OBJECTIVE: This study compares postoperative recovery quality between Ciprofol and Propofol, providing a reference for the clinical application of anesthetics. METHODS: We randomized 112 patients undergoing ureteroscopic surgery into two groups: the Ciprofol group (Group C), with an induction dose of 0.4 mg/kg and a maintenance dose of 0.8-1.5 mg/(kg·h), and the Propofol group (Group P), with an induction dose of 2 mg/kg and a maintenance dose of 4-10 mg/(kg·h). Both groups received sevoflurane at a concentration of 1%. The Bispectral Index (BIS) was maintained between 40 and 60. The primary outcomes were the Quality of Recovery-15 (QoR-15) scores on postoperative day 1 (POD1). Secondary outcomes included hemodynamic parameters, vasopressor use, timing indicators, sedative consumption, BIS values, Riker Sedation-Agitation Scale (R-SAS) scores, urinary tract symptoms, patient satisfaction, and adverse events. RESULTS: No significant differences were observed in QoR-15 scores between the two groups. Although Group C had higher pain (P = 0.004) and comfort (P = 0.002) scores on POD1, these differences were not clinically significant. The incidence of hypotension and vasopressor use was lower in Group C, which had more stable hemodynamics. Additionally, the time from induction to BIS ≤ 60 was shorter in Group P (P = 0.001), while Group C had lower BIS values from drug discontinuation to full recovery of consciousness (P = 0.001). The incidence of urinary tract symptoms on POD1 was lower in Group C (P = 0.043). There were no significant differences in time to spontaneous breathing recovery, extubation, recovery room stay, time to first ambulation, hospital stay, patient satisfaction, or other adverse events. CONCLUSION: Ciprofol provides comparable early postoperative recovery to Propofol during ureteroscopy and may be a preferable alternative for urological procedures, especially in patients with blood pressure concerns. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR2400082736).