A randomized study assessing the impact of cilostazol on platelet function profiles in patients with diabetes mellitus and coronary artery disease on dual antiplatelet therapy: results of the OPTIMUS-2 study

Three-Year Clinical Outcomes With the Cilotax Dual Drug-Eluting Stent vs Everolimus-Eluting Stents in Patients With Acute Myocardial Infarction

BACKGROUND

This study compared the safety and effectiveness of paclitaxel/cilostazol-eluting Cilotax stents with those of everolimus-eluting stents in patients with acute myocardial infarction. Real-world data from the Korea Acute Myocardial Infarction Registry were examined.

METHODS

A total of 5,472 patients with acute myocardial infarction underwent percutaneous coronary intervention with Cilotax stents (n = 212) or everolimus-eluting stents (n = 5,260). The primary end point was the 3-year rate of target lesion failure. The other end points were major adverse cardiovascular events (a composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, and ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization), target vessel revascularization, and stent thrombosis. A propensity score matching analysis was performed to adjust for potential confounders by using a logistic regression model; propensity score matching generated 2 well-balanced groups (Cilotax group, n = 180; everolimus-eluting stents group, n = 170; N = 350). After propensity score matching, baseline clinical characteristics were similar between the groups.

RESULTS

After percutaneous coronary intervention, compared with the everolimus-eluting stents group, the Cilotax group more often had major adverse cardiovascular events (24.1% vs 18.5%; P = .042), myocardial infarction (8.0% vs 3.2%; P < .001), target lesion revascularization (8.0% vs 2.6%; P < .001), target vessel revascularization (11.3% vs 4.5%; P < .001), and stent thrombosis (4.7% vs 0.5%; P < .001) before matching. Even after matching, the Cilotax group had more frequent target lesion revascularization (9.4% vs 2.9%; P = .22) and stent thrombosis (5.6% vs 1.2%; P = .34).

CONCLUSION

In patients with acute myocardial infarction who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention, use of the Cilotax stent was associated with higher rates of target lesion revascularization, target vessel revascularization, and stent thrombosis than were everolimus-eluting stents. Use of the Cilotax dual drugeluting stent should be avoided in the treatment of myocardial infarction.

The Role of Cilostazol, a Phosphodiesterase-3 Inhibitor, in the Development of Atherosclerosis and Vascular Biology: A Review with Meta-Analysis

Atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) stands as the leading global cause of mortality. Addressing this vital and pervasive condition requires a multifaceted approach, in which antiplatelet intervention plays a pivotal role, together with antihypertensive, antidiabetic, and lipid-lowering therapies. Among the antiplatelet agents available currently, cilostazol, a phosphodiesterase-3 inhibitor, offers a spectrum of pharmacological effects. These encompass vasodilation, the impediment of platelet activation and aggregation, thrombosis inhibition, limb blood flow augmentation, lipid profile enhancement through triglyceride reduction and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol elevation, and the suppression of vascular smooth muscle cell proliferation. However, the role of cilostazol has not been clearly documented in many guidelines for ASCVD. We comprehensively reviewed the cardiovascular effects of cilostazol within randomized clinical trials that compared it to control or active agents and involved individuals with previous coronary artery disease or stroke, as well as those with no previous history of such conditions. Our approach demonstrated that the administration of cilostazol effectively reduced adverse cardiovascular events, although there was less evidence regarding its impact on myocardial infarction. Most studies have consistently reported its favorable effects in reducing intermittent claudication and enhancing ambulatory capacity in patients with peripheral arterial disease. Furthermore, cilostazol has shown promise in mitigating restenosis following coronary stent implantation in patients with acute coronary syndrome. While research from more diverse regions is still needed, our findings shed light on the broader implications of cilostazol in the context of atherosclerosis and vascular biology, particularly for individuals at high risk of ASCVD.

Differential inhibition of platelet function by cilostazol in combination with clopidogrel

PURPOSE

To assess the antiplatelet effect of cilostazol clinically, we compared the effects of cilostazol in combination with clopidogrel on various platelet function tests.

METHODS

We recruited patients with ischemic stroke at high risk of recurrence who were treated with clopidogrel alone within 180 days after stroke onset. Subjects underwent baseline platelet function tests, and were then randomly assigned to receive dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) comprising clopidogrel and cilostazol or clopidogrel monotherapy (SAPT). After 6 months, platelet function was measured again and compared to that at baseline in each group, and the rate of change was compared between groups.

RESULTS

Thirty-four patients were enrolled, but 4 patients were excluded for various reasons. In total, 30 subjects (13 in DAPT and 17 in SAPT group) were analyzed. Adenosine diphosphate- and collagen-induced aggregation, VerifyNow P2Y12 reaction units, vasodilator-stimulated phosphoprotein (platelet reactivity index: PRI) and plasma p-selectin concentration were significantly lower (P = 0.004, 0.042, 0.049, 0.003 and 0.006 respectively), while VerifyNow % inhibition was significantly higher at 6 months compared to baseline (P = 0.003) in the DAPT group only. Comparison of the rate of change in each parameter from baseline to 6 months showed that while PRI decreased at a greater rate (P = 0.012), VerifyNow % inhibition increased at a greater rate (P = 0.003) in the DAPT group than the SAPT group.

CONCLUSIONS

The inhibitory effects of adjunctive cilostazol added to clopidogrel on platelet function differed by type of platelet function test. VerifyNow % inhibition and PRI were more inhibited than the other platelet function tests.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

CSPS.com substudy in TWMU (UMIN000026672), registered on April 1, 2017. This study was performed as a substudy of CSPS.com (UMIN000012180, registered on October 31, 2013) and was retrospectively registered.

Effect of Cilostazol on Patients With Diabetes Who Underwent Endovascular Treatment for Peripheral Artery Disease

Background No large-scale study has compared the clinical impact of triple antiplatelet therapy (TAPT: aspirin, clopidogrel, and cilostazol) and dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) on adverse limb events in patients with diabetes after endovascular therapy (EVT) for peripheral artery disease. Thus, we investigate the effect of cilostazol added to a DAPT on the clinical outcomes after EVT in patients with diabetes using a nationwide, multicenter, real-world registry. Methods and Results A total of 990 patients with diabetes who underwent EVT were enrolled from the retrospective cohorts of a Korean multicenter EVT registry and were divided according to the antiplatelet regimen (TAPT [n=350; 35.4%] versus DAPT [n=640; 64.6%]). After propensity score matching based on clinical characteristics, a total of 350 pairs were compared for clinical outcomes. The primary end points were major adverse limb events, a composite of major amputation, minor amputation, and reintervention. For the matched study groups, the lesion length was 125.4±102.0 mm, and severe calcification was observed in 47.4%. The technical success rate (96.9% versus 94.0%; P=0.102) and the complication rate (6.9% versus 6.6%; P>0.999) were similar between the TAPT and DAPT groups. At 2-year follow-up, the incidence of major adverse limb events (16.6% versus 19.4%; P=0.260) did not differ between the 2 groups. However, the TAPT group showed less minor amputation than the DAPT group (2.0% versus 6.3%; P=0.004). In multivariate analysis, TAPT was an independent predictor of minor amputation (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.354 [95% CI, 0.158-0.794]; P=0.012). Conclusions In patients with diabetes undergoing EVT for peripheral artery disease, TAPT did not decrease the incidence of major adverse limb events but may be associated with a decreased risk of minor amputation.

