Why the study?
Does ticlopidine compared to cilostazol reduce restenosis in patients undergoing percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty?
Does ticlopidine compared to cilostazol reduce restenosis in patients undergoing percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty?
Both ticlopidine and cilostazol are similarly effective in preventing angiographic restenosis after PTCA, though cilostazol may be associated with fewer mild adverse effects.
Supports interchangeable use of either agent post-PTCA; confirms their equivalence for restenosis prevention in this RCT.
Prevention of restenosis after percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (PTCA) continues to be a significant problem. Recent controlled studies have demonstrated that cilostazol suppresses restenosis after PTCA. The effects of ticlopidine, another antiplatelet agent, were compared in terms of outcomes of patients randomized for treatment with the two drugs after PTCA. A total of 35 patients (47 lesions) were assigned prospectively and randomly to ticlopidine (17 patients, 24 lesions) and cilostazol (18 patients, 23 lesions) groups. Minimal luminal diameter (MLD) and percentage of stenosis to reference diameter were estimated before PTCA, just after the procedure and after 4 months follow-up. All patients underwent 4 months angiographic follow-up, at the end of which MLD was 2.03+/-0.71 mm in the ticlopidine group and 2.05+/-0.68 mm in the cilostazol group (p = 0.95), and the percentage of stenosis to reference diameter was 31.4+/-16.7% and 30.0+/-17.0%, respectively (p = 0.78). The restenosis rate was 12.5% in the ticlopidine group and 17.4% in the cilostazol group (p = 0.69), relatively low as compared to the 20% to 30% reported in previous studies. Adverse drug reactions during the follow-up period were observed in two of the ticlopidine group and none of the cilostazol group. We conclude that both ticlopidine and cilostazol are effective for the prevention of restenosis after PTCA, however the former may be associated with slight side effects.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Nagaoka et al. (2001) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: