Trial reportDrug design, development and therapy2026
Efficacy and Safety of Ciprofol versus Propofol for Tracheal Intubation in Pediatric Patients Undergoing Laparoscopic Hernia Repair: An Assessor-Blinded Randomised Controlled Trial.
Trial report in Drug design, development and therapy, 2026. 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Ciprofol, a novel GABA Patients and Methods: Of 166 screened children, 120 were enrolled: 40 patients to dose-finding phase to determine the ED95 of ciprofol by biased coin design up-and-down sequential method, and the remaining 80 patients to non-inferiority comparison phase. 80 patients were randomly allocated in 1:1 ratio to receive ciprofol (0.782 mg/kg) or propofol (4 mg/kg) for induction, combined with fentanyl and cisatracurium. Primary outcome was proportion of patients who achieved an excellent grade for tracheal intubation conditions. Secondary outcomes included incidence of adverse events, hemodynamic parameters, loss of consciousness time, and PACU recovery time. Results: (1) ED95 of ciprofol for tracheal intubation in children undergoing laparoscopic hernia repair was 0.782 mg/kg (95% CI: 0.75-0.795 mg/kg). (2) An excellent grade for tracheal intubation conditions was achieved in 38 (95.0%) children in ciprofol group versus 35 (89.7%) children in propofol group in per-protocol analysis (rate difference 5.3%, 95% CI -4.14-14.73%). In intention-to-treat analysis, excellent grade rate in propofol group was 90.0% (36/40), with a rate difference of 5.0% (95% CI -4.1%-14.9%). Non-inferiority of ciprofol to propofol was confirmed in both analyses. Adverse events occurred in 7 (17.5%) children receiving ciprofol and 30 (76.9%) receiving propofol. Injection pain was significantly lower with ciprofol (2.5% vs. 38.5%). Conclusion: In healthy, non-obese children aged 3-6 years undergoing laparoscopic hernia repair, ED95 of ciprofol for tracheal intubation was 0.782 mg/kg. Ciprofol (0.782 mg/kg) demonstrated non-inferiority to propofol (4 mg/kg) in excellent tracheal intubation conditions, with lower injection pain and more stable hemodynamics.
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.