Clinical pharmacology of antiplatelet drugs

INTRODUCTION

Platelets play a key role in arterial thrombosis and antiplatelet therapy is pivotal in the treatment of cardiovascular disease. Current antiplatelet drugs target different pathways of platelet activation and show specific pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic characteristics, implicating clinically relevant drug-drug interactions.

AREAS COVERED

This article reviews the role of platelets in hemostasis and cardiovascular thrombosis, and discusses the key pharmacodynamics, drug-drug interactions and reversal strategies of clinically used antiplatelet drugs.

EXPERT OPINION

Antiplatelet therapies target distinct pathways of platelet activation: thromboxane A₂ synthesis, adenosine diphosphate-mediated signaling, integrin α_IIbβ₃ (GPIIb/IIIa), thrombin-mediated platelet activation via the PAR1 receptor and phosphodiesterases. Key clinical drug-drug interactions of antiplatelet agents involve acetylsalicylic acid - ibuprofen, clopidogrel - omeprazole, and morphine - oral P2Y₁₂ inhibitors, all of which lead to an attenuated antiplatelet effect. Platelet function and genetic testing and the use of scores (ARC-HBR, PRECISE-DAPT, ESC ischemic risk definition) may contribute to a more tailored antiplatelet therapy. High on-treatment platelet reactivity presents a key problem in the acute management of ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). A treatment strategy involving early initiation of an intravenous antiplatelet agent may be able to bridge the gap of insufficient platelet inhibition in high ischemic risk patients with STEMI.

A Randomized Controlled Trial Evaluating Outcome Impact of Cilostazol in Patients with Coronary Artery Disease or at a High Risk of Cardiovascular Disease

Previous studies found that cilostazol has a favorable effect on glucose and lipid homeostasis, endothelial function, atherosclerosis, and vasculo-angiogenesis. However, it is poorly understood whether these effects can translate into better clinical outcomes. This study investigated the outcome effect of cilostazol in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) or at a high risk of cardiovascular (CV) disease. We conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial involving 266 patients who received cilostazol, 200 mg/day (n = 134) or placebo (n = 132). Pre-specified clinical endpoints including composite major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) (CV death, non-fatal myocardial infarct, non-fatal stroke, hospitalization for heart failure, or unplanned coronary revascularization), the composite major coronary event (MCE) and major adverse CV and cerebrovascular event (MACCE), were prospectively assessed. The mean duration of follow-up was 2.9 years. Relative to placebo, cilostazol treatment had a borderline effect on risk reduction of MACE (hazard ratio [HR], 0.67; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.34–1.33), whereas the beneficial effect in favor of cilostazol was significant in patients with diabetes mellitus or a history of percutaneous coronary intervention (p for interaction, 0.02 and 0.06, respectively). Use of cilostazol, significantly reduced the risk of MCE (HR, 0.38; 95% CI, 0.17–0.86) and MACCE (HR, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.23–0.96). A significantly lower risk of angina pectoris (HR, 0.38; 95% CI, 0.17–0.86) was also observed in the cilostazol group. After multi-variable adjustment, cilostazol treatment independently predicted a lower risk of MCE. In conclusion, these results suggest cilostazol may have beneficial effects in patients with CAD or at a high risk of CV disease.

Update on Cilostazol: A Critical Review of Its Antithrombotic and Cardiovascular Actions and Its Clinical Applications

Cilostazol, a phosphodiesterase III inhibitor, has vasodilating and antiplatelet properties with a low rate of bleeding complications. It has been used over the past 25 years for improving intermittent claudication in patients with peripheral artery disease (PAD). Cilostazol also has demonstrated efficacy in patients undergoing percutaneous revascularization procedures for both PAD and coronary artery disease. In addition to its antithrombotic and vasodilating actions, cilostazol also inhibits vascular smooth muscle cell proliferation via phosphodiesterase III inhibition, thus mitigating restenosis. Accumulated evidence has shown that cilostazol, due to its "pleiotropic" effects, is a useful, albeit underutilized, agent for both coronary artery disease and PAD. It is also potentially useful after ischemic stroke and is an alternative in those who are allergic or intolerant to classical antithrombotic agents (eg, aspirin or clopidogrel). These issues are herein reviewed together with the pharmacology and pharmacodynamics of cilostazol. Large studies and meta-analyses are presented and evaluated. Current guidelines are also discussed, and the spectrum of cilostazol's actions and therapeutic applications are illustrated.

Cilostazol: a Review of Basic Mechanisms and Clinical Uses

Primarily used in the treatment of intermittent claudication, cilostazol is a 2-oxyquinolone derivative that works through the inhibition of phosphodiesterase III and related increases in cyclic adenosine monophosphate (cAMP) levels. However, cilostazol has been implicated in a number of other basic pathways including the inhibition of adenosine reuptake, the inhibition of multidrug resistance protein 4, among others. It has been observed to exhibit antiplatelet, antiproliferative, vasodilatory, and ischemic-reperfusion protective properties. As such, cilostazol has been investigated for clinical use in a variety of settings including intermittent claudication, as an adjunctive for reduction of restenosis after coronary and peripheral endovascular interventions, and in the prevention of secondary stroke, although its widespread implementation for indications other than intermittent claudication has been limited by relatively modest effect sizes and lack of studies in western populations. In this review, we highlight the pleiotropic effects of cilostazol and the evidence for its clinical use.

Current state-of-the-art antiplatelet and anticoagulation therapy in diabetic patients with coronary artery disease

Diabetes mellitus is a complex disease that leads to long-term damage to various organ systems. Among the numerous cardiovascular disease-related complications, thrombotic events frequently occur in patients with diabetes. Although guidelines exist for treating and preventing most diabetes-related co-morbidities, the evidence on antithrombotic therapy in primary and secondary prevention is limited due to the scarcity of randomized trials dedicated to patients with diabetes mellitus. Most of the available data are derived from studies that only included a small proportion of patients with diabetes. The present review provides an overview of the status of knowledge on antiplatelet and anticoagulation therapy in patients with diabetes, focusing on the risk-benefit balance of these therapies and future treatment strategies.

Efficacy and safety of ticagrelor versus clopidogrel with different dosages in acute coronary syndrome patients with high GRACE and CRUSADE scores

Objective

To investigate the efficacy and safety of ticagrelor and different dosages of clopidogrel after acute coronary syndrome.

Methods

We compared different antiplatelet strategies for the prevention of cardiovascular events in 1939 patients admitted to the hospital with an acute coronary syndrome undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).

Results

At 24 months, a survival analysis showed that ticagrelor and double-dose clopidogrel decreased the incidence of MACCE (a composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction (MI), target vessel revascularization and stroke) (p < 0.001, p = 0.012, respectively). Although double-dose clopidogrel obviously increased the risk of major bleeding (p < 0.001), a similar result was not observed in the ticagrelor group (p = 0.398). These two stronger antiplatelet strategies also decreased the incidence of myocardial infarction (p = 0.004 and 0.045, respectively). The advantages of ticagrelor are also evident in the endpoints of all cause death and target vessel revascularization. The NACCE (a composite of all-cause death, MI, stroke and major bleeding) rate was also reduced in the ticagrelor group (p = 0.004).

Conclusions

In PCI patients with a high ischemic and bleeding risk, the ticagrelor antiplatelet strategy significantly reduced the MACCE rate without increasing the risk of major bleeding. A decreased MACCE rate was also observed in patients administered the double dosage of clopidogrel, but the bleeding risk was increased compared with the control group.

Efficacy and Safety of Dual-Drug-Eluting Stents for de Novo Coronary Lesions in South Korea-The Effect Trial

Background: Drug-eluting stents (DESs) are commonly used in percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) procedures; however, complications including in-stent restenosis and stent thrombosis are significant challenges. The dual-DES is a stent that elutes two drugs to target various stages of the restenosis reaction. This study investigated the safety and efficacy of dual-DES in clinical practice. Methods: This study included 375 patients who underwent PCI with Cilotax^™ or DXR^™ dual-DESs at one of 13 centers in South Korea. The primary endpoint was target lesion failure (TLF) within 1 year. The secondary endpoints were cardiac death, myocardial infarction (MI), target lesion revascularization (TLR), and stent thrombosis. Results: The rates of TLF in dual-DESs (3.7%) were comparable to those reported in conventional DES. In addition, the DXR^™ group had a significantly lower rate of TLF than the Cilotax^™ group. In multivariate analysis, the DXR^™ group had a lower risk of TLF (adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 0.30, 95% CI 0.09–0.92, p = 0.036) and MI (adjusted HR 0.16, 95% CI 0.03–0.82, p = 0.027) than the Cilotax^™ group. Conclusion: Dual-DESs had similar clinical outcomes regarding efficacy and safety as conventional DES. Among the dual-DES, the DXR^™ stent as a new generation dual-DES had more favorable clinical outcomes than the Cilotax^™ stent.

Antithrombotic Therapy for Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease Risk Mitigation in Patients With Coronary Artery Disease and Diabetes Mellitus

Patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) are characterized by enhanced thrombotic risk attributed to multiple mechanisms including hyperreactive platelets, hypercoagulable status, and endothelial dysfunction. As such, they are more prone to atherosclerotic cardiovascular events than patients without DM, both before and after coronary artery disease (CAD) is established. In patients with DM without established CAD, primary prevention with aspirin is not routinely advocated because of its increased risk of major bleeding that largely offsets its ischemic benefit. In patients with DM with established CAD, secondary prevention with antiplatelet drugs is an asset of pharmacological strategies aimed at reducing the risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular events and their adverse prognostic consequences. Such antithrombotic strategies include single antiplatelet therapy (eg, with aspirin or a P2Y₁₂ inhibitor), dual antiplatelet therapy (eg, aspirin combined with a P2Y₁₂ inhibitor), and dual-pathway inhibition (eg, aspirin combined with the vascular dose of the direct oral anticoagulant rivaroxaban) for patients with chronic ischemic heart disease, acute coronary syndromes, and those undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. Because of their increased risk of thrombotic complications, patients with DM commonly achieve enhanced absolute benefit from more potent antithrombotic approaches compared with those without DM, which most often occurs at the expense of increased bleeding. Nevertheless, studies have shown that when excluding individuals at high risk for bleeding, the net clinical benefit favors the use of intensified long-term antithrombotic therapy in patients with DM and CAD. Several studies are ongoing to establish the role of novel antithrombotic strategies and drug formulations in maximizing the net benefit of antithrombotic therapy for patients with DM. The scope of this review article is to provide an overview of current and evolving antithrombotic strategies for primary and secondary prevention of atherosclerotic cardiovascular events in patients with CAD and DM.

Cilostazol increases adenosine plasma concentration in patients with acute coronary syndrome

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE

Cilostazol is a specific and strong inhibitor of phosphodiesterase (PDE) type III which can suppress the platelet aggregation by increasing cyclic adenosine monophosphate (cAMP) levels. The clinical benefit of cilostazol in ACS patients suggested that the drug may have non-platelet-directed properties. Some in vitro and animal studies also indicated that the 'pleiotropic' properties of cilostazol might be related to the interaction with adenosine metabolism. Adenosine is an important regulatory metabolite and an inhibitor of platelet activation. However, no human study has been conducted to determine whether cilostazol could increase the adenosine plasma concentration in vivo. As a result, this study aimed to investigate the impact of cilostazol on adenosine plasma concentration (APC) in acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients.

METHODS

We prospectively analysed 149 ACS patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stents. The included patients were divided into two groups according to the presence (cilostazol group, n = 64) or absence (aspirin group, n = 85) of aspirin intolerance. The inhibition of platelet aggregation (IPA), APC and cAMP concentration was measured. Patient characteristics, medications and 30-day clinical outcomes were examined.

RESULTS

Patients receiving cilostazol had a significantly higher adenosine and cAMP plasma concentration than patients receiving aspirin (3.00 ± 0.67 vs 2.56 ± 0.74 mol/L, P < .001; 28.10 ± 14.74 vs 20.48 ± 11.35 pmol/mL, P = .0014). Cilostazol was associated with a higher inhibition rate of ADP induced platelet aggregation than aspirin (63.35 ± 26.71 vs 52.2 ± 28.35, P = .036). The plasma levels of adenosine and cAMP showed a positive correlation with ADP induced platelet aggregation.

WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION

Cilostazol increases adenosine concentration compared with aspirin. Its potent antiplatelet effect in ACS patients may be partly mediated by adenosine.

Prevention of atherothrombotic events in patients with diabetes mellitus: from antithrombotic therapies to new-generation glucose-lowering drugs

Diabetes mellitus is an important risk factor for a first cardiovascular event and for worse outcomes after a cardiovascular event has occurred. This situation might be caused, at least in part, by the prothrombotic status observed in patients with diabetes. Therefore, contemporary antithrombotic strategies, including more potent agents or drug combinations, might provide greater clinical benefit in patients with diabetes than in those without diabetes. In this Consensus Statement, our Working Group explores the mechanisms of platelet and coagulation activity, the current debate on antiplatelet therapy in primary cardiovascular disease prevention, and the benefit of various antithrombotic approaches in secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease in patients with diabetes. While acknowledging that current data are often derived from underpowered, observational studies or subgroup analyses of larger trials, we propose antithrombotic strategies for patients with diabetes in various cardiovascular settings (primary prevention, stable coronary artery disease, acute coronary syndromes, ischaemic stroke and transient ischaemic attack, peripheral artery disease, atrial fibrillation, and venous thromboembolism). Finally, we summarize the improvements in cardiovascular outcomes observed with the latest glucose-lowering drugs, and on the basis of the available evidence, we expand and integrate current guideline recommendations on antithrombotic strategies in patients with diabetes for both primary and secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease.

Patients with diabetes mellitus have a prothrombotic status that increases the risk of cardiovascular events and worsens prognosis after these events. In this Consensus Statement, the Working Group on Thrombosis of the Italian Society of Cardiology proposes antithrombotic strategies for patients with diabetes in various cardiovascular settings.

Effect of cilostazol, a phosphodiesterase-3 inhibitor, on coronary artery stenosis and plaque characteristics in patients with type 2 diabetes: ESCAPE study

AIM

To perform a prospective study to evaluate the effect of cilostazol (CTZ) compared with aspirin (acetylsalicylic acid; ASA) in Korean people with diabetes and subclinical coronary atherosclerosis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 100 people with diabetes who had mild to moderate coronary atherosclerosis, assessed by coronary computed tomographic angiography (CCTA), were randomly assigned to either 200 mg/d CTZ or 100 mg/d ASA (n = 50 each group). The primary outcome was change in coronary artery stenosis assessed by CCTA after 12 months of treatment. Secondary outcomes included changes in plaque composition, coronary artery calcium score and cardiac markers.

RESULTS

The mean age, body mass index and glycated haemoglobin concentration were 61.5 years, 25.0 kg/m² and 56.8 mmol/mol, respectively, and were well matched between the two groups. Coronary artery stenosis decreased in the CTZ group (from 44.0 ± 2.1% to 40.4 ± 2.5%) but remained unchanged in the ASA group (from 38.9 ± 2.1% to 40.6 ± 2.1%). In the CTZ group, the non-calcified portion of plaques decreased significantly (from 20.6 ± 3.0 to 17.3 ± 3.0 mm³ ), whereas it did not change significantly in the ASA group (15.2 ± 2.8 vs 16.6 ± 2.9 mm³ ). Increases in HDL cholesterol, decreases in triglycerides, liver enzyme and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein levels, and reductions in abdominal visceral fat area and insulin resistance were observed only in the CTZ group.

CONCLUSION

CTZ treatment for 12 months decreased coronary artery stenosis and the non-calcified plaque component. These results suggest that CTZ treatment may be an option for preventing the progression of coronary atherosclerosis in people with diabetes.

Effects of Cilostazol-Based Triple Antiplatelet Therapy Versus Dual Antiplatelet Therapy After Coronary Drug-Eluting Stent Implantation: An Updated Meta-Analysis of the Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

The results of studies on cilostazol-based triple antiplatelet therapy (TAT) after drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation were inconsistent. To assess the effects of TAT compared with dual antiplatelet therapy (DAT) after DES/second-generation DES implantation, we performed a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

METHODS

All relevant studies evaluated were identified by searching the PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and ISI Web of Science databases without time and language limitation. Subgroup analyses were performed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of TAT after second-generation DES implantation.

RESULTS

Eleven RCTs involving a total of 4684 patients were included. The meta-analysis showed TAT was associated with significant beneficial effects on angiographic findings of in-stent restenosis [risk ratio (RR) 0.645, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.470-0.885; P = 0.007], in-segment restenosis (RR 0.606, 95% CI 0.450-0.817; P = 0.001), in-stent late loss (RR - 0.095, 95% CI - 0.136 to - 0.054; P < 0.0001), in-segment late loss (RR - 0.100, 95% CI - 0.139 to - 0.061; P < 0.0001), target lesion revascularization (TLR) (RR 0.570, 95% CI 0.430-0.755; P < 0.0001), and target vessel revascularization (TVR) (RR 0.523, 95% CI 0.380-0.719; P < 0.0001). No significant difference was found in outcomes of all-cause death, cardiac death, definite/probable stent thrombosis (ST), non-fatal myocardial infarction (MI), overall bleeding, and major bleeding between the two groups, as well as some minor adverse effects including palpitations, thrombocytopenia, neutropenia, and hepatic dysfunction. However, the incidence rate of rash, gastrointestinal disorders, and headache was significantly higher in TAT. The second-generation DES subgroup showed similar results, except for the indicators of all-cause death (RR 2.161, 95% CI 1.007-4.635; P = 0.048) and hepatic dysfunction (RR 0.176, 95% CI 0.031-0.995; P = 0.049).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with DAT, cilostazol-based TAT can significantly improve the angiographic findings of in-stent and in-segment late loss, in-stent and in-segment restenosis, TLR, and TVR after DES/second-generation DES implantation. However, no benefits were observed in outcomes of all-cause death, cardiac death, ST, and MI.

DAPT Plus Cilostazol is Better Than Traditional DAPT or Aspirin Plus Ticagrelor as Elective PCI for Intermediate-to-Highly Complex Cases: Prospective, Randomized, PRU-Based Study in Taiwan

PURPOSE

Current treatment guidelines do not recommend different antiplatelet treatments for patients in different coronary risk categories; nor do they consider ethnic differences in responses to individual drugs.

OBJECTIVES

We performed a prospective, single-blind, randomized, comparative study of Taiwanese patients with stable angina and scheduled stent implantation for intermediate-to-highly complex coronary lesions and compared the platelet reactivity unit (PRU) levels and 24-month outcomes of groups receiving three different antiplatelet treatments.

METHODS

Patients (N = 334) were randomized into three treatment groups (aspirin + clopidogrel, aspirin + ticagrelor, or aspirin + clopidogrel + cilostazol) for 6 months of treatment and were then switched to aspirin only. PRU levels were determined 24 h, 7 days, and 1 month after stent implantation. Clinical outcomes and adverse events were recorded over 24 months.

RESULTS

Clopidogrel treatment reached full effect after 1 month. Ticagrelor decreased PRU levels more than did clopidogrel but often to levels that increased the risk of hemorrhage. The addition of cilostazol to clopidogrel decreased PRU levels earlier and more strongly than clopidogrel alone but not as strongly as did ticagrelor. Ticagrelor treatment caused fewer major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) and more episodes of minor bleeding than the other two treatments.

CONCLUSIONS

Clopidogrel appears safer than ticagrelor in Taiwanese patients with stable angina after stent implantation for intermediate-to-highly complex coronary lesions. The addition of cilostazol to clopidogrel may provide a more rapid decrease in PRU to therapeutic levels without increasing the risk of hemorrhage.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT02101411.

Association of platelet response to cilostazol with clinical outcome and CYP genotype in patients with cerebral infarction

INTRODUCTION

Cilostazol, an anti-platelet drug that inhibits phosphodiesterase 3, is beneficial for patients with atherothrombosis. In contrast to other anti-platelet drugs such as aspirin and thienopyridines, little information is available on the relationship between platelet responses to cilostazol and clinical outcomes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted a prospective study on patients with cerebral infarction who were treated with cilostazol. The platelet response to cilostazol was assessed with our new assay for the phosphorylation of vasodilator-stimulated phosphoprotein (VASP) subsequent to the pharmacological action of cilostazol. Patients were followed up for 2 years and the relationship between VASP assay results and the recurrence of thrombotic events was examined. We also investigated the effects of CYP3A5 and CYP2C19 genotypes involved in the metabolism of cilostazol on the platelet response to cilostazol.

RESULTS

Among the 142 patients enrolled, 130 completed the 2-year follow-up and the recurrence of thrombotic events was noted in 8 (6.2%). VASP phosphorylation levels were significantly lower in patients with than in those without recurrence. The combined genotype of CYP3A5*1/*3 and CYP2C19*1/*1 was associated with a low level of VASP phosphorylation, while either genotype was not. A multivariate analysis showed that high residual platelet reactivity during the cilostazol treatment, which was defined by a low response of platelet VASP phosphorylation to cilostazol, was an independent risk factor for the recurrence of thrombotic events.

CONCLUSION

A low platelet response to cilostazol determined by a new platelet assay was associated with the recurrence of thrombotic events in patients with cerebral infarction.

Diabetes and antiplatelet therapy: from bench to bedside

Diabetes mellitus (DM) is a metabolic disorder associated with accelerated atherogenesis and an increased risk of atherothrombotic complications. Multiple mechanisms contribute to the pro-thrombotic status which characterizes DM patients underscoring the importance of antiplatelet therapies used for secondary prevention in these patients. For many years, dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) with aspirin and the P2Y₁₂ inhibitor clopidogrel has represented the mainstay of treatment following an acute coronary syndrome (ACS) or in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI). Although DAPT reduces the incidence of atherothrombotic recurrences, these rates remain high in DM patients underscoring the need for more efficacious therapies. Oral platelet P2Y₁₂ receptor inhibitors with enhanced potency, such as prasugrel and ticagrelor, as well as antiplatelet therapies such as vorapaxar inhibiting the thrombin-mediated platelet signaling pathway, constitute treatment opportunities for patients with DM and have shown to be associated with a greater reduction in ischemic recurrences, albeit at the cost of more bleeding. This article reviews currently available antiplatelet agents and delivers an update on the advances and drawbacks of these agents used for secondary prevention in DM patients experiencing an ACS or undergoing PCI.

Tailored Adjunctive Cilostazol Therapy Based on CYP2C19 Genotyping in Patients With Acute Myocardial Infarction - The CALDERA-GENE Study

BACKGROUND

Patients with reduced-function CYP2C19 genotypes on dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) with aspirin and clopidogrel show higher clinical risk for acute myocardial infarction (AMI). We investigated the effect of CYP2C19 genotype-tailored adjunctive cilostazol therapy on treatment of AMI.Methods and Results:The study group of 138 patients with suspected AMI were screened for CYP2C19 genotype immediately after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) using a SPARTAN RX point-of-care device. Carriers of the CYP2C19 reduced-function allele were randomized into DAPT (Carrier/DAPT) and DAPT plus 14-day cilostazol (Carrier/DAPT+Cilostazol) groups, while noncarriers were treated with DAPT (Noncarrier/DAPT). After exclusion of 10 patients, the remaining 128 patients were analyzed for P2Y12 reaction unit (PRU) using VerifyNow^®P2Y12 system, and levels of biomarkers immediately after, and 1, 14, and 28 days after PCI. DAPT+Cilostazol reduced PRU levels in carriers (n=46) to those found in the Noncarrier/DAPT group (n=40), and significantly lower than those of the Carrier/DAPT group (n=42) at 14 days post-PCI. Discontinuation of cilostazol for 14 days was associated with a significant rise in PRU levels to those of the Carrier/DAPT group at 28 days post-PCI. Plasma B-type natriuretic peptide levels at 14 days post-PCI were lower in Carrier/DAPT+Cilostazol than in the other 2 groups, and the levels increased to those of the other groups at 28 days post-PCI after withdrawal of cilostazol.

CONCLUSIONS

Adjunctive cilostazol therapy tailored to CYP2C19 genotype seemed useful in AMI patients with the CYP2C19 reduced-function allele.

Platelet function profiles in the elderly: Results of a pharmacodynamic study in patients on clopidogrel therapy and effects of switching to prasugrel 5 mg in patients with high platelet reactivity

Studies specifically designed to assess clopidogrel response in the elderly as well as treatment alternatives to improve platelet inhibition in this highrisk population are lacking. This study aimed to define phar-macodynamic (PD) profiles, including high platelet reactivity (HPR) rates, among elderly patients on maintenance clopidogrel therapy and to assess the PD effects of prasugrel 5 mg/day in elderly with HPR. This was a prospective observational PD study enrolling consecutive ≥75-year-old patients on maintenance clopidogrel therapy (75 mg/day) who were tested for clopidogrel response by the VerifyNow P2Y12 assay and light transmittance aggregometry (LTA). HPR rates were estimated using multiple definitions. HPR patients identified by the VerifyNow P2Y12 assay [P2Y12 reaction unit (PRU) ≥230] were switched to prasugrel 5 mg/day, and platelet function testing was performed after 15 days of treatment. PD testing was completed in 100 patients. The HPR prevalence varied between 25% and 32%, depending on the definition used. A PRU ≥230 was observed in 25 patients; of these, 20 switched to prasugrel 5 mg/day. This resulted in significant reduction in PRU mean values (279.8 ± 45.1 vs. 171.7 ± 65.2, p=0.0002) with an absolute between-treatment difference of 108.1 (95% confidence intervals 75.2–140.9). Accordingly, switching to prasugrel 5 mg/day overcame HPR in most (80%) patients. Consistently, all LTA measures were significantly lower after prasugrel compared with clopidogrel. In conclusion, a considerable proportion of elderly patients exhibit HPR while on standard clopidogrel therapy. Switching to 5 mg/day prasugrel in elderly patients with HPR is associated with enhanced platelet inhibition and overcomes HPR in the majority of these patients.

Effects of ticagrelor versus clopidogrel on platelet function in fibrinolytic-treated STEMI patients undergoing early PCI

OBJECTIVES

Patients undergoing PCI early after fibrinolytic therapy are at high risk for both thrombotic and bleeding complications. We sought to assess the pharmacodynamic effects of ticagrelor versus clopidogrel in the fibrinolytic-treated STEMI patients undergoing early PCI.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Patients undergoing PCI within 24 hours of tenecteplase (TNK), aspirin, and clopidogrel for STEMI were randomized to receive additional clopidogrel 300 mg followed by 75 mg daily or ticagrelor 180 mg followed by 90 mg twice daily. The platelet reactivity units (PRU) were measured with the VerifyNow Assay before study drug administration (baseline) at 4 and 24 hours post-PCI. The primary end point was PRU ≤208 at 4 hours. A total of 140 patients (74 in ticagrelor and 66 in clopidogrel group) were enrolled. The mean PRU values at baseline were similar for the 2 groups (257.8±52.9 vs 259.5±56.7, P=.85, respectively). Post-PCI, patients on ticagrelor, compared to those on clopidogrel, had significantly lower PRU at 4 hours (78.7±88 vs 193.6±86.5, respectively, P<.001) and at 24 hours (34.5±35.0 and 153.5±75.5, respectively, P<.001). The primary end point was observed in 87.8% (n=65) in the ticagrelor-treated patients compared to 57.6% (n=38) of clopidogrel-treated patients, P<.001.

CONCLUSION

Fibrinolysis-treated STEMI patients who received clopidogrel and aspirin at the time of fibrinolysis and were undergoing early PCI frequently had PRU >208. In this high-risk population, ticagrelor provides more prompt and potent platelet inhibition compared with clopidogrel (Funded by Astra Zeneca; NCT01930591, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01930591).

A laboratory association between hemoglobin and VerifyNow P2Y12 reaction unit: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

VerifyNow P2Y12 assay is used widely to evaluate residual platelet reactivity in patients taking P2Y12 receptor antagonists. However, a laboratory association between VerifyNow P2Y12 reaction unit (PRU) and hemoglobin, which might lead to wrong interpretation of the data, is reported. We performed these systematic review and meta-analysis to clearly define the relationship between PRU and hemoglobin and to elucidate whether the relationship, if any, is a true biological association or is just a laboratory error.

METHODS

Through a comprehensive electronic and manual search, 10 studies were selected for the cohort level meta-analysis. Among 10 studies, we were able to retrieve the raw data of 5 studies, and a patient-level meta-analysis was performed. Potential publication bias was searched by funnel plot analysis and was actively adjusted, if present, by trim and fill method.

RESULTS

The pooled analysis revealed a significant inverse correlation between PRU and hemoglobin (r=-0.349; P<.001; 10 studies with 4,793 patients). VerifyNow P2Y12 base unit, which reflects off-drug platelet reactivity, was also inversely correlated with hemoglobin (r=-0.526; P<.001; 8 studies with 4,395 patients). % Inhibition (r=0.081; P=.059; 6 studies with 3,832 patients) and ΔPRU (r=-0.037; P=.188; 5 studies with 3,521 patients) were not associated with hemoglobin. A significant inverse association between PRU and hemoglobin was also observed in the patient-level meta-analysis (3,533 patients pooled from 5 studies; r=-0.335; P<.001). Light transmission aggregometry (r=0.160; P=.072; 4 studies with 1,144 patients) and multiple electrode platelet aggregometry (r=-0.029; P=.394; 3 studies with 7,645 patients) showed no significant association with hemoglobin.

CONCLUSIONS

A significant inverse association was observed between PRU and hemoglobin which is likely to be a laboratory error. Clinicians should be aware that this association might lead to wrong interpretation of the data.

Platelet testing in flow diversion: a review of the evidence

OBJECTIVE

Although the use of dual antiplatelet therapy with flow diversion is recommended and commonplace, the testing of platelet inhibition is more controversial.

METHODS

The authors reviewed the medical literature to establish and describe the physiology of platelet adhesion, the pharmacology of antiplatelet medications, and the mechanisms of the available platelet function tests. Additionally, they present a review of the pertinent neurointerventional and interventional cardiology literature.

RESULTS

Competing reports in the neurointerventional literature argue for and against the use of routine platelet function testing, with adjustments to the dosage or medications based on the results. The interventional cardiology literature has also wrestled with this dilemma after percutaneous coronary interventions, with conflicting reports of the benefits of platelet function testing.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite its prevalence, the benefits of platelet function testing prior to flow diversion are unproven. This practice will likely remain controversial until the level of evidence improves through more rigorous testing and reporting.

Impact of Diabetes Mellitus on the Pharmacodynamic Effects of Ticagrelor Versus Clopidogrel in Troponin-Negative Acute Coronary Syndrome Patients Undergoing Ad Hoc Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

Background

Diabetes mellitus (DM) is associated with enhanced platelet reactivity and impaired response to oral antiplatelet therapy, including clopidogrel. This post hoc analysis investigated the pharmacodynamic effects of ticagrelor versus clopidogrel loading dose (LD) in troponin‐negative acute coronary syndrome patients with or without DM undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention in the Ad Hoc PCI study.

Methods and Results

Patients randomized (1:1) to receive ticagrelor 180 mg LD or clopidogrel 600 mg LD were assessed by diabetic status. Platelet reactivity (P2Y₁₂ reaction units [PRU] on VerifyNow^® assay) was measured pre‐LD, at 0.5, 2, and 8 hours post‐LD, and at the end of the percutaneous coronary intervention. The primary endpoint was PRU levels 2 hours post‐LD; secondary endpoints included rates of high on‐treatment platelet reactivity (PRU≥208). Of 100 randomized patients, 51 received ticagrelor (DM, n=20; non‐DM, n=31) and 49 clopidogrel (DM, n=16; non‐DM, n=33). At 2 hours post‐LD, mean (SD) PRU levels in DM patients were 130.1 (111.7) with ticagrelor versus 287.6 (71.9) with clopidogrel (mean [95%CI] difference −157.5 [−225.3, −89.8]; P<0.001); in non‐DM patients, they were 75.3 (75.7) versus 243.0 (72.4) (mean difference −167.7 [−207.1, −128.3]; P<0.001). High on‐treatment platelet reactivity rates at 2 hours post‐LD were also significantly (P<0.001) reduced with ticagrelor versus clopidogrel in DM and non‐DM patients. Between‐treatment differences for PRU and high on‐treatment platelet reactivity were not significant at earlier time points but were at 8 hours post‐LD (P<0.001).

Conclusions

Compared with clopidogrel, ticagrelor achieved faster, enhanced platelet inhibition and reduced high on‐treatment platelet reactivity rates, in DM and non‐DM patients.

Clinical Trial Registration

URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01603082.

Antiplatelet agents in hemodialysis

Patients affected by cardiovascular disease (CVD) are treated with antiplatelet agents (AA) and/or anticoagulant drugs, which are fundamental in the management of stroke, coronary atherosclerotic disease, peripheral vascular disease and atrial fibrillation. CVD is the most important cause of death in chronic renal failure (CRF). Death rates from myocardial infarction (MI) and from all other cardiac causes exceed those for the general population. Incidence of MI in CRF is triple that in the general population. Moreover, mortality is seven- to eight-fold higher in patients requiring chronic hemodialysis compared to the general population, and approximately 40% of deaths in this population are attributable to coronary artery disease (CAD). For these reasons, AA are widely used in patients affected by CRF. Current data do not support a protective effect of antiplatelet administration in hemodialytic patients as primary prevention of cardiovascular mortality. Different results have been obtained concerning secondary prevention of CVD. The Cooperative Cardiovascular Project demonstrated that dialysis patients treated with aspirin following MI had a 43% lower mortality. Another study reported that the use of aspirin and beta-blockers following MI was associated with lower mortality in CRF patients. However, aspirin plus clopidogrel seems to increase the hemorrhagic risk without a significant reduction in cardiovascular mortality and there are insufficient data to support the use of new AA drugs in hemodialytic patients. In conclusion, since CRF patients are one of the groups at highest risk for atherosclerotic events, it could be reasonable to use aspirin in HD patients. However, the bleeding risk in HD patients needs to be strongly evaluated, especially before starting dual AA treatment.

Increased Benefit With Vorapaxar Use in Patients With a History of Myocardial Infarction and Diabetes Mellitus: What the Data Show Us

Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is a progressive and multifactorial metabolic disease mainly characterized by hyperglycemia and insulin resistance. Abnormal platelet reactivity associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) is also a feature characteristic of patients with T2DM. Dual antiplatelet therapy consisting of aspirin and an adenosine diphosphate platelet P2Y₁₂ receptor antagonist, such as clopidogrel, represents the standard antithrombotic regimen for the secondary prevention of CVD risk in T2DM. However, a high proportion of patients with T2DM exhibit high on-treatment platelet reactivity to aspirin and/or clopidogrel, associated with a greater risk of adverse cardiovascular events compared with nondiabetic patients. Consequently, novel antiplatelet therapeutic approaches may be required in order to avoid such events. Vorapaxar is a novel antiplatelet agent that targets the platelet protease-activated receptor 1 and inhibits thrombin-induced platelet activation. Vorapaxar has been studied in 2 phase III clinical trials and has been approved for use in the secondary prevention of atherothrombotic events in patients with a previous myocardial infarction (MI) or peripheral arterial disease. New data from the Thrombin-Receptor Antagonist in Secondary Prevention of Atherothrombotic Ischemic Events (TRA 2°P)-TIMI 50 trial MI cohort demonstrate that the subgroup of patients with T2DM exhibits increased benefit from vorapaxar use compared with non-T2DM patients. The aim of the present work is to critically review the current knowledge concerning vorapaxar use in patients with T2DM as well as to discuss the possible mechanism(s) underlying vorapaxar's beneficial effect in T2DM.

Flow Diversion for Intracranial Aneurysm Management: A New Standard of Care

Endovascular treatment of intracranial aneurysms with complex morphologies such as giant, wide-necked, or fusiform aneurysms is challenging. Stent-assisted coiling and balloon-assisted coiling are alternative techniques to treat such complex aneurysms, but studies have shown less-than-expected efficacy, as suggested by their high rate of recanalization. The management of complex aneurysms via microsurgery or conventional neuroendovascular strategies has traditionally been poor. However, over the last few years, flow-diverting stents (FDS) have revolutionized the treatment of such aneurysms. FDS are implanted within the parent artery rather than the aneurysm sac. By modifying intra-aneurysmal and parent-vessel flow dynamics at the aneurysm/parent vessel interface, FDS trigger a cascade of gradual intra-aneurysmal thrombosis. As endothelialization of the FDS is complete, the parent vessel reconstructs while preserving the patency of normal perforators and side branch vessels. As with any intervention, the practice and application of flow-diversion technology is inherent, with risks that include vessel rupture or perforation, in-stent thrombosis, perforator occlusion, procedural and delayed hemorrhages, and perianeurysmal edema. Herein, we review the devices, their mechanisms of actions, clinical applications, complications, and ongoing studies.

Association between insulin receptor substrate-1 polymorphisms and high platelet reactivity with clopidogrel therapy in coronary artery disease patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus

BACKGROUND

The mechanisms leading to the high on-treatment platelet reactivity in diabetes patients are not fully elucidated. The genetic factors may be associated with the diminished antiplatelet efficacy of dual antiplatelet therapy. We investigated the possible association between insulin receptor substrate-1 (IRS-1) polymorphisms and high platelet reactivity in coronary artery disease (CAD) patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).

METHODS

A total of 674 CAD patients with T2DM were enrolled in this study. Platelet aggregation and platelet activation were assessed with light transmission aggregometry and flow cytometry analysis, respectively. Participants were divided into high platelet reactivity (HPR) group and non-HPR group according to their maximal platelet aggregation. Genotypes were identified by polymerase chain reaction and direct sequencing of genomic DNA. The association between IRS-1 genetic variants and platelet function was assessed.

RESULTS

There were 233 participants in the HPR group and 441 participants in the non-HPR group. G allele frequencies of rs13431554 were 27.7 % for the HPR group and 18.6 % for the non-HPR group (p < 0.001). Adenosine diphosphate and arachidonic acid induced platelet aggregation were significantly higher in G allele carriers compared with non-carriers (56.8 ± 16.2 vs 52.0 ± 17.9 %, p < 0.01, 28.9 ± 18.6 vs 25.2 ± 17.8 %, p < 0.01, respectively). We observed that P-selectin expression and PAC-1 binding were higher in G allele carriers compared with non-carriers (40.8 ± 12.4 vs 36.2 ± 13.8, p = 0.01; 43.7 ± 15.9 vs 38.7 ± 19.9, p = 0.03, respectively).

CONCLUSION

The G allele of rs13431554 in the IRS-1 gene was associated with a hyperreactive platelet phenotype in the CAD patients with T2DM.

Addition of cilostazol to aspirin therapy for secondary prevention of cardiovascular and cerebrovascular disease in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: A randomized, open-label trial

BACKGROUND

Patients with established coronary artery disease are at increased risk for future ischemic events and require secondary prevention for systemic vascular disease. We performed a randomized clinical trial to evaluate the impact of cilostazol on cardiovascular and cerebrovascular disease in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention.

METHODS

A total of 514 patients who had undergone coronary stent implantation >6 months previously and were thought to no longer need dual antiplatelet therapy with aspirin and a thienopyridine were randomly assigned to receive aspirin plus cilostazol therapy or aspirin therapy alone after discontinuation of thienopyridine therapy. The primary efficacy end point was a composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, stroke, or cardiovascular or cerebrovascular revascularization at 2 years after randomization. The main safety end point was major or minor bleeding, according to the Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction bleeding definition.

RESULTS

At 2 years, follow-up clinical data were available for 98.1% of patients. The primary efficacy end point occurred in 13.9% of the aspirin plus cilostazol group versus 22.1% of the aspirin-only group (hazard ratio 0.61, 95% CI 0.40-0.93, P = .021). The rate of major or minor bleeding was not significantly different between the aspirin plus cilostazol and aspirin-only groups (1.6% and 4.0%, respectively, hazard ratio 0.40, 95% CI 0.13-1.28, P = .12).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients who underwent coronary stent implantation, the addition of cilostazol to aspirin therapy was associated with lower rates of cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events at 2 years compared with aspirin monotherapy.

Protease receptor antagonism to target blood platelet therapies

Platelet activation and thrombus formation play a central role in ischemic vascular disease. Thrombin, an especially potent physiologic agonist mediating in vivo activation of platelets, acts via a unique family of G-protein-coupled receptors called protease-activated receptors (PARs) with a broad tissue expression. This review focuses on current antiplatelet therapies as well as innovative approaches to targeting PARs in patients with atherothrombotic vascular disease.

Comparing the effectiveness and safety between triple antiplatelet therapy and dual antiplatelet therapy in type 2 diabetes mellitus patients after coronary stents implantation: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Background

Since antiplatelet therapy in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) patients is very important after intracoronary stenting, and because the most commonly used therapies have been the dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) consisting of aspirin and clopidogrel and the triple antiplatelet therapy (TAPT) consisting of aspirin, clopidogrel and cilostazol, we aim to compare the effectiveness and safety between triple antiplatelet therapy and dual antiplatelet therapy in T2DM patients.

Methods

Systematic literature search was done from the databases of PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) and WanFang. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the effectiveness and safety between triple therapy and dual therapy in T2DM patients after coronary stents placement were included. Endpoints included major adverse cardiac effects (MACEs), target lesion revascularization (TLR), target vessel revascularization (TVR), death, stent thrombosis, bleeding and adverse drug reactions during a 9–12 months period, as well as platelet activities.

Results

Four studies including 1005 patients reporting the adverse clinical outcomes and six studies including 519 patients reporting the platelet activities, with a total of 1524 patients have been analyzed in this meta-analysis. The pooling analysis shows that TAPT has significantly decreased the occurrence of MACEs (RR: 0.55; 95 % CI: 0.36–0.86, P = 0.009), TLR (RR 0.41; 95 % CI: 0.21–0.80, P = 0.008), TVR (RR 0.55; 95 % CI: 0.34–0.88, P = 0.01) and the overall incidence of Death/ Myocardial Infarction (MI)/TVR (RR 0.54; 95 % CI: 0.31–0.94, P = 0.03) during this 9 to 12 months follow up period after stents implantation. Stent thrombosis was almost similar in both groups. Bleeding seemed to favor DAPT but the result was not statistically significant. Platelet aggregation, platelet reactivity index (PRI) and platelet reactivity unit (PRU) were also reduced with Weight Mean Difference (WMD) of (−13.80; 95 % CI: −17.03 to −10.56, P < 0.00001), (−22.87; 95 % CI: −23.66 to −22.07, P < 0.00001) and (−44.17; 95 % CI: −58.56 to −29.77, P < 0.00001) respectively.

Conclusion

Since MACEs have been significantly decreased in the triple group, TAPT appears to be more effective than DAPT in T2DM patients after intracoronary stenting. No significant difference in stent thrombosis and bleeding risks between these 2 groups shows TAPT to be almost as safe as DAPT in these diabetic patients.

The Silk flow-diverter stent for endovascular treatment of intracranial aneurysms

Flow diverter (FD) stents represent a new endovascular technique developed for the treatment of complex intracranial aneurysms (wide neck, fusiform, large, and giant aneurysms) that are challenging for classic endovascular techniques such as coiling, balloon-assisted coiling and stent-assisted coiling. Low porosity, high metal coverage, and high pore density are the main properties of FD stents. These properties induce hemodynamic changes redirecting the blood flow away from the aneurysm and into the parent artery leading to gradual thrombosis of the aneurysm. FD stents also provide scaffolding for subsequent neoendothelial proliferation, and vessel wall remodeling. This is considered as a paradigm shift compared to prior endovascular methods, which predominantly aimed at providing treatment inside the aneurysmal sac. This paper describes in detail the first released FD stent, the Silk flow-diverter stent (Balt Extrusion, Montmorency, France), its mechanism of action and deployment technique. It reviews the pertinent literature regarding safety, efficacy and potential risks and complications associated with the use of this stent.

State-of-the-Art: Hypo-responsiveness to oral antiplatelet therapy in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus

Diabetes mellitus is a global pandemic, associated with a high burden of cardiovascular disease. There are multiple platelet derangements in patients with diabetes, and antiplatelet drugs remain the first-line agents for secondary prevention as well as for high-risk primary prevention among patients with diabetes. This review provides a summary of oral antiplatelet drug hypo-responsiveness in patients with diabetes, specifically aspirin and Clopidogrel resistance. Topics discussed include antiplatelet testing, definitions used to define hypo-response and resistance, its prevalence, association with clinical outcomes and strategies to mitigate resistance. The role of prasugrel and ticagrelor, as well as investigational agents, is also discussed.

The potential role of anticoagulant therapy for the secondary prevention of ischemic events post-acute coronary syndrome

Abstract The use of dual antiplatelet therapy has led to a substantial reduction in ischemic events post-acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Despite this, recurrent event rates remain high. Recent research has combined antiplatelet with anticoagulant therapy to reduce recurrent event rates further. Compared with standard medical therapy, rivaroxaban demonstrated improved efficacy outcