Secondary outcomes
Upon performing the analysis, no significant difference was found in all of the outcomes except pain on the injection site in which ciprofol performed notably better in reducing pain. (P=0.0003). Insignificant differences between the two drugs were revealed in terms of total adverse events , tachycardia, rash, prolonged QT interval, hypoxia, hypotension, hypertension, CTCAE severity grading (grade 1), CTCAE Severity Grading (Grade 2), bradycardia, any treatment-emergent adverse events, elevated AST, number of patients who maintained Bispectral index (BIS) between 40 – 60 (min).
Furthermore, after conducting a subgroup analysis it was discovered that a significant reduction in total adverse events occurred when 0.5 mg ciprofol was used for induction (P < 0.0001). Similarly, ciprofol fared significantly better in terms of reducing the incidence of tachycardia when 0.5mg ciprofol was utilized for both induction and maintenance of general anesthesia (P = 0.01). Propofol performed significantly worse compared to 0.4mg ciprofol during the induction phase according to the CTCAE severity grading scale (grade 1) (P = 0.005).