, not different in the remaining ones. Occurrence of hypotension was the most commonly investigated side effects, and it seemed less frequent with ciprofol.

CONCLUSION

Ciprofol for sedation or GA may be safer than propofol, though its pharmacokinetics may be less advantageous.

Comparison of the Efficacy of HSK3486 and Propofol for Induction of General Anesthesia in Adults: A Multicenter, Randomized, Double-blind, Controlled, Phase 3 Noninferiority Trial

BACKGROUND

Propofol is an intravenous anesthetic associated with hypotension, respiratory depression, and injection-site pain. HSK3486 injectable emulsion (ciprofol) is a 2,6-disubstituted phenol derivative with fast onset and quick, stable recovery. Previous studies support HSK3486 as an effective, safe anesthetic with substantially less injection-site pain than propofol. The primary objective of this study was to investigate the noninferiority of HSK3486 compared with propofol in successful general anesthesia induction.

METHODS

Two hundred fifty-five participants were enrolled in HSK3486-304, a multicenter, randomized (2:1), double-blind, propofol-controlled, phase 3 study evaluating HSK3486 for general anesthesia induction in adults undergoing elective surgery with tracheal intubation. The primary endpoint was successful anesthesia induction, defined as 1 or less on the Modified Observer's Assessment of Alertness/Sedation scale. Key secondary endpoints were proportion of participants with injection-site pain on the Numerical Rating Scale of 1 or greater and a composite endpoint, including the proportion of participants successfully induced while maintaining the desired anesthetic depth and without substantial cardiac and respiratory events. Safety endpoints included adverse events, abnormal vital signs, and injection-site pain.

RESULTS

Two hundred fifty-one participants (HSK3486, n = 168; propofol, n = 83) were included in the analyses. General anesthesia was successfully induced in 97.0% versus 97.6% of participants with HSK3486 and propofol, respectively. The difference in success rate was -0.57% (95% CI, -5.4 to 4.2%); the noninferiority boundary of -8% was not crossed. Thirty participants (18.0%) had injection-site pain with HSK3486 versus 64 (77.1%) with propofol (P < 0.0001). Eighty-one participants (48.2%) with HSK3486 versus 42 (50.6%) with propofol (P = 0.8780) satisfied the composite endpoint. When injection-site pain was excluded, the incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events related to study drug was 17.9% for HSK3486 and 14.5% for propofol.

CONCLUSIONS

The study met its primary objective and endpoint, demonstrating noninferiority of HSK3486 compared with propofol in successful anesthetic induction. Substantially less injection-site pain was associated with HSK3486 than with propofol.

EDITOR’S PERSPECTIVE

Median Effective Dose of Ciprofol Combined With Sufentanil for Inhibiting the Upper Gastrointestinal Endoscopic Placement Reaction in Elderly Patients

Objective

Ciprofol is a new sedative anesthetic drug that can be used for gastrointestinal endoscopy and induction of general anesthesia, but the appropriate dosage for use in elderly patients has not been determined. Sufentanil is a commonly used opioid in clinical practice, and this study was designed to induce anesthesia in elderly patients using sufentanil in combination with ciprofol. However, the optimal dosage of ciprofol when it is co-administered with sufentanil has not yet been established. This study was designed to find the median effective dose (ED50) and 95% confidence interval (95% CI) of ciprofol for intravenous anesthesia when combined with sufentanil.

Methods

We studied 57 patients who were scheduled to undergo a diagnostic upper gastrointestinal endoscopy. According to age, it was divided into two groups: 65∼74 years old (group A) and over 75 years old (group B). Using the modified Dixon sequence test method, intravenous bolus of 0.1 μg/kg sufentanil was given 3 min before ciprofol is administered, the initial dose of ciprofol was 0.4 mg/kg, the upper gastrointestinal endoscopy was placed after reaching the depth of sedation, and vital signs and adverse events were recorded at each perioperative time point (T0-T7).

Results

In the group A, when combined with 0.1 μg/kg sufentanil, the ED50 of ciprofol to inhibiting responses to insertion of upper gastrointestinal endoscopy was 0.23 mg/kg, and the 95% CI was 0.09∼0.30 mg/kg; in the group B, the ED50 was 0.18 mg/kg, and the 95% CI was 0.13∼0.22 mg/kg.

Conclusion

The ED50 of ciprofol in combination with sufentanil (0.1 μg/kg) for upper gastrointestinal endoscopy in elderly patients: 0.23 mg/kg in group A and 0.18 mg/kg in group B.

Population pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic modeling and exposure-response analysis of ciprofol in the induction and maintenance of general anesthesia in patients undergoing elective surgery: A prospective dose optimization study

AIM

This study aimed to establish a population pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic (PK-PD) model to explore the optimal maintenance dose and appropriate starting time of maintenance dose after induction of ciprofol and investigate the efficacy and safety of ciprofol for general anesthesia induction and maintenance in patients undergoing elective surgery.

METHOD

A total of 334 subjects with 3092 concentration measurements from nine clinical trials and 115 subjects with 5640 bispectral index (BIS) measurements from two clinical trials were used in the population PK-PD analysis. Exposure-response relationships for both efficacy endpoints (duration of anesthesia successful induction, time to recovery from anesthesia, time to respiratory recovery, and time from discontinuation to the 1st/3rd consecutive Aldrete score ≥ 9) and safety variables (hypotension, bradycardia, and injection site pain) were evaluated based on the data gathered from 115 subjects in two clinical trials.

RESULT

Ciprofol pharmacokinetics (PK) were adequately described by a three-compartment model with first-order elimination from the central compartment and redistribution from the deep and shallow peripheral compartments. An inhibitory sigmoidal Emax model best described the relationship between ciprofol effect-site concentrations and BIS measurements. Body weight, age, sex, blood sampling site, and study type (short-term infusion vs long-term infusion) were identified as statistically significant covariates on the PK of ciprofol. No covariates were found to have a significant effect on the pharmacodynamic (PD) parameters. The PK-PD simulation results showed that the optimal maintenance dose was 0.8 mg/kg/h and the appropriate time to start the maintenance dose was 4-5 mins after the induction dose of ciprofol. Within the exposure range of this study, no meaningful correlations between ciprofol exposures and efficacy or safety endpoints were observed.

CONCLUSION

A population PK-PD model was successfully developed to describe the ciprofol PK and BIS changes. Efficacy was consistent across the exposure range with a well-tolerated safety profile indicating no maintenance dose adjustment is required for patients undergoing elective surgery.

Cytochrome P450 2B6 and UDP-Glucuronosyltransferase Enzyme-Mediated Clearance of Ciprofol (HSK3486) in Humans: The Role of Hepatic and Extrahepatic Metabolism

Ciprofol (HSK3486) is a novel intravenous agent for general anesthesia. In humans, HSK3486 mainly undergoes glucuronidation to form M4 [fraction of clearance (fCL): 62.6%], followed by the formation of monohydroxylated metabolites that further undergo glucuronidation and sulfation to produce M5-1, M5-2, M5-3, and M3 (summed fCL: 35.2%). However, the complete metabolic pathways of HSK3486 in humans remain unclear. In this study, by comparison with chemically synthesized reference standards, three monohydroxylated metabolites [M7-1, 4-hydroxylation with an unbound intrinsic clearance (CLint,u) of 2211 μl/min/mg; M7-2, ω-hydroxylation with a CLint,u of 600 μl/min/mg; and M7-3, (ω-1)-hydroxylation with a CLint,u of 78.4 μl/min/mg] were identified in human liver microsomes, and CYP2B6 primarily catalyzed their formation. In humans, M7-1 was shown to undergo glucuronidation at the 4-position and 1-position by multiple UDP-glucuronosyltransferases (UGTs) to produce M5-1 and M5-3, respectively, or was metabolized to M3 by cytosolic sulfotransferases. M7-2 was glucuronidated at the ω position by UGT1A9, 2B4, and 2B7 to form M5-2. UGT1A9 predominantly catalyzed the glucuronidation of HSK3486 (M4). The CLint,u values for M4 formation in human liver and kidney microsomes were 1028 and 3407 μl/min/mg, respectively. In vitro to in vivo extrapolation analysis suggested that renal glucuronidation contributed approximately 31.4% of the combined clearance. In addition to HSK3486 glucuronidation (M4), 4-hydroxylation (M7-1) was identified as another crucial oxidative metabolic pathway (fCL: 34.5%). Further attention should be paid to the impact of CYP2B6- and UGT1A9-mediated drug interactions and gene polymorphisms on the exposure and efficacy of HSK3486. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT: This research elucidates the major oxidative metabolic pathways of HSK3486 (the formation of three monohydroxylated metabolites: M7-1, M7-2, M7-3) as well as definitive structures and formation pathways of these monohydroxylated metabolites and their glucuronides or sulfate in humans. This research also identifies major metabolizing enzymes responsible for the glucuronidation (UGT1A9) and oxidation (CYP2B6) of HSK3486 and characterizes the mechanism of extrahepatic metabolism. The above information is helpful in guiding the safe use of HSK3486 in the clinic.

Effective doses of ciprofol combined with alfentanil in inhibiting responses to gastroscope insertion, a prospective, single-arm, single-center study

BACKGROUND

Ciprofol is a novel intravenous sedative and anesthetic. Studies have shown that it features a rapid onset of action, a fast recovery time, slight inhibition of respiratory and cardiovascular functions, and a low incidence of adverse reactions. This study aims to explore the median effective dose (ED50) and the 95% effective dose (ED95) of ciprofol in inhibiting responses to gastroscope insertion when combined with a low dose of alfentanil, and to evaluate its safety, to provide a reference for the rational use of ciprofol in clinical practices.

METHODS

We included 25 patients aged 18-64 years of either sex who underwent gastroscopy under intravenous general anesthesia, with a Body Mass Index (BMI) 18-28 kg/m2, and an American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) grade I or II. In this study, the dose-finding strategy of ciprofol followed a modified Dixon's up-and-down method with an initial dose of 0.30 mg/kg and an increment of 0.02 mg/kg. Ciprofol was administered after intravenous injection of 7 µg/kg of alfentanil, and 2 min later a gastroscope was inserted. When the insertion response of one participant was positive (including body movement, coughing, and eye opening), an escalation of 0.02 mg/kg would be given to the next participant; otherwise, a de-escalation of 0.02 mg/kg would be administered. The study was terminated when negative response and positive response alternated 8 times. A Probit model was used to calculate the ED50 and ED95 of ciprofol in inhibiting responses to gastroscope insertion when combined with alfentanil. Patients' recovery time, discharge time, vital signs and occurrence of adverse reactions were recorded.

RESULTS

The ED50 of single-dose intravenous ciprofol injection with 7 µg/kg of alfentanil in inhibiting gastroscope insertion responses was 0.217 mg/kg, and the ED95 was 0.247 mg/kg. Patients' recovery time and discharge time were 11.04 ± 1.49 min and 9.64 ± 2.38 min, respectively. The overall incidence of adverse reactions was 12%.

CONCLUSION

The ED50 of ciprofol combined with 7 µg/kg of alfentanil in inhibiting gastroscope insertion responses was 0.217 mg/kg, and the ED95 was 0.247 mg/kg. Ciprofol showed a low incidence of anesthesia-related adverse events.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

http://www.chictr.org.cn (ChiCTR2200061727).

The optimal induction dose of ciprofol combined with low-dose rocuronium in children undergoing daytime adenotonsillectomy

Adenotonsillectomy is the most common daytime surgery performed on children. Anesthesiologists must select the optimal combination of drugs to ensure effective anesthesia effect and prompt recovery in children. The optimal induction dose of ciprofol in children is unclear. In this study, we aim to investigate the effect of different doses of ciprofol on anesthesia induction in children undergoing daytime adenotonsillectomy and provide a reference for clinical use. 144 children aged 3-12 years, ASA I-II, undergoing daytime adenotonsillectomy, were included in this clinical trial. The children were randomly divided into three groups and given 0.4 mg/kg (C4), 0.6 mg/kg (C6), or 0.8 mg/kg (C8) of ciprofol for anesthesia induction. The primary outcome was intubation conditions. Vital signs and injection pain were also recorded. The rates of unacceptable intubation conditions were 30.6%, 8.7%, and 8.2% in the C4, C6, and C8 groups (P value < 0.0167). The overall incidence of reported injection pain was 3.5%. The heart rate and mean arterial pressure did not differ between the groups at the same time points. We found that combining 0.6 mg/kg of ciprofol with low-dose rocuronium could provide optimal intubation conditions in pediatric daytime adenotonsillectomy patients. This combination resulted in stable circulation and BIS values. This study is registered at the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (Registration number: ChiCTR2200063144, Date of Registration: 31/08/2022).

Efficacy and safety of ciprofol (HSK3486) for procedural sedation and anesthesia induction in surgical patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Ciprofol (HSK3486) is a novel gamma-aminobutyric acid type A (GABAA) receptor agonist that has attracted wide attention because of its lower injection pain and fewer adverse events. We summarized all available evidence and analyzed the efficacy and safety of ciprofol during procedural sedation and anesthesia induction.

Methods

An electronic search of PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Google Scholar, Science Direct, the Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wan Fang Data, and the VIP Chinese Journal Service platform was conducted from inception of databases to March 1, 2023. Risk ratio (RR) and mean difference (MD) with 95 % confidence interval (CI) were used separately for binary categorical and continuous variables. We performed trial sequential analysis and the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology to judge the certainty of evidence.

Results

Fifteen randomized controlled trials with 2441 patients were included in this study. Ciprofol showed similar advantages to propofol in terms of induction success rate (RR = 1, 95 % CI = 0.99, 1.01, moderate certainty) and induction time (MD = 3.31, 95 % CI = -0.34, 6.95, low certainty), but did not increase the incidence of adverse events (RR = 0.88, 95 % CI = 0.78, 1.00, very low certainty), such as bradycardia (RR = 0.96, 95 % CI = 0.77, 1.21, high certainty), hypoxia (RR = 0.79, 95 % CI = 0.46, 1.37, p = 0.40, moderate certainty) and other adverse events. Although it may be associated with a longer time to be fully alert (MD = 1.22, 95 % CI = 0.32, 2.12, very low certainty), ciprofol significantly reduced injection pain (RR = 0.15, 95 % CI 0.09, 0.24, low certainty) and may have reduced the incidence of hypotension (RR = 0.77, 95 % CI = 0.63, 0.94, low certainty) and respiratory depression (RR = 0.29, 95 % CI = 0.15, 0.56, moderate certainty).

Conclusion

Ciprofol and propofol had similar effects on most outcomes. While the time to full alertness may be prolonged, injection pain was significantly reduced, and hypotension and respiratory depression may be reduced compared with propofol. We believe that ciprofol is an effective alternative to intravenous anesthetic agents.

A preclinical study on online monitoring of exhaled ciprofol concentration by the ultraviolet time-of-flight spectrometer and prediction of anesthesia depth in beagles

BACKGROUND

Exhaled air has been demonstrated as a reliable medium for monitoring propofol concentration. However, online monitoring of exhaled ciprofol have not been reported.

