Key result
Aspirin showed a significantly greater decrease in platelet reactivity assessed by VerifyNow compared to cilostazol (-28.9% vs -0.4%, P<0.001) after 14 days of treatment in patients with type 2 diabetes.
Why the study?
Aspirin for primary cardiovascular prevention in diabetes remains controversial, while some studies have suggested beneficial cardiovascular effects of cilostazol.
Does cilostazol improve antiplatelet effects compared to aspirin in patients with type 2 diabetes and high cardiovascular risk?
RCT (n=116)
Open-label
1:1 matching based on randomization table
Yes
Does cilostazol improve antiplatelet effects compared to aspirin in patients with type 2 diabetes and high cardiovascular risk?
In patients with type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular risk factors, aspirin provides superior ex vivo antiplatelet effects compared to cilostazol, though cilostazol offers favorable changes in atherogenic dyslipidemia.
Aspirin yields superior short-term ex vivo antiplatelet effects versus cilostazol in high-risk diabetes; leaves open whether cilostazol's lipid benefits affect clinical outcomes.
BACKGROUND: The role of aspirin in primary cardiovascular disease prevention in patients with diabetes remains controversial. However, some studies have suggested beneficial effects of cilostazol on cardiovascular disease in patients with diabetes. We prospectively investigated the antiplatelet effects of cilostazol compared with aspirin in patients with diabetes and cardiovascular risk factors. METHODS: We randomly assigned 116 patients with type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular risk factors but no evident cardiovascular disease to receive aspirin at a dose of 100 mg or cilostazol at a dose of 200 mg daily for 14 days. The primary efficacy outcome was antiplatelet effects of aspirin and cilostazol assessed with the VerifyNow system (aspirin response units [ARU]) and PFA-100 (closure time [CT]). Secondary outcomes were changes of clinical laboratory data (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02933788). RESULTS: After 14 days, there was greater decrease in ARU in aspirin (-28.9%±9.9%) compared cilostazol (-0.4%±7.1%, P<0.001) and was greater increase in CT in aspirin (99.6%±63.5%) compared cilostazol (25.7%±54.1%, P<0.001). The prevalence of aspirin resistance was 7.5% according to VerifyNow (defined by ARU ≥550) and 18.9% according to PFA-100 (CT <192 seconds). Compared with aspirin, cilostazol treatment was associated with increased high density lipoprotein cholesterol (7.1%±12.7% vs. 4.2%±18.0%, P=0.006) and decreased triglycerides (-9.4%±33.7% vs. 4.4%±17.57%, P=0.016). However, there were no significant changes in total and low density lipoprotein cholesterol, C-reactive protein level, and cluster of differentiation 40 ligand between cilostazol and aspirin groups. CONCLUSION: Aspirin showed better antiplatelet effects assessed with VerifyNow and PFA-100 compared with cilostazol. However, there were favorable changes in atherogenic dyslipidemia only in the cilostazol.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
A 2022 study conducted an RCT in Type 2 diabetes mellitus with cardiovascular risk factors (n=116). Aspirin vs. Cilostazol 200 mg daily was evaluated on Change in platelet reactivity from baseline to day 14 assessed with VerifyNow (ARU) (p=<0.001). Aspirin showed a significantly greater decrease in platelet reactivity assessed by VerifyNow compared to cilostazol (-28.9% vs -0.4%, P<0.001) after 14 days of treatment in patients with type 2 diabetes.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: