Trial reportFrontiers in aging2026
Comparison of anesthesia induction with ciprofol, propofol, and etomidate in elderly patients undergoing gastrointestinal endoscopy: a single center, prospective, double blind randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in Frontiers in aging, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: We compared benefits and adverse effects of anesthesia induction with ciprofol, propofol, and etomidate in elderly patients undergoing gastrointestinal endoscopy anesthesia. Methods: A total of 391 patients who underwent painless gastrointestinal endoscopy; age ≥ 60 years; ASA I-III were involved between April 30 and 30 December 2025. The primary outcome was hypoxemia or apnea during anesthesia. Secondary outcomes included systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP), mean blood pressure (MBP), heart rate (HR), respiratory rate (RR), SpO Results: No differences were found in hypoxemia and apnea. Except for RR, other hemodynamic and respiratory parameters were significantly different among the groups (p < 0.05), and the degree of blood pressure decline in group E was smaller than groups C and P. Group E patients had lower intraoperative hypotension (p = 0.007) and lower demand for vasoactive drugs (p = 0.006). The injection pain scores in groups C and E were lower, but patients in group E had a higher incidence of myoclonus, and the proportion of coughing and hiccups during endoscopy was higher in group E. The incidence of dizziness was lower in Group C. Conclusion: No significant differences were observed in the incidence of hypoxemia and apnea among three groups. Etomidate has the advantage of stable hemodynamics; however, the incidence of myoclonus, bucking, and hiccups is high. Injection pain occurred less frequently with ciprofol and etomidate, while ciprofol was associated with a low incidence of postoperative dizziness. Clinical Trail Registration: https://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.html?proj=269837, identifier ChiCTR2500101280.
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.