SynthesisDrug design, development and therapy2025
Ciprofol Versus Propofol for Sedation in Gastrointestinal Endoscopy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis in a Chinese Population.
Synthesis in Drug design, development and therapy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Optimal dosing of ciprofol for gastrointestinal endoscopy: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.BMC gastroenterology · 2025Pooled it
- Cipepofol for adjunctive sedation during neuraxial anesthesia: a study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.Trials · 2026Trial
- Effect of ciprofol with etomidate on the occurrence of hypotension in elderly patients undergoing upper gastrointestinal endoscopy: a prospective randomized controlled study.BMC anesthesiology · 2026Trial
- Efficacy and Safety of Ciprofol versus Propofol for Tracheal Intubation in Pediatric Patients Undergoing Laparoscopic Hernia Repair: An Assessor-Blinded Randomised Controlled Trial.Drug design, development and therapy · 2026Trial
- Comparison of Incidence of Respiratory Depression Between Ciprofol versus Propofol for Procedural Sedation During First-Trimester Surgical Abortion: A Randomized Controlled Trial.Drug design, development and therapy · 2026Trial
- Effects of nine sedative-analgesic combinations on fatigue after gastrointestinal endoscopy: a randomized controlled 3 × 3 factorial trial protocol.Annals of medicine · 2026Article
- Sedation in Gastrointestinal Endoscopy: From Drug-Centered Protocols to Personalized, Technology-Supported Pathways: A Narrative Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Effects of ciprofol versus propofol sedation on hypoxaemia and hypotension in elderly patients undergoing bidirectional endoscopy: protocol for a randomized controlled trial.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Efficacy and safety of ciprofol versus propofol for sedation in hysteroscopy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Therapeutic advances in drug safety · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Ciprofol (HSK3486) is a novel intravenous anesthetic structurally similar to propofol; however, its advantages over propofol remain unclear. This study aimed to compare the safety, efficacy, and satisfaction outcomes of ciprofol and propofol during gastrointestinal endoscopy. Patients and Methods: This systematic review incorporated all available comparative trials assessing ciprofol versus propofol for endoscopic sedation following a comprehensive search strategy across eight biomedical databases-Web of Science, Embase, PubMed, and Cochrane Library, along with major Chinese repositories (CNKI, Wanfang, CBM, and VIP)-through September 2023. Evidence synthesis was conducted per PRISMA guidelines, with methodological rigor enhanced through prospective trial registry screening and implementation of GRADE framework for evidence grading. Results: This systematic review included 45 randomized controlled trials involving 6884 patients who met predefined methodological and clinical eligibility thresholds. Very low to moderate certainty evidence showed that ciprofol induced sedation or anesthesia comparable to that of propofol (relative risk [RR]: 1.00, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.00 to 1.01), with both agents demonstrating similar procedural efficiency. Furthermore, ciprofol was associated with a reduced incidence of complications, including hypotension (RR: 0.60, 95% CI: 0.51 to 0.70), bradycardia (RR: 0.69, 95% CI: 0.56 to 0.85), nausea and vomiting (RR: 0.67, 95% CI: 0.54 to 0.84), hypoxia (RR: 0.38, 95% CI: 0.31 to 0.48), respiratory depression (RR: 0.39, 95% CI: 0.28 to 0.56), apnea (RR: 0.35, 95% CI: 0.23 to 0.53), and injection pain (RR: 0.13, 95% CI: 0.09 to 0.17), while also enhancing patient and anesthesiologist satisfaction. Conclusion: Ciprofol-induced sedation or anesthesia was comparable to propofol, with both drugs demonstrating similar procedural efficiency. However, ciprofol was associated with lower risk of adverse reactions and higher satisfaction among patients and anesthesiologists. Ciprofol may represent a superior sedative option for gastrointestinal endoscopy.
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.