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).