| Citation: |
FANG Zhiyong, QIU Xiaojuan, FENG Tao, BIAN Qingming. Effective dose and safety of ciprofol in combination with butorphanol for painless gastroscopy in elderly patients[J]. Journal of Clinical Medicine in Practice, 2024, 28(12): 82-85. DOI: 10.7619/jcmp.20234289
|
To investigate the median effective dose (ED50) and 95% effective dose (ED95) of ciprofol in combination with butorphanol for painless gastroscopy in elderly patients.
A total of 27 elderly patients with selective gastroscopy were conducted with intravenous induction of 5 μg/kg butorphanol for at least 30 seconds, and 3 minutes later, they were administered intravenously with ciprofol for at least 30 seconds; gastroscopy was performed when the eyelash reflex disappeared or the Modified Observer's Assessment of Alertness/Sedation (MOAA/S) score was less than one point. The initial dose of ciprofol was set as 0.2 mg/kg, and the modified sequential allocation method was used; if there was a positive response during the insertion of the gastroscope, the dose for the next patient would increase by one level, and vice versa, the dose would decrease by one level, with an adjacent dose concentration gradient of 0.05 mg/kg. A positive response to gastroscope insertion was defined as coughing, swallowing, or limb movements when the gastroscope entered the throat. The study was terminated after 7 reversals in ciprofol dose adjustments. ED50, ED95, and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (95%CI) of ciprofol combined with butorphanol for painless gastroscopy were calculated.
When combined with butorphanol, the ED50 of ciprofol for painless gastroscopy in elderly patients was 0.253 mg/kg (95%CI, 0.219 to 0.290), and the ED95 was 0.328 mg/kg (95%CI, 0.290 to 0.521).
When combined with butorphanol, the ED50 of ciprofol for painless gastroscopy in elderly patients is 0.253 mg/kg, and the ED95 is 0.328 mg/kg.
| [1] |
WADHWA V, ISSA D, GARG S, et al. Similar risk of cardiopulmonary adverse events between propofol and traditional anesthesia for gastrointestinal endoscopy: a systematic review and meta-analysis[J]. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol, 2017, 15(2): 194-206. doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2016.07.013
|
| [2] |
"环泊酚临床应用意见"专家小组, 刘进, 王东信, 等. 环泊酚临床应用指导意见[J]. 中华麻醉学杂志, 2021, 7(2): 129-132.
|
| [3] |
张晓琴, 詹锐, 彭丽君, 等. 纳布啡抑制无痛人工流产术后宫缩痛的半数有效剂量[J]. 临床麻醉学杂志, 2021, 37(3): 253-256. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-LCMZ202103007.htm
|
| [4] |
国家消化内镜质控中心, 国家麻醉质控中心. 中国消化内镜诊疗镇静/麻醉操作技术规范[J]. 临床麻醉学杂志, 2019, 35(1): 81-84. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-LCMZ201901025.htm
|
| [5] |
易强林, 莫怀忠, 胡慧, 等. 环泊酚与丙泊酚在老年患者无痛胃镜检查中的比较[J]. 临床麻醉学杂志, 2022, 38(7): 712-715. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-LCMZ202207008.htm
|
| [6] |
ZHU X N, CHEN L M, ZHENG S, et al. Comparison of ED95 of Butorphanol and Sufentanil for gastrointestinal endoscopy sedation: a randomized controlled trial[J]. BMC Anesthesiol, 2020, 20(1): 101. doi: 10.1186/s12871-020-01027-5
