Key result
Cilostazol significantly reduced the annual incidence of any stroke by 25.7% compared to aspirin in Japanese patients with non-cardioembolic ischemic stroke.
Why the study?
Does cilostazol reduce the incidence of stroke in Japanese patients with non-cardioembolic ischemic stroke compared to aspirin?
RCT (n=2,757)
Double-blind
Randomized
Does cilostazol reduce the incidence of stroke in Japanese patients with non-cardioembolic ischemic stroke compared to aspirin?
Cilostazol demonstrated a favorable risk-benefit profile compared to aspirin for secondary stroke prevention in Japanese patients with non-cardioembolic ischemic stroke, significantly reducing both recurrent stroke and hemorrhagic events.
Supports cilostazol over aspirin for secondary prevention in Japanese non-cardioembolic stroke; extends RCT evidence in this population.
We compared the efficacy and safety of cilostazol and aspirin in 2,672 Japanese patients with non-cardioembolic ischemic stroke. The patients were randomized to be allocated either on cilostazol (200 mg/day) group or aspirin (81 mg/day) group, and were followed up for one to five years (average 29 months). The primary endpoint was any stroke, and safety endpoint was hemorrhagic stroke or hemorrhage requiring hospitalization. Annual incidence of stroke was significantly lower in the cilostazol group (2.76%) than in the aspirin group (3.71%) (relative risk reduction [RRR] 25.7%, p=0.0357) and annual incidence of hemorrhagic stroke or hemorrhage requiring hospitalization was 0.77% in the cilostazol group and 1.77% in the aspirin group (RRR 54.2%, p=0.0004). The sub-analyses between subtypes of ischemic stroke showed that annual incidence of hemorrhagic stroke was much lower in the cilostazol group (0.36%) than in the aspirin group (1.20%) among patients with lacunar stroke (p=0.003). The results suggest that cilostazol has a favorable risk-benefit profile alternative to aspirin for secondary stroke prevention in patients with non-cardioembolic ischemic stroke, particularly in patients with lacunar stroke, who are at high risk of hemorrhagic stroke.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Shinichiro Uchiyama (2010) conducted an RCT in Non-cardioembolic ischemic stroke (n=2,757). Cilostazol vs. Aspirin (81 mg/day) was evaluated on Any stroke (RRR 25.7%, p=0.0357). Cilostazol significantly reduced the annual incidence of any stroke by 25.7% compared to aspirin in Japanese patients with non-cardioembolic ischemic stroke.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: