SynthesisBMC gastroenterology2025
Optimal dosing of ciprofol for gastrointestinal endoscopy: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMC gastroenterology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe use of ciprofol for endoscopic sedation is relatively recent; however, no definitive conclusions have been drawn regarding its optimal dose. This study evaluated the optimal ciprofol dose for sedated endoscopy using a network meta-analysis.
methodsPubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, CNKI, Wanfang, VIP Chinese scientific and technological journal full-text database, and SinoMed were searched from inception to July 2025. The review incorporated all available comparative trials assessing ciprofol versus propofol for endoscopic sedation. The primary outcome was the incidence of injection pain and adverse cardiopulmonary reactions.
resultsA total of 52 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving 7283 patients were included. Ciprofol demonstrated a significantly lower incidence of injection pain, respiratory depression, bradycardia, and hypotension compared to propofol. Compared with propofol 2 mg/kg, ciprofol 0.4 mg/kg were associated with a significantly lower incidence of injection pain (RR[95%CrI] = 0.13[0.08, 0.21], high confidence), respiratory depression (RR[95%CrI] = 0.36[0.26, 0.48], high confidence), and hypotension (RR[95%CrI] = 0.62[0.44, 0.84], moderate confidence).
conclusionA dose of 0.4 mg/kg of ciprofol may represent the optimal dose for endoscopic sedation, as it can reduce the incidence of injection pain, respiratory depression, and hypotension. However, most included studies focus on Chinese populations, which limits the global applicability of the findings. Future RCTs conducted in more countries are warranted.
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.