Cargando…
Comparison of ciprofol (HSK3486) versus propofol for the induction of deep sedation during gastroscopy and colonoscopy procedures: A multi‐centre, non‐inferiority, randomized, controlled phase 3 clinical trial
Ciprofol is a propofol analogue with improved pharmacokinetic properties. A multi‐centre, non‐inferiority trial was conducted to compare the deep sedation properties of ciprofol and propofol with a non‐inferiority margin of 8% in patients undergoing gastroscopy and colonoscopy. In total, 289 patient...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9543620/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35653554 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/bcpt.13761 |
_version_ | 1784804416488996864 |
---|---|
author | Li, Junxiang Wang, Xiao Liu, Jin Wang, Xia Li, Xiangkui Wang, Yaping Ouyang, Wen Li, Jun Yao, Shanglong Zhu, Zhaoqiong Guo, Qulian Yu, Yonghao Meng, Jinhai Zuo, Yunxia |
author_facet | Li, Junxiang Wang, Xiao Liu, Jin Wang, Xia Li, Xiangkui Wang, Yaping Ouyang, Wen Li, Jun Yao, Shanglong Zhu, Zhaoqiong Guo, Qulian Yu, Yonghao Meng, Jinhai Zuo, Yunxia |
author_sort | Li, Junxiang |
collection | PubMed |
description | Ciprofol is a propofol analogue with improved pharmacokinetic properties. A multi‐centre, non‐inferiority trial was conducted to compare the deep sedation properties of ciprofol and propofol with a non‐inferiority margin of 8% in patients undergoing gastroscopy and colonoscopy. In total, 289 patients were randomly allocated for surgery (259 colonoscopy and 30 gastroscopy) at a 1:1 ratio to be given intravenous injections of ciprofol (0.4 mg/kg) or propofol (1.5 mg/kg). The primary outcome was the success rate of colonoscopy defined as colonoscopy completion with no need for an alternative sedative or >5 ciprofol or propofol top up doses within any 15‐min time period. The success rate of colonoscopy was 100% in the ciprofol group vs. 99.2% in the propofol group (mean difference 0.8%, 95% CI: −2.2% to 4.2%). Except for the gastrointestinal lesions found during the gastroscopy and colonoscopy procedures, the occurrence rates of adverse drug reactions in the ciprofol and propofol groups were 31.3% and 62.8%, respectively (P < 0.001). Pain on injection was less common in the ciprofol group (4.9% vs. 52.4%, P < 0.001). The outcomes demonstrated that ciprofol was non‐inferior to propofol with regard to successful sedation for gastroscopy or colonoscopy procedures and no obvious important adverse events occurred. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9543620 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-95436202022-10-14 Comparison of ciprofol (HSK3486) versus propofol for the induction of deep sedation during gastroscopy and colonoscopy procedures: A multi‐centre, non‐inferiority, randomized, controlled phase 3 clinical trial Li, Junxiang Wang, Xiao Liu, Jin Wang, Xia Li, Xiangkui Wang, Yaping Ouyang, Wen Li, Jun Yao, Shanglong Zhu, Zhaoqiong Guo, Qulian Yu, Yonghao Meng, Jinhai Zuo, Yunxia Basic Clin Pharmacol Toxicol ORIGINAL ARTICLES Ciprofol is a propofol analogue with improved pharmacokinetic properties. A multi‐centre, non‐inferiority trial was conducted to compare the deep sedation properties of ciprofol and propofol with a non‐inferiority margin of 8% in patients undergoing gastroscopy and colonoscopy. In total, 289 patients were randomly allocated for surgery (259 colonoscopy and 30 gastroscopy) at a 1:1 ratio to be given intravenous injections of ciprofol (0.4 mg/kg) or propofol (1.5 mg/kg). The primary outcome was the success rate of colonoscopy defined as colonoscopy completion with no need for an alternative sedative or >5 ciprofol or propofol top up doses within any 15‐min time period. The success rate of colonoscopy was 100% in the ciprofol group vs. 99.2% in the propofol group (mean difference 0.8%, 95% CI: −2.2% to 4.2%). Except for the gastrointestinal lesions found during the gastroscopy and colonoscopy procedures, the occurrence rates of adverse drug reactions in the ciprofol and propofol groups were 31.3% and 62.8%, respectively (P < 0.001). Pain on injection was less common in the ciprofol group (4.9% vs. 52.4%, P < 0.001). The outcomes demonstrated that ciprofol was non‐inferior to propofol with regard to successful sedation for gastroscopy or colonoscopy procedures and no obvious important adverse events occurred. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022-06-10 2022-08 /pmc/articles/PMC9543620/ /pubmed/35653554 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/bcpt.13761 Text en © 2022 The Authors. Basic & Clinical Pharmacology & Toxicology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Nordic Association for the Publication of BCPT (former Nordic Pharmacological Society). https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not used for commercial purposes. |
spellingShingle | ORIGINAL ARTICLES Li, Junxiang Wang, Xiao Liu, Jin Wang, Xia Li, Xiangkui Wang, Yaping Ouyang, Wen Li, Jun Yao, Shanglong Zhu, Zhaoqiong Guo, Qulian Yu, Yonghao Meng, Jinhai Zuo, Yunxia Comparison of ciprofol (HSK3486) versus propofol for the induction of deep sedation during gastroscopy and colonoscopy procedures: A multi‐centre, non‐inferiority, randomized, controlled phase 3 clinical trial |
title | Comparison of ciprofol (HSK3486) versus propofol for the induction of deep sedation during gastroscopy and colonoscopy procedures: A multi‐centre, non‐inferiority, randomized, controlled phase 3 clinical trial |
title_full | Comparison of ciprofol (HSK3486) versus propofol for the induction of deep sedation during gastroscopy and colonoscopy procedures: A multi‐centre, non‐inferiority, randomized, controlled phase 3 clinical trial |
title_fullStr | Comparison of ciprofol (HSK3486) versus propofol for the induction of deep sedation during gastroscopy and colonoscopy procedures: A multi‐centre, non‐inferiority, randomized, controlled phase 3 clinical trial |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of ciprofol (HSK3486) versus propofol for the induction of deep sedation during gastroscopy and colonoscopy procedures: A multi‐centre, non‐inferiority, randomized, controlled phase 3 clinical trial |
title_short | Comparison of ciprofol (HSK3486) versus propofol for the induction of deep sedation during gastroscopy and colonoscopy procedures: A multi‐centre, non‐inferiority, randomized, controlled phase 3 clinical trial |
title_sort | comparison of ciprofol (hsk3486) versus propofol for the induction of deep sedation during gastroscopy and colonoscopy procedures: a multi‐centre, non‐inferiority, randomized, controlled phase 3 clinical trial |
topic | ORIGINAL ARTICLES |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9543620/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35653554 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/bcpt.13761 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT lijunxiang comparisonofciprofolhsk3486versuspropofolfortheinductionofdeepsedationduringgastroscopyandcolonoscopyproceduresamulticentrenoninferiorityrandomizedcontrolledphase3clinicaltrial AT wangxiao comparisonofciprofolhsk3486versuspropofolfortheinductionofdeepsedationduringgastroscopyandcolonoscopyproceduresamulticentrenoninferiorityrandomizedcontrolledphase3clinicaltrial AT liujin comparisonofciprofolhsk3486versuspropofolfortheinductionofdeepsedationduringgastroscopyandcolonoscopyproceduresamulticentrenoninferiorityrandomizedcontrolledphase3clinicaltrial AT wangxia comparisonofciprofolhsk3486versuspropofolfortheinductionofdeepsedationduringgastroscopyandcolonoscopyproceduresamulticentrenoninferiorityrandomizedcontrolledphase3clinicaltrial AT lixiangkui comparisonofciprofolhsk3486versuspropofolfortheinductionofdeepsedationduringgastroscopyandcolonoscopyproceduresamulticentrenoninferiorityrandomizedcontrolledphase3clinicaltrial AT wangyaping comparisonofciprofolhsk3486versuspropofolfortheinductionofdeepsedationduringgastroscopyandcolonoscopyproceduresamulticentrenoninferiorityrandomizedcontrolledphase3clinicaltrial AT ouyangwen comparisonofciprofolhsk3486versuspropofolfortheinductionofdeepsedationduringgastroscopyandcolonoscopyproceduresamulticentrenoninferiorityrandomizedcontrolledphase3clinicaltrial AT lijun comparisonofciprofolhsk3486versuspropofolfortheinductionofdeepsedationduringgastroscopyandcolonoscopyproceduresamulticentrenoninferiorityrandomizedcontrolledphase3clinicaltrial AT yaoshanglong comparisonofciprofolhsk3486versuspropofolfortheinductionofdeepsedationduringgastroscopyandcolonoscopyproceduresamulticentrenoninferiorityrandomizedcontrolledphase3clinicaltrial AT zhuzhaoqiong comparisonofciprofolhsk3486versuspropofolfortheinductionofdeepsedationduringgastroscopyandcolonoscopyproceduresamulticentrenoninferiorityrandomizedcontrolledphase3clinicaltrial AT guoqulian comparisonofciprofolhsk3486versuspropofolfortheinductionofdeepsedationduringgastroscopyandcolonoscopyproceduresamulticentrenoninferiorityrandomizedcontrolledphase3clinicaltrial AT yuyonghao comparisonofciprofolhsk3486versuspropofolfortheinductionofdeepsedationduringgastroscopyandcolonoscopyproceduresamulticentrenoninferiorityrandomizedcontrolledphase3clinicaltrial AT mengjinhai comparisonofciprofolhsk3486versuspropofolfortheinductionofdeepsedationduringgastroscopyandcolonoscopyproceduresamulticentrenoninferiorityrandomizedcontrolledphase3clinicaltrial AT zuoyunxia comparisonofciprofolhsk3486versuspropofolfortheinductionofdeepsedationduringgastroscopyandcolonoscopyproceduresamulticentrenoninferiorityrandomizedcontrolledphase3clinicaltrial |