|
| [7] |
黄宇光, 黄文起, 李刚, 等. 酒石酸布托啡诺镇痛专家共识[J]. 临床麻醉学杂志, 2011, 27(10): 1028-1029. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-LCMZ201110043.htm
|
| [8] |
陈弟, 赵唐圆梦, 徐志新, 等. 瑞马唑仑复合布托啡诺抑制老年患者胃镜检查置入反应的半数有效剂量[J]. 临床麻醉学杂志, 2022, 8(6): 663-665. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-LCMZ202206020.htm
|
| [9] |
胡君凤, 胡双燕, 仲俊峰, 等. 无痛胃镜检查时布托啡诺抑制吞咽反射ED50和ED95的测定[J]. 中国内镜杂志, 2022, 8(2): 63-67. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-ZGNJ202202011.htm
|
| [10] |
AU A K, STEINBERG D, THOM C, et al. Ultrasound measurement of inferior vena cava collapse predicts propofol-induced hypotension[J]. Am J Emerg Med, 2016, 34(6): 1125-1128. doi: 10.1016/j.ajem.2016.03.058
|
| [11] |
SCHONBERGER R B, DAI F, MICHEL G, et al. Association of propofol induction dose and severe pre-incision hypotension among surgical patients over age 65[J]. J Clin Anesth, 2022, 80: 110846. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinane.2022.110846
|
| [12] |
金颖, 班征虎, 周涵, 等. 环泊酚复合地佐辛抑制妇科日间手术患者体动反应的半数有效剂量研究[J]. 实用临床医药杂志, 2023, 27(18): 142-144. doi: 10.7619/jcmp.20232406
|
| [13] |
LI J X, WANG X, LIU J, et al. 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[J]. Basic Clin Pharmacol Toxicol, 2022, 131(2): 138-148. doi: 10.1111/bcpt.13761
|
| [14] |
WANG X, WANG X, LIU J, et al. Effects of ciprofol for the induction of general anesthesia in patients scheduled for elective surgery compared to propofol: a phase 3, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, comparative study[J]. Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci, 2022, 26(5): 1607-1617.
|
| [15] |
QIN K, QIN W Y, MING S P, et al. Effect of ciprofol on induction and maintenance of general anesthesia in patients undergoing kidney transplantation[J]. Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci, 2022, 26(14): 5063-5071.
|
| [16] |
CHEN X Q, GUO P, YANG L, et al. Comparison and clinical value of ciprofol and propofol in intraoperative adverse reactions, operation, resuscitation, and satisfaction of patients under painless gastroenteroscopy anesthesia[J]. Contrast Media Mol Imaging, 2022, 2022: 9541060.
|
| 1. |
李孝辉，张晓彬，刘浩，徐继鹏，姜其学，刘磊. 苄星青霉素联合多西环素在早期梅毒治疗中的应用. 医药论坛杂志. 2025(05): 535-538 .
| |
| 2. |
付家富，张红萍. 苄星青霉素联合头孢曲松钠治疗梅毒患者的效果. 中国当代医药. 2024(19): 34-38 .
| |
| 3. |
许纯，李锦成，杨文彬，姜艳，杨科佼，周天祺，刘甲野. 2013—2023年扬州市梅毒流行病学特征分析. 实用临床医药杂志. 2024(21): 22-27 .
本站查看
| |
| 4. |
崖顺波，陆桂甫. 头孢曲松联合苄星青霉素对梅毒患者免疫功能的影响及安全性分析. 现代医学与健康研究电子杂志. 2023(07): 92-94 .
| |
| 5. |
王润龙，张海璐. 苄星青霉素联合复方甘草酸苷片治疗梅毒的临床疗效观察. 医学理论与实践. 2023(15): 2592-2594 .
| |
| 6. |
吴晓燕. 复方黄柏液辅助治疗早期梅毒的效果及对RPR滴度、Wnt信号通路的影响. 中国性科学. 2023(08): 132-136 .
| |
| 7. |
陈筱铮. 孕产妇妊娠期梅毒治疗对新生儿预后的影响. 中国妇幼卫生杂志. 2021(05): 44-47+52 .
| |
| 8. |
乔国安，张晓忠，杨晶雪. 早期梅毒患者应用头孢曲松治疗的效果研究. 黑龙江中医药. 2021(06): 476-477 .
|
© 2020 《实用临床医药杂志》编辑部
Address: 江苏省扬州市江阳中路136号，扬州大学江阳路北校区14号楼201室China Pos: 225009Tel: 0514-87978917、87978989、87978807
Supported by:
Beijing Renhe Information Technology Co., Ltd.
苏公网安备 32100302010246号
DownLoad: