Trial reportBMC anesthesiology2024
The potency-ratio of ciprofol and propofol under procedural sedation and anesthesia for outpatient hysteroscopy during cervical dilation: a study using up-and-down sequential allocation method.
Trial report in BMC anesthesiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparison of the potency-ratio of ciprofol and propofol on sedative effects in painless hysteroscopy: a randomized double-blind dose-response study.BMC anesthesiology · 2025Trial
- The median effective dose of esketamine with different doses of oliceridine during hysteroscopic surgery.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2025Trial
- Intravenous Anesthesia with Ciprofol and Remimazolam Besylate for Painless Gastroscopy: A Prospective, Single-Center, Randomized Controlled Trial.Drug design, development and therapy · 2025Trial
- Median effective dose (ED50) of ciprofol combined with alfentanil for suppressing cervical dilation responses during hysteroscopy: a prospective Dixon up-and-down study.BMC anesthesiology · 2026Article
- Efficacy and safety of ciprofol versus propofol for sedation in hysteroscopy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Therapeutic advances in drug safety · 2026Article
- Safety and efficacy of ciprofol for general anesthesia induction in elderly patients undergoing lumbar surgery.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- Ciprofol Alleviates Depressive-Like Behaviors in CUMS Mice Through PPARα-Associated ERK/CREB Signaling Activation.Drug design, development and therapy · 2025Article
- Review
- Comparative efficacy and safety of ciprofol and propofol in hysteroscopy: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Journal of anaesthesiology, clinical pharmacologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCiprofol(HSK3486) is a novel 2,6-disubstituted phenol derivate, a short-acting intravenous sedative, which has similar efficacy characteristics as propofol with less incidence of side effect. Both ciprofol and propofol are often used in outpatient hysteroscopic surgery for sedation. However, the relative potency of these two drugs has not been fully determined in this context.
objectiveOur study aimed to investigate the potency-ratio of ciprofol and propofol under procedural sedation and anesthesia in restraining reaction of outpatient hysteroscopy dilatation.
methodsThe ED50 (effective dose in 50% of subjects) value for ciprofol and propofol were calculated by Up-and-Down Sequential Allocation Method. 60 healthy patients undergoing daytime hysteroscopy were randomly divided into two groups, which were intravenously injected with ciprofol at an initial dose of 0.4 mg/kg (group C) or propofol at an initial dose of 2 mg/kg (group P) at 2 min after intravenous injection of sufentanil 0.15ug/kg. A successful response is defined as the absence of patient movement in the case of cervical dilation. Conversely, the presence of patient movement is defined as failure. After successful or failed responses, each follow-up patient in the corresponding group was reduced or increased with propofol 0.5 mg/kg or ciprofol 0.1 mg/kg, respectively.
resultsThe estimated ED50 value for ciprofol and propofol in restraining reaction of hysteroscopy dilatation was 0.444 mg/kg (95% CI, 0.385-0.503 mg/kg) and 1.985 mg/kg (95% CI, 1.801-2.170 mg/kg), respectively. The incidence of respiratory depression, hypoxemia and injection pain in ciprofol was significantly lower than those in propofol.
conclusionThe ED50 of ciprofol and propofol in preventing hysteroscopy dilatation reaction was 0.444 mg/kg (95% CI, 0.385-0.503 mg/kg) and 1.985 mg/kg (95% CI, 1.801-2.170 mg/kg) for outpatient hysteroscopy. The potency-ratio of ciprofol and propofol observed in our study was 1.0:4.5(95%CI,1:3.9-1:5.1).
trial registrationThe study was registered at Chinese Clinical Trial Registry http//www.chictr.org.cn/ (Registration date19/11/22 Trial ID ChiCTR2200065954).
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.