Comparison of the Clinical Effects of Ciprofol, Propofol, and Etomidate in the Combined Painless Gastroscopy and Enteroscopy: A Randomized Controlled Trial

<i>Background</i>: Propofol and etomidate are commonly used for sedation during painless gastroenteroscopy, but both have significant side effects. Cycline is a new sedative with minor side effects. This study aims to observe the clinical effects of ciprofol, propofol, and etomidate in the combined painless gastroscopy and enteroscopy. <i>Methods</i>: We randomly divided 600 outpatients aged 18-70 years, with a body mass index 18-30 kg/m<sup>2</sup>, and an ASA score of I-II, who underwent painless gastroenteroscopy, into three groups: propol group, etomidate group, and cyclizine group, with 200 cases in each group. All groups were pre-injected with 01 ug/kg sufentanil injection intravenously. The propofol group was given 2 mg/kg propofol injection intravenously, theomidate group was given 0.2 mg/kg etomidate injection intravenously, and the cyclizine group was given 0.4 mg cyclizine injection intravenously. The injection time for all groups was 30±5 seconds. The examination began when the MOAA/S score was 0-1 or the corneal reflex disappeared. 1. We observed the incidence of injection pain, onset time, sedation success rate, incidence of movement, incidence of respiratory depression, circulatory inhibition, awakening time, PACU time, and satisfaction of the examiner and the patient in all three groups; We observed the adverse reactions such as muscle pain and intraoperative awareness in the patients of all three groups. <i>Results</i>: 1. There were no differences in basic information of the patients in the three groups. The sedation success rate in all three groups was 100%. There were no significant differences in the time, awakening time, and PACU time among the three groups (P>0.05); 2. The incidence of injection pain, respiratory depression, circulatory inhibition in the propofol group was higher than that in the etomidate group and the cyclizine group, with significant differences (P<.05). However, there were no significant differences between the etomidate group and the cyclizine group. The satisfaction of the patients and the exam in the cyclizine group was higher (P<0.05); 3. Although there were no significant differences in the incidence of adverse reactions among three groups, the incidence of muscle tremor and muscle pain in the etomidate group was significantly higher than that in the propofol group and the cycline group, with significant differences (P<0.05). <i>Conclusion</i>: The clinical effect of ciprofol for painless gastroenteroscopy is significantly better than that of propofol and etomidate, and suitable for promotion in outpatient painless gastroenteroscopy.