METHODS

Thirty-six beagles undergoing mechanical ventilation were divided into 6 groups, including bolus injection of low (Group BL, n = 6), medium (Group BM, n = 6), and high dose of ciprofol (Group BH, n = 6) groups; as well as 1 h continuous infusion of low (Group IL, n = 6), medium (Group IM, n = 6), and high dose of ciprofol (Group IH, n = 6) groups. The ciprofol concentration in exhaled air (CE) was determined by the ultraviolet time-of-flight mass spectrometer (UV-TOFMS). The correlations of CE and plasma concentration (Cp), CE and the bispectral index (BIS) were explored. Additionally, the pharmacokinetics (PK) models of CE and Cp, the pharmacodynamics (PD) models of CE and BIS were also established.

RESULTS

Online monitoring of exhaled ciprofol can be achieved with the UV-TOFMS instrument. The CE of ciprofol in beagles was found at parts per billion by volume (ppbv) level. The linear correlation of CE and Cp was weak in bolus injection groups (R2 = 0.01) nonetheless moderate in continuous infusion groups (R2 = 0.53). The i.v. bolus PK model of CE and Cp can be fitted with the non-compartment models. Additionally, the the PD models of CE and BIS can be well fitted with the inhibitory sigmoid Emax model with the estimate values of IC50 = 0.05 ± 0.01 ppbv, γ = 4.74 ± 1.51, E0 = 81.40 ± 3.75, Imax = 16.35 ± 4.27 in bolus injection groups; and IC50 = 0.05 ± 0.01 ppbv, γ = 6.92 ± 1.30, E0 = 83.08 ± 1.62, Imax = 12.58 ± 1.65 in continuous infusion groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Online monitoring of exhaled ciprofol concentration in beagles can be achieved with the UV-TOFMS instrument. Good correlations can be observed between exhaled ciprofol concentration and its cerebral effects reflected by the BIS value, demonstrating the potential of exhaled ciprofol monitoring for titrating depth of anesthesia in future clinical setting.

Drug-drug interaction study of ciprofol and sodium divalproex: Pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and safety in healthy Chinese subjects

Ciprofol (also known as HSK3486) is a promising intravenous anesthetic candidate derived from propofol and independently developed by Haisco Pharmaceutical Group Co., Ltd. (Chengdu, China). Compared with propofol, ciprofol has the potential to reduce the dose required and the associated risks. Ciprofol is extensively metabolized in vivo, and its interaction with other concurrently administered drugs during clinical application is worthy of attention. Therefore, an open-label, two-stage sequential study was performed in healthy subjects who received either a single administration of ciprofol injection or ciprofol injection after oral administration of sodium divalproex. The aim of the study was to evaluate the effects of sodium divalproex on ciprofol with respect to pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and safety, thus providing a basis for the rational clinical use of ciprofol and sodium divalproex.

Efficacy and Safety of Ciprofol Sedation in ICU Patients Undergoing Mechanical Ventilation: A Multicenter, Single-Blind, Randomized, Noninferiority Trial

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effectiveness and safety of ciprofol for sedating patients in ICUs who required mechanical ventilation (MV).

DESIGN

A multicenter, single-blind, randomized, noninferiority trial.

SETTING

Twenty-one centers across China from December 2020 to June 2021.

PATIENTS

A total of 135 ICU patients 18 to 80 years old with endotracheal intubation and undergoing MV, who were expected to require sedation for 6-24 hours.

INTERVENTIONS

One hundred thirty-five ICU patients were randomly allocated into ciprofol ( n = 90) and propofol ( n = 45) groups in a 2:1 ratio. Ciprofol or propofol were IV infused at loading doses of 0.1 mg/kg or 0.5 mg/kg, respectively, over 4 minutes ± 30 seconds depending on the physical condition of each patient. Ciprofol or propofol were then immediately administered at an initial maintenance dose of 0.3 mg/kg/hr or 1.5 mg/kg/hr, to achieve the target sedation range of Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale (+1 to -2). Besides, continuous IV remifentanil analgesia was administered (loading dose: 0.5-1 μg/kg, maintenance dose: 0.02-0.15 μg/kg/min).

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Of the 135 patients enrolled, 129 completed the study. The primary endpoint-sedation success rates of ciprofol and propofol groups were 97.7% versus 97.8% in the full analysis set (FAS) and were both 100% in per-protocol set (PPS). The noninferiority margin was set as 8% and confirmed with a lower limit of two-sided 95% CI for the inter-group difference of -5.98% and -4.32% in the FAS and PPS groups. Patients who received ciprofol had a longer recovery time ( p = 0.003), but there were no differences in the remaining secondary endpoints (all p > 0.05). The occurrence rates of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) or drug-related TEAEs were not significantly different between the groups (all p > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Ciprofol was well tolerated, with a noninferior sedation profile to propofol in Chinese ICU patients undergoing MV for a period of 6-24 hours.

A systematic review and meta-analysis comparing the efficacy and safety of ciprofol (HSK3486) versus propofol for anesthetic induction and non-ICU sedation

Background: Ciprofol (HSK3486) is a novel intravenous anesthetic agent that bears structural similarity to propofol and displays favorable pharmacodynamic characteristics such as rapid onset and offset. The meta-analysis aimed at comparing the efficacy and safety of ciprofol versus propofol in clinical practice. Methods: Medline, EMBASE, Google Scholar, Cochrane Library were searched from inception to April 2023. The primary outcome was success rate of sedation/anesthetic induction and differences in sedation/induction time. The secondary outcomes included risks of hemodynamic instability, respiratory complications, and pain on injection, as well as recovery profiles, satisfaction score, and top-up dose requirement. Results: Twelve RCTs (sedation: n = 6, anesthetic induction, n = 6, all conducted in China) involving 1,793 patients (age: 34-58 years) published from 2021 to 2023 were analyzed. Pooled results revealed no differences in success rate [risk ratio (RR) = 1, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.99 to 1.01, I2 = 0%, 1,106 patients, p = 1] and time required for successful anesthetic induction/sedation [mean difference (MD) = 7.95 s, 95% CI: -1.09 to 16.99, I2 = 97%, 1,594 patients, p = 0.08]. The risks of top-up dose requirement (RR = 0.94, p = 0.48), cardiopulmonary complications [i.e., bradycardia (RR = 0.94, p = 0.67), tachycardia (RR = 0.83, p = 0.68), hypertension (RR = 1.28, p = 0.2), hypoxemia/pulmonary depression (RR = 0.78, p = 0.24)], and postoperative nausea/vomiting (RR = 0.85, p = 0.72), as well as discharge time (MD = 1.39 min, p = 0.14) and satisfaction score (standardized MD = 0.23, p = 0.16) did not differ significantly between the two groups. However, the ciprofol group had lower risks of hypotension (RR = 0.85, p = 0.02) and pain on injection (RR = 0.17, p < 0.00001) than the propofol group. The time to full alertness was statistically shorter in the propofol group (i.e., 0.66 min), but without clinical significance. Conclusion: Our results demonstrated similar efficacy between ciprofol and propofol for sedation and anesthetic induction, while ciprofol was associated with lower risks of hypotension and pain on injection. Future studies are warranted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of ciprofol in pediatric or the elderly populations. Systematic Review Registration: (https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/), identifier (CRD42023421278).

Calibration and validation of ultraviolet time-of-flight mass spectrometry for online measurement of exhaled ciprofol

Ciprofol (HSK 3486, C14H20O), a novel 2,6-disubstituted phenol derivative similar to propofol, is a new type of intravenous general anaesthetic. We found that the exhaled ciprofol concentration could be measured online by ultraviolet time-of-flight mass spectrometry (UV-TOFMS), which could be used to predict the plasma concentration and anaesthetic effects of ciprofol. In this study, we present the calibration method and validation results of UV-TOFMS for the quantification of ciprofol gas. Using a self-developed gas generator to prepare different concentrations of ciprofol calibration gas, we found a linear correlation between the concentration and intensity of ciprofol from 0 parts per trillion by level (pptv) to 485.85 pptv (R2 = 0.9987). The limit of quantification was 48.59 pptv and the limit of detection was 7.83 pptv. The imprecision was 12.44% at 97.17 pptv and was 8.96% at 485.85 pptv. The carry-over duration was 120 seconds. In addition, we performed a continuous infusion of ciprofol in beagles, measured the exhaled concentration of ciprofol by UV-TOFMS, determined the plasma concentration by high-performance liquid chromatography, and monitored the anaesthetic effects as reflected by the bispectral index value. The results showed that the exhaled and plasma concentrations of ciprofol were linearly correlated. The exhaled ciprofol concentration correlated well with the anaesthetic effect. The study showed that we could use UV-TOFMS to provide a continuous measurement of gaseous ciprofol concentration at 20 second intervals.

Comparison of remifentanil and esketamine in combination with propofol for patient sedation during fiberoptic bronchoscopy

BACKGROUND

Ideal sedation and analgesia strategies for fiberoptic bronchoscopy have not been found. At present, propofol based sedation strategy still has some defects, such as respiratory depression and blood pressure drop. It is difficult to meet the requirements of safety and effectiveness at the same time. The aim of this study was to compare the clinical efficacy of propofol/remifentanil with propofol/esketamine for patient sedation during fiberoptic bronchoscopy.

METHOD

Patients undergoing fiberoptic bronchoscopy were randomly assigned to propofol/ remifentanil (PR group; n = 42) or propofol/esketamine (PK group; n = 42) for sedation and analgesia. The primary outcome was the rate of transient hypoxia (oxygen saturation (SpO₂) < 95%). The secondary outcomes are the intraoperative hemodynamics, including the changes in blood pressure, heart rate, the incidence of adverse reactions, the total amount of propofol usage were recorded, and the satisfaction level of patients and bronchoscopists.

RESULTS

After sedation, the arterial pressure and heart rate of patients in the PK group were stable without significant decrease. Decreases in diastolic blood pressure, mean arterial pressure, and heart rate were observed in patients in the PR group (P < 0.05), although it was not of clinical relevance. The dosage of propofol in the PR group was significantly higher than that in the PK group (144 ± 38 mg vs. 125 ± 35 mg, P = 0.012). Patients in the PR group showed more transient hypoxia (SpO₂ < 95%) during surgery (7 vs. 0, 0% versus 16.6%, P = 0.018), more intraoperative choking (28 vs. 7, P < 0.01), postoperative vomiting (22 vs. 13, P = 0.076) and vertigo (15 vs. 13, P = 0.003). Bronchoscopists in the PK group showed more satisfaction.

CONCLUSION

Compared with remifentanil, the combination of esketamine with propofol in fiberoptic bronchoscopy leaded to more stable intraoperative hemodynamics, lower dosage of propofol, lower transient hypoxia rate, fewer incidence of adverse events, and greater bronchoscopists satisfaction.

The Effect of Different Doses of Ciprofol in Patients with Painless Gastrointestinal Endoscopy

Background

Ciprofol is currently used for painless gastrointestinal endoscopy and anesthesia induction. However, whether it is superior to propofol and its optimal dose remains unknown.

Methods

A total of 149 patients, 63 males and 86 females, aged 18-80 years, BMI 18-28 kg/m², ASA I-III, were divided randomly into four groups: propofol group (group P, n = 44), ciprofol 0.2mg/kg group (group C2, n = 38), ciprofol 0.3mg/kg group (group C3, n = 36) and ciprofol 0.4 mg/kg group (group C4, n = 31). Groups C2, C3 and C4 had injected IV with ciprofol 0.2, 0.3 and 0.4 mg/kg, respectively. Group P had injected IV with propofol 1.5mg/kg. The time for disappearance of the eyelash reflex, gastrointestinal endoscopy time, recovery time, and the Modified Observer's Assessment of Alertness/Sedation (MOAA/S) score at awakening (T₁), 15 minutes after awakening (T₂) and 30 minutes after awakening (T₃) were recorded.

Results

Compared with group P, the time to fall asleep was significantly shortened, and the incidence of nausea and vomiting and injection pain was significantly lower in groups C2, C3 and C4 (P < 0.05). There was no significant difference in recovery time and recovery quality between each group (P > 0.05). Compared with group P and C4, the incidence of hypotension and respiratory depression was significantly lower in groups C2 and C3 (P < 0.05).

Conclusion

The appropriate dose of ciprofol for painless gastrointestinal endoscopy is more advantageous than propofol in hemodynamics and respiratory stability, with less injection pain and nausea and vomiting, which is worthy of clinical promotion.

Efficacy and safety of Ciprofol for procedural sedation and anesthesia in non-operating room settings

STUDY OBJECTIVE

Ciprofol, a novel intravenous anesthetic, provides rapid recovery in patients undergoing colonoscopy. We aimed to examine the efficacy and safety of ciprofol in comparison with propofol for sedation or anesthesia in non-operating room settings including endoscopic submucosal dissection, endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, and flexible bronchoscopy (FB).

DESIGN

Prospective, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group clinical trial.

SETTING

University-affiliated teaching hospital.

PATIENTS

We recruited 207 patients scheduled for an endoscopic procedure from October 2021 to December 2021.

INTERVENTIONS

Patients were randomized into three groups according to the dose during induction (n = 69 each): 1) ciprofol 6 mg/kg/h, 2) ciprofol 8 mg/kg/h, or 3) propofol 40 mg/kg/h. Ciprofol or propofol was administered throughout the procedure.

MEASUREMENTS

The primary outcome was the success rate of sedation or anesthesia for the procedures. Secondary outcomes included induction time, endoscope insertion time, recovery time, discharge time, incidence of drug-related adverse events (AEs), neurological and inflammatory outcomes.

MAIN RESULTS

The procedure success rates in the three groups were 100%. The induction time in the 6 (3.3 ± 1.0 min) and 8 mg/kg/h (2.9 ± 0.6 min) ciprofol groups was longer than that in the propofol group (2.5 ± 0.6 min) only in patients undergoing FB (p = 0.004). The time for patients to be fully alert and discharged from the post-anesthesia care unit was comparable across the three groups (p > 0.05). The incidence of drug-related AEs in the propofol and 6 and 8 mg/kg/h ciprofol groups was 84.1%, 76.8%, and 79.7%. No pain on injection was reported by ciprofol groups. Neurological outcomes and inflammatory responses were comparable among the three groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Ciprofol induced a level of sedation or anesthesia equivalent to that induced by propofol in non-operating room settings except for a prolonged induction time in patients undergoing FB. Ciprofol had a safety profile similar to that of propofol. No pain on injection was reported by ciprofol.

Efficacy and safety of HSK3486 vs. propofol for the induction and maintenance of general anaesthesia: A multicentre, single-blind, randomised, parallel-group, phase 3 clinical trial

BACKGROUND

HSK3486 (ciprofol) is a 2,6-disubstituted phenol derivative that acts like propofol as an agonist at the gamma-aminobutyric acid-A (GABA A ) receptor.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the efficacy and safety of HSK3486 for general anaesthesia induction and maintenance.

DESIGN

A single-blinded, randomised, parallel-group, phase 3 trial.

SETTING

Involving 10 study centres, from November 24, 2020 to January 25, 2021.

PATIENTS

A total of 129 patients undergoing nonemergency, noncardiothoracic, and nonbrain elective surgery.

INTERVENTION

Patients were randomly assigned at a 2:1 ratio into HSK3486 or propofol groups, to receive HSK3486 (0.4 mg kg -1 ) or propofol (2.0 mg kg -1 ) for induction before a maintenance infusion at initial rates of 0.8 and 5.0 mg kg -1 h -1 , and were adjusted to maintain a bispectral index (BIS) of 40-60 until the end of surgery.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Noninferiority between the drugs was evaluated as the lower limit of the 95% confidence interval (CI) for the between-group difference in the success rate of anesthetic maintenance (primary outcome) >-8%. Secondary outcomes included successful anaesthetic induction, full alertness and spontaneous breathing recovery, time until leaving the postanaesthesia care unit and changes in BIS. Safety profiles were also measured.

RESULTS

Of 129 enrolled patients, 128 completed the trial, with 86 in the HSK3486 group and 42 in the propofol group. The success rate for the maintenance of general anaesthesia was 100% for both groups, and noninferiority of HSK3486 was confirmed (95% CI -4.28% to 8.38%). No significant differences were found between the two groups of patients with regard to secondary outcomes (all P  > 0.05). There appeared to be a comparable incidence of treatment for emergency adverse events (TEAEs) (80.2% vs. 81.0%, P  = 1.000) and drug-related TEAEs (57.0% vs. 64.3%, P  = 0.451) in the HSK3486 and propofol groups.

CONCLUSION

HSK3486 had a noninferior efficacy profile compared to propofol, exhibiting excellent tolerance.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinicaltrials.gov, identifier: NCT04511728.

Ciprofol: A Novel Alternative to Propofol in Clinical Intravenous Anesthesia?

Ciprofol is a novel compound that was independently developed in China. According to the Chinese product instructions approved by the China National Medical Products Administration and the information of official website, indications for ciprofol include sedation and anesthesia during the surgical/procedure of nontracheal intubation, induction and maintenance of general anesthesia, and sedation during intensive care. Ciprofol is a short-acting intravenous sedative based on the structural modification of propofol. Ciprofol has high efficacy, good selectivity, and fewer adverse reactions, indicating good clinical application potential. A series of clinical studies have been conducted to evaluate the sedative effect of ciprofol in various procedures and settings, including gastroscopy and colonoscopy, fiber-optic bronchoscopy, general anesthesia in elective surgeries, and mechanical ventilation in intensive care units. This review summarizes the chemical structure, pharmacodynamics, and pharmacokinetic properties of ciprofol. We also assessed the efficacy and safety of ciprofol by synthesizing the relevant clinical trial data.

Efficacy and safety of ciprofol-remifentanil versus propofol-remifentanil during fiberoptic bronchoscopy: A prospective, randomized, double-blind, non-inferiority trial

Objective: Ciprofol is a novel 2,6-disubstituted phenol derivative that has improved pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties compared with propofol. This study was conducted to compare the efficacy and safety of ciprofol-remifentanil versus propofol-remifentanil for patients undergoing fiberoptic bronchoscopy. Methods: Overall, 92 patients undergoing fiberoptic bronchoscopy were included in this prospective, randomized, double-blind, non-inferiority trial and were equally divided into two groups (n = 46 each). Fentanyl (50 μg) was given 2 min before the intravenous infusion of 0.3 mg/kg of ciprofol or 1.2 mg/kg of propofol over a time period of 30 s. During anesthesia maintenance, 0.05-0.2 μg/kg/min of remifentanil combined with one-third to one-fourth of the initial dose of ciprofol or propofol was repeated at 2-min intervals, as required, to maintain a Modified Observer's Assessment of Alertness and Sedation (MOAA/S) scale score <3. The primary outcome was the successful rate of fiberoptic bronchoscopy. Secondary outcomes included demographic characteristics, time metrics, hemodynamics, coughing severity, intubating conditions, lowest oxygen saturation, utilization of study drug doses, number of remedies (lidocaine and vasoactive drugs) used, satisfaction scores of both patients and the endoscopist, occurrence of intraoperative awareness, patients' willing to repeat fiberoptic bronchoscopy, and occurrence and severity of adverse events. Results: The successful completion rate of fiberoptic bronchoscopy was 91.30% (42 of 46; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 82.80%-99.80%) in the ciprofol-remifentanil group and 89.13% (41 of 46; 95% CI: 79.80%-98.50%) in the propofol-remifentanil group. Though the clinically acceptable intubating condition was improved in the ciprofol-remifentanil group, this difference has no clinical statistical difference (p > 0.05). No significant differences were noted between the two groups with respect to time metrics, consumption of fentanyl and remifentanil, or number of remedies (lidocaine and vasoactive drugs). Patients' willingness to repeat fiberoptic bronchoscopy and the satisfaction of both patients and endoscopist were significantly higher in the ciprofol-remifentanil than in the propofol-remifentanil group (p < 0.05). Compared with patients in the propofol-remifentanil group, patients in the ciprofol-remifentanil group had more stable hemodynamics. The lowest oxygen saturation was significantly higher in the ciprofol-remifentanil than in the propofol-remifentanil group (p < 0.05). The numbers of patients who experienced pain on injection in the ciprofol-remifentanil group was significantly lower than the number in the propofol-remifentanil group (p < 0.01). Severity of coughing, clinically acceptable severity of coughing, incidence of intraoperative awareness, and other adverse events were all similar between the two groups (p > 0.05). Only four patients experienced grade 2 adverse events (severe hypotension in one patient in the ciprofol-remifentanil group and three patients in the propofol-remifentanil group; p > 0.05); they were treated with noradrenaline. Conclusion: Ciprofol-remifentanil was non-inferior to propofol-remifentanil with regard to successful sedation for flexible bronchoscopy, when used with pre-intravenous administration of 50 μg of fentanyl. At the same time, patients' willingness to repeat flexible bronchoscopy and the satisfactions were all significantly improved.

Safety, pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of a novel γ-aminobutyric acid (GABA) receptor potentiator, HSK3486, in Chinese patients with hepatic impairment

BACKGROUND

The primary objective of this study was to investigate if hepatic impairment alters the safety, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics of HSK3486.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

This was a clinical trial of HSK3486 in subjects with normal hepatic function (n = 8), and mild (Child-Pugh A; n = 8), or moderate (Child-Pugh B; n = 8) hepatic impairment. Each subject received an IV bolus dose of 0.4 mg/kg HSK3486 for 1 min, immediately followed by a maintenance infusion of 0.4 mg/kg/h HSK3486 for 30 min.

RESULTS

In total, 24 subjects were enrolled and completed the study. HSK3486 was generally well tolerated by all subjects. There were no serious AEs and no deaths reported during the study. The incidence of AEs was numerically highest in subjects with moderate hepatic impairment. The exposure (AUC) of HSK3486 increased gradually with the decrease in hepatic function; however, degree of hepatic impairment had little effect on HSK3486 PD (MOAA/S and BIS).

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, there were no clinically relevant differences in HSK3486 exposure or PD in subjects with mild or moderate hepatic impairment compared to normal control. These data imply that HSK3486 dose adjustment is not warranted in subjects with mild or moderate hepatic impairment.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (CT.gov identifier: NCT04145596).Key MessageHSK3486 at an IV bolus dose of 0.4 mg/kg and a maintenance infusion of 0.4 mg/kg/h was safe and well tolerated by all mild or moderate hepatic impairment subjects and normal hepatic function subjects.There were no clinically relevant differences in HSK3486 exposure or PD in subjects with mild or moderate hepatic impairment compared to subjects with normal hepatic function.HSK3486 dose adjustment is not required in subjects with mild or moderate hepatic impairment.

The Effectiveness of Supportive Psychotherapy on the Anxiety and Depression Experienced by Patients Receiving Fiberoptic Bronchoscope

Objectives

As the largest cohort of healthcare workers and nurses can practice as psychotherapists to integrate the psychotherapeutic interventions as part of routine care. The present study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of supportive psychotherapy (SPT) on patients who had been scheduled to undergo a fiberoptic bronchoscopy (FOB) procedure.

Methods

This study retrospectively analyzed 92 patients who underwent FOB, which was divided into the SPT group and usual-care group based on whether patients were given SPT interventions or not. The Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) were used to determine the severity of depression and anxiety, as well as the 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey questionnaire (SF-36) to evaluate the health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Moreover, the patients' satisfaction was assessed based on the Likert 5-Point Scale.

Results

The baseline status of anxiety, depression, and HRQoL in patients was similar in the SPT group and the usual-care group with no significant difference. Both PHQ-9 score and HADS-D score in the SPT group after intervention were lower than that in the usual-care group, accompanied by the deceased HADS-A subscale. Moreover, the improved HRQoL was found in the patients undergoing FOB after SPT interventions as compared to those receiving conventional nursing care using the SF-36 score. Additionally, the patient satisfaction in the SPT group was higher than in the usual-care group.

Conclusions

The study demonstrated that anxiety and depression, as negative emotions, can be reduced by supportive psychotherapy in patients receiving FOB with improved mental health and satisfaction with nursing care.

Structural Modification in Anesthetic Drug Development for Prodrugs and Soft Drugs

Among the advancements in drug structural modifications, the increased focus on drug metabolic and pharmacokinetic properties in the anesthetic drug design process has led to significant developments. Drug metabolism also plays a key role in optimizing the pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and safety of drug molecules. Thus, in the field of anesthesiology, the applications of pharmacokinetic strategies are discussed in the context of sedatives, analgesics, and muscle relaxants. In this review, we summarize two approaches for structural optimization to develop anesthetic drugs, by designing prodrugs and soft drugs. Drugs that both failed and succeeded during the developmental stage are highlighted to illustrate how drug metabolism and pharmacokinetic optimization strategies may help improve their physical and chemical properties.

What's New in Intravenous Anaesthesia? New Hypnotics, New Models and New Applications

New anaesthetic drugs and new methods to administer anaesthetic drugs are continually becoming available, and the development of new PK-PD models furthers the possibilities of using arget controlled infusion (TCI) for anaesthesia. Additionally, new applications of existing anaesthetic drugs are being investigated. This review describes the current situation of anaesthetic drug development and methods of administration, and what can be expected in the near future.