Search

Purpose: Cilostazol is a widely used antiplatelet drug for secondary stroke prevention in Asia, but its comparison with clopidogrel is not well understood. This study aims to investigate the effectiveness and safety of cilostazol compared to clopidogrel for the secondary prevention of noncardioembolic ischemic stroke., Methods: This retrospective comparative effectiveness research analyzed 1:1 propensity scorematched data from insured individuals between 2012 and 2019, using administrative claims data in Health Insurance Review and Assessment in Korea. Patients with diagnosis codes for ischemic stroke without cardiac disease were included and divided into two groups, those receiving cilostazol and those receiving clopidogrel. The primary outcome was a recurrent ischemic stroke. Secondary outcomes included all-cause death, myocardial infarction, hemorrhagic stroke, and a composite of these outcomes. The safety outcome was major gastrointestinal bleeding., Results: The study analyzed 4,754 patients in the propensity scorematched population and found no statistically significant difference in recurrent ischemic stroke (cilostazol group vs clopidogrel group, 2.7% vs 3.2%; 95% CI, 0.62-1.21), the composite outcome of recurrent ischemic stroke, all-cause death, myocardial infarction, and hemorrhagic stroke (5.1% vs 5.5%; 0.75-1.22), and major gastrointestinal bleeding (1.3% vs 1.5%; 0.57-1.47) between patients receiving cilostazol and those receiving clopidogrel. In subgroup analysis, cilostazol was associated with a lower incidence of recurrent ischemic stroke compared to clopidogrel in hypertensive patients (2.5% vs 3.9%; interaction P = 0.041)., Conclusions: This real-world study suggests that cilostazol is effective and safe for noncardioembolic ischemic stroke and may be associated with better effectiveness in hypertensive patients compared to clopidogrel., (© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.)

Background: Cerebral small vessel disease (SVD) causes lacunar strokes (25% of all ischaemic strokes), physical frailty and cognitive impairment and vascular and mixed dementia. There is no specific treatment to prevent progression of SVD., Methods: The LACunar Intervention Trial-2 is an investigator-initiated prospective randomised open-label blinded-endpoint phase II feasibility study assessing cilostazol and isosorbide mononitrate for preventing SVD progression. We aimed to recruit 400 patients with clinically evident lacunar ischaemic stroke and randomised to cilostazol, isosorbide mononitrate, both or neither, in addition to guideline secondary ischaemic stroke prevention, in a partial factorial design. The primary outcome is feasibility of recruitment and adherence to medication; key secondary outcomes include: drug tolerability; recurrent vascular events, cognition and function at 1 year after randomisation; and safety (bleeding, falls, death). Data are number (%) and median (IQR)., Results: The trial commenced on 5 February 2018 and ceased recruitment on 31 May 2021 with 363 patients randomised, with the following baseline characteristics: average age 64 (56.0, 72.0) years, female 112 (30.9%), stroke onset to randomisation 79.0 (27.0, 244.0) days, hypertension 267 (73.6%), median blood pressures 143.0 (130.0, 157.0)/83.0 (75.0, 90.0) mm Hg, current smokers 67 (18.5%), educationally achieved end of school examinations (A-level) or higher 118 (32.5%), modified Rankin scale 1.0 (0.0, 1.0), National Institutes Health stroke scale 1.0 (1.4), Montreal Cognitive Assessment 26.0 (23.0, 28.0) and total SVD score on brain imaging 1.0 (0.0, 2.0). This publication summarises the baseline data and presents the statistical analysis plan., Summary: The trial is currently in follow-up which will complete on 31 May 2022 with results expected in October 2022., Trial Registration Number: ISRCTN14911850., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background and Objectives: Long-term treatment with the combination of cilostazol with aspirin or clopidogrel showed a lower risk of stroke recurrence compared to aspirin or clopidogrel alone after high-risk noncardioembolic ischemic stroke in a randomized trial. We aimed to determine whether the effect of the dual medication compared to monotherapy on risk of recurrent ischemic stroke differs according to timing of starting medication after stroke onset., Methods: In a subanalysis of the randomized controlled trial, patients between 8 and 180 days after stroke onset were randomly assigned to receive aspirin or clopidogrel alone or a combination of cilostazol with aspirin or clopidogrel. They were divided into 3 groups according to the timing of starting trial treatment: between 8 and 14 days after stroke onset (8-14 days group), between 15 and 28 days after stroke onset (15-28 days group), and between 29 and 180 days after stroke onset (29-180 days group). The primary efficacy outcome was the first recurrence of ischemic stroke. Safety outcomes included severe or life-threatening bleeding., Results: Of 1,879 patients, 498 belonged to the 8-14 days group, 467 to the 15-28 days group, and 914 to the 29-180 days group. There was a significant treatment-by-subgroup interaction for the recurrence of ischemic stroke between trial treatment and trichotomized groups. The recurrence of ischemic stroke was less common with dual therapy than with monotherapy in the 15-28 days group (annualized rate 1.5% vs 4.9%, respectively; adjusted hazard ratio 0.34 [95% CI 0.12-0.95]) and the 29-180 days group (1.9% vs 4.4%, respectively; 0.27 [0.12-0.63]) and similarly common in the 8-14 days group (4.5% for both; 1.02 [0.51-2.04]). Severe or life-threatening bleeding occurred similarly between patients on dual therapy and those on monotherapy in any of the trichotomized groups (crude hazard ratio 0.22 [95% CI 0.03-1.88] in the 8-14 days group, 1.07 [0.15-7.60] in the 15-28 days group, and 0.76 [0.24-2.39] in the 29-180 days group)., Discussion: Long-term dual antiplatelet therapy using cilostazol starting 15-180 days after stroke onset, compared to therapy started 8-14 days after onset, was more effective for secondary stroke prevention than monotherapy without increasing hemorrhage risk., Trial Registration Information: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01995370; UMIN Clinical Trials Registry 000012180., Classification of Evidence: This study provides Class II evidence that for patients with acute noncardioembolic stroke taking either aspirin or clopidogrel, the addition of cilostazol 15-180 days after stroke onset decreases the risk of recurrent ischemic stroke., (Copyright © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of the American Academy of Neurology.)

Background Long-term benefit of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) over single antiplatelet therapy (SAPT) for the prevention of recurrent stroke has not been established in patients with intracranial arterial stenosis. We compared the efficacy and safety of DAPT with cilostazol and clopidogrel or aspirin to those of SAPT with clopidogrel or aspirin in patients with intracranial arterial stenosis, who were recruited to the Cilostazol Stroke Prevention Study for Antiplatelet Combination trial, a randomized controlled trial in high-risk Japanese patients with ischemic stroke. Methods and Results We compared the vascular and hemorrhagic events between DAPT and SAPT in patients with ischemic stroke and symptomatic or asymptomatic intracranial arterial stenosis of at least 50% in a major intracranial artery. Patients were placed in two groups: 275 were assigned to receive DAPT and 272 patients SAPT. The risks of ischemic stroke (hazard ratio [HR], 0.47; 95% CI, 0.23-0.95); and composite of stroke, myocardial infarction, and vascular death (HR, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.26-0.91) were lower in DAPT than SAPT, whereas the risk of severe or life-threatening bleeding (HR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.12-4.30) did not differ between the 2 treatment groups. Conclusions DAPT using cilostazol was superior to SAPT with clopidogrel or aspirin for the prevention of recurrent stroke and vascular events without increasing bleeding risk among patients with intracranial arterial stenosis after stroke. Registration URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT01995370.

Background: Stroke is one of the leading causes of death worldwide. Cilostazol, an antiplatelet and phosphodiesterase 3 inhibitor, has not been clearly established for ischaemic stroke use. We aim to determine the efficacy and safety of cilostazol for secondary stroke prevention., Methods: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Web of Science and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched from inception to 25 September 2020, for randomised trials comparing the efficacy and safety of cilostazol monotherapy or dual therapy with another antiplatelet regimen or placebo, in patients with ischaemic stroke. Version 2 of the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomised trials (RoB 2) was used to assess study quality. This meta-analysis was reported in line with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement., Results: Eighteen randomised trials comprising 11 429 participants were included in this meta-analysis. Most trials possessed low risk of bias and were of low heterogeneity. Cilostazol significantly reduced the rate of ischaemic stroke recurrence (risk ratio, RR=0.69, 95% CI 0.58 to 0.81), any stroke recurrence (RR=0.64, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.74) and major adverse cardiovascular events (RR=0.67, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.81). Cilostazol did not significantly decrease mortality (RR=0.90, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.25) or increase the rate of good functional outcome (Modified Rankin Scale score of 0-1; RR=1.07, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.19). Cilostazol demonstrated favourable safety profile, significantly reducing the risk of intracranial haemorrhage (RR=0.46, 95% CI 0.31 to 0.68) and major haemorrhagic events (RR=0.49, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.70)., Conclusions: Cilostazol demonstrated superior efficacy and safety profiles compared with traditional antiplatelet regimens such as aspirin and clopidogrel for secondary stroke prevention but does not appear to affect functional outcomes. Future randomised trials can be conducted outside East Asia, or compare cilostazol with a wider range of antiplatelet agents., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background and Purpose: In this post-hoc analysis using acute dual study dataset, the impacts of cerebral microbleeds (MBs) after mild stroke on clinical outcome were investigated., Methods: The number of MBs on admission was categorized as 1) no MBs, 2) MBs 1-4, 3) MBs 5-9, and 4) MBs ≥ 10. The efficacy outcome was defined as neurological deterioration and stroke recurrence within 14 days. Safety outcomes included ICH and/or SAH as well as extracranial hemorrhages., Results: Of the 1102 patients, 780 (71%) had no MBs on admission, while 230 (21%) had MBs 1-4, 48 (4%) had MBs 5-9, and 44 (4%) had MBs ≥ 10. The number of MBs was not associated with the neurological deterioration and/or stroke recurrence (p = 0.934), ICH and/or SAH (p = 0.743), and extracranial hemorrhage (p = 0.205). Favorable outcome was seem in 84% in the No MBs group, 83% in the MBs 1-4, 94% in the MBs 5-9, and 85% in the MBs ≥ 10 (p = 0.304). Combined cilostazol and aspirin therapy did not alter any rates of efficacy and safety outcomes among the no MBs, MBs 1-4, MBs 5-9, and MBs ≥ 10 groups compared to aspirin alone (all p > 0.05). By multivariate regression analysis, a history of ICH and diastolic blood pressure were the independent parameters to all of the MBs criteria (presence, MBs ≥ 5, and MBs ≥ 10)., Conclusions: MBs did not alter the clinical outcome at 3 months of onset. Elevated diastolic blood pressure and a history of ICH were the essential parameters related to the MBs., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Our previous trial acute dual study (ADS) reported that dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) using cilostazol and aspirin did not reduce the rate of short-term neurological worsening in non-cardioembolic stroke patients. Present post-hoc analysis investigated whether the impact of combined cilostazol and aspirin differed among stroke subtypes and factors associated with neurological deterioration and/or stroke recurrence., Methods: Using the ADS registry, the rate of neurological deterioration, defined as clinical worsening and/or recurrent stroke, including transient ischemic attack was calculated. Stroke subtypes included large-artery atherosclerosis (LAA), small vessel occlusion (SVO), other determined etiology (Others), and undetermined etiology of stroke (Undetermined)., Results: Data of 1022 patients were analyzed. Deterioration was seen in 104 (10%) patients, and the rates were not markedly different between patients treated with DAPT vs. aspirin in any stroke subtypes: LAA, 19% vs. 11%, (p=0.192); SVO, 10% vs. 10% (p=1.000); Others, 6% vs. 6% (p=1.000); Undetermined, 11% vs. 8% (p=0.590). Diabetes mellitus was the independent factor associated with deterioration (odds ratio 4.360, 95% confidence interval 1.139-16.691, p=0.032) in the LAA group. Age (1.030 [1.004-1.057], p=0.026), systolic blood pressure (1.012 [1.003-1.022], p=0.010), and infarct size (2.550 [1.488-4.371], p=0.001) were associated with deterioration in SVO group, and intracranial stenosis/occlusion was associated with it in the Undetermined group (3.744 [1.138-12.318], p=0.030)., Conclusions: Combined cilostazol and aspirin did not reduce the rate of short-term neurological deterioration in any clinical stroke subtype. The characteristics of patients whose condition deteriorates in the acute period may differ based on the stroke subtypes., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors have no conflicts of interest or funding sources to disclose., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background The aim of the present study was to investigate the efficacy and safety of antiplatelet (aspirin plus cilostazol) dual therapy for patients with noncardioembolic stroke within 48 hours of symptom onset. Methods and Results The ADS (Acute Aspirin Plus Cilostazol Dual Therapy for Non-Cardiogenic Stroke Patients Within 48 Hours of Symptom Onset ) study is an investigator-initiated, prospective, multicenter (34 hospitals in Japan), randomized, open-label, and aspirin-controlled trial. Acute stroke patients with noncardioembolic stroke within 48 hours of onset were studied. The subjects were randomly allocated to combination therapy with aspirin 81 to 200 mg plus cilostazol 200 mg (dual group) and single therapy with aspirin 81 to 200 mg (aspirin group) for 14 days. After the 14 days, all patients took the cilostazol 200 mg for 3 months. A primary efficacy outcome was defined as any one of the following occurring (neurological deterioration, symptomatic stroke recurrence, or transient ischemic attack) within 14 days. A primary safety outcome included intracerebral hemorrhage and subarachnoid hemorrhage. Between May 2011 and June 2017, 1201 patients (796 [66%] men; median age, 69 [61-77] years) randomized 1:1 to either the dual group or the aspirin group were analyzed. Initial National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score was 2 (1-4) in both groups (P=0.830). A primary efficacy outcome was observed in 11% in the dual group and 11% in the aspirin group (P=0.853). A primary safety outcome occurred in 2 (0.3%) in the dual group and in 1 (0.2%) in the aspirin group (P=0.624). Conclusions Dual antiplatelet therapy using cilostazol and aspirin was safe but did not reduce the rate of short-term neurological worsening. Clinical Trial Registration URL: umin.ac.jp/ctr/index/htm. Unique identifier: UMIN000004950.

Background: Although dual antiplatelet therapy with aspirin and clopidogrel reduces early recurrence of ischaemic stroke, with long-term use this type of therapy is no longer effective and the risk of bleeding increases. Given that cilostazol prevents stroke recurrence without increasing the incidence of serious bleeding compared with aspirin, we aimed to establish whether dual antiplatelet therapy involving cilostazol is safe and appropriate for long-term use., Methods: In a multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled trial across 292 hospitals in Japan, patients with high-risk non-cardioembolic ischaemic stroke identified on MRI were randomly assigned to two groups in a 1:1 ratio to receive monotherapy with either oral aspirin (81 or 100 mg, once per day) or clopidogrel (50 or 75 mg, once per day) alone, or a combination of cilostazol (100 mg, twice per day) with aspirin or clopidogrel. Randomisation was done centrally (using block randomisation with a block size of six per each participating hospital) through a web-based registration system and was done by EPS Corporation. The patients were required to have at least 50% stenosis of a major intracranial or extracranial artery or two or more of the vascular risk factors. Trial medication was continued for half a year or longer, for a maximum of 3·5 years. The primary efficacy outcome was the rate of first recurrence of symptomatic ischaemic stroke. Safety outcomes were severe or life-threatening bleeding; any adverse events; serious adverse events; and any bleeding events. Efficacy analyses were done in the intention-to-treat population and safety analyses were done in the as-treated population. This trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (number NCT01995370) and UMIN Clinical Trials Registry (number 000012180)., Findings: Participants were recruited from Dec 13, 2013, to March 31, 2017. 932 patients assigned to the dual therapy group and 947 patients assigned to the monotherapy group were included in the intention-to-treat analysis. The trial was stopped after the enrolment of 1884 patients of an anticipated 4000 patients because of the delay in recruitment. Ischaemic stroke recurred in 29 (3%) of 932 patients (annualised rate 2·2%) on dual therapy including cilostazol and 64 (7%) of 947 patients (annualised rate 4·5%) on monotherapy during a median 1·4 years follow-up (hazard ratio [HR] 0·49, 95% CI 0·31-0·76, p=0·0010). Severe or life-threatening bleeding occurred in eight patients (annualised rate 0·6%) on dual therapy and 13 patients (annualised rate 0·9%) on monotherapy (HR 0·66, 95% CI 0·27-1·60, p=0·35). Occurrence of any type of adverse event was similar between the groups (255 [28%] of 910 patients in the dual therapy group vs 219 [24%] of 921 patients in the monotherapy group); as was occurrence of serious adverse events (87 [10%] vs 142 [15%]) and bleeding events (38 [4%] vs 33 [4%]). Gastrointestinal bleeding, which affected nine (<1%) of 910 patients in the monotherapy group and nine (<1%) of 921 patients in the dual therapy group, was the most common type of bleeding., Interpretation: The combination of cilostazol with aspirin or clopidogrel had a reduced incidence of ischaemic stroke recurrence and a similar risk of severe or life-threatening bleeding compared with treatment with aspirin or clopidogrel alone in patients at high risk for recurrent ischaemic stroke., Funding: Otsuka Pharmaceutical., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To investigate the safety of triple antiplatelet therapy (TAT) with cilostazol in patients undergoing stenting for extracranial and/or intracranial artery stenosis., Methods: A prospectively collected database was reviewed to identify patients who underwent stenting for extracranial and/or intracranial artery stenosis and showed resistance to aspirin and/or clopidogrel as assessed by pre-stenting thromboelastography (TEG) testing. Patients were assigned to a TAT group and a dual antiplatelet therapy (DAT) group. Major complications were defined as thromboembolic events (transient ischemic attack (TIA), ischemic stroke, and stent thrombosis) or major bleeding events within 30 days, and minor complications were defined as extracranial bleeding that did not require vascular surgery or transfusion within 30 days., Results: A total of 183 patients were identified. The incidence of major complications was significantly lower in the TAT group than in the DAT group (TAT group vs. DAT group, 1/110 vs. 6/73; P=0.017). TIAs occurred in four patients, with one in the TAT group and three in the DAT group (1/110 vs. 3/73; P=0.303). Ischemic strokes occurred in three patients in the DAT group (TAT group vs. DAT group, P=0.062). No major bleeding events or stent thrombosis was recorded in either group. Two patients (one in each group) experienced minor complications that resolved without additional treatment (1/110 vs. 1/73; P>0.999)., Conclusions: TAT under TEG guidance appears to be a safe antiplatelet strategy in patients undergoing stenting for extracranial and/or intracranial artery stenosis. By employing TAT under TEG guidance, favorable outcomes can be achieved in these patients., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)