Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 1 de 1
Filtrar
Mais filtros

Base de dados
Ano de publicação
Tipo de documento
País de afiliação
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Crit Care Med ; 51(10): 1318-1327, 2023 10 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37272947

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: To determine the effectiveness and safety of ciprofol for sedating patients in ICUs who required mechanical ventilation (MV). DESIGN: A multicenter, single-blind, randomized, noninferiority trial. SETTING: Twenty-one centers across China from December 2020 to June 2021. PATIENTS: A total of 135 ICU patients 18 to 80 years old with endotracheal intubation and undergoing MV, who were expected to require sedation for 6-24 hours. INTERVENTIONS: One hundred thirty-five ICU patients were randomly allocated into ciprofol ( n = 90) and propofol ( n = 45) groups in a 2:1 ratio. Ciprofol or propofol were IV infused at loading doses of 0.1 mg/kg or 0.5 mg/kg, respectively, over 4 minutes ± 30 seconds depending on the physical condition of each patient. Ciprofol or propofol were then immediately administered at an initial maintenance dose of 0.3 mg/kg/hr or 1.5 mg/kg/hr, to achieve the target sedation range of Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale (+1 to -2). Besides, continuous IV remifentanil analgesia was administered (loading dose: 0.5-1 µg/kg, maintenance dose: 0.02-0.15 µg/kg/min). MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Of the 135 patients enrolled, 129 completed the study. The primary endpoint-sedation success rates of ciprofol and propofol groups were 97.7% versus 97.8% in the full analysis set (FAS) and were both 100% in per-protocol set (PPS). The noninferiority margin was set as 8% and confirmed with a lower limit of two-sided 95% CI for the inter-group difference of -5.98% and -4.32% in the FAS and PPS groups. Patients who received ciprofol had a longer recovery time ( p = 0.003), but there were no differences in the remaining secondary endpoints (all p > 0.05). The occurrence rates of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) or drug-related TEAEs were not significantly different between the groups (all p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Ciprofol was well tolerated, with a noninferior sedation profile to propofol in Chinese ICU patients undergoing MV for a period of 6-24 hours.


Assuntos
Propofol , Respiração Artificial , Humanos , Adolescente , Adulto Jovem , Adulto , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Respiração Artificial/métodos , Método Simples-Cego , Dor/tratamento farmacológico , Unidades de Terapia Intensiva , Hipnóticos e Sedativos/uso terapêutico
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA