Key result
Ciprofol matches propofol for day 1 postoperative quality of recovery after abdominal surgery.
Why the study?
The postoperative quality of recovery in elderly patients receiving ciprofol versus propofol total intravenous anesthesia after laparoscopic major abdominal surgery was not established.
Does ciprofol maintain postoperative quality of recovery compared to propofol in elderly patients undergoing laparoscopic major abdominal surgery?
RCT (n=144)
Double-blind
randomly assigned
Does ciprofol maintain postoperative quality of recovery compared to propofol in elderly patients undergoing laparoscopic major abdominal surgery?
Ciprofol is non-inferior to propofol for postoperative quality of recovery in elderly patients undergoing major abdominal surgery, with less injection pain and hypotension but more bradycardia.
Supports ciprofol as noninferior alternative to propofol for TIVA in elderly abdominal surgery; extends RCT evidence for its use.
STUDY OBJECTIVES: We conducted a non-inferiority study to assess the postoperative quality of recovery (QoR) in elderly patients receiving ciprofol or propofol total intravenous anesthersia(TIVA)after elective laparoscopic major abdominal surgery, with QoR-15 scores as the main measure. DESIGN: A prospective, double-blind, randomized non-inferiority trial was conducted in the theater, post-anesthesia care unit (PACU), and the ward. PARTICIPANTS: 144 elderly patients (age ≥ 65 years) were randomly assigned to either the ciprofol group or the propofol group. INTERVENTIONS: The ciprofol group received continuous infusion of ciprofol with remifentanil, and the propofol group received infusion of propofol with remifentanil. OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was the QoR-15 on the first postoperative day (POD1), assessed in both intention-to-treat and per-protocol populations, with the mean difference between groups compared to a non-inferiority threshold of -8. Additional assessments included QoR-15 scores on POD2, 3, and 5 for both analysis sets. Other evaluated perioperative value factors included hemodynamic parameters and injection discomfort in the intention-to-treat analysis. A linear mixed model was utilized to examine the impact of group-time interactions on hemodynamic data and QoR-15. MAIN RESULTS: The QoR-15 scores on POD1 in the ciprofol group were non-inferior to those in the propofol group both in intention-to-treat set (mean [95 %CI], 95.9[93.7-98.2] vs. 95.6 [93.3-97.8]; mean difference [95 % CI], 0.4 [-2.8-3.5]; P<0.001 for noninferiority) and per-protocol set (mean [95 %CI], 96.7 [94.4-99.0] vs. 95.7 [93.4-98.0]; mean difference [95 % CI], 1.0 [-2.2-4.3]; P<0.001 for noninferiority). Comparable outcomes were noted on postoperative days 2, 3, and 5 following the procedure in both analysis sets. Additionally: compared with propofol group, the occurrence of injection pain was lower (2.8 % vs. 27.8 %, P < 0.001); the hypotension was less frequent (33.3 % vs. 54.2 %, P = 0.012); the bradycardia was more common (38.9 % vs. 23.6 %, P = 0.048). CONCLUSIONS: Ciprofol is not inferior to propofol in QoR. Ciprofol can be suitably administered to elderly patients undergoing elective laparoscopic major abdominal surgery.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Liang et al. (2024) conducted an RCT in elective laparoscopic major abdominal surgery (n=144). Ciprofol vs. Propofol was evaluated on QoR-15 score on the first postoperative day (POD1) (MD 0.4, 95% CI -2.8-3.5, p=<0.001 for noninferiority). Ciprofol was non-inferior to propofol for day 1 postoperative quality of recovery in elderly patients undergoing abdominal surgery (mean difference 0.4; 95% CI -2.8-3.5; P<0.001 for noninferiority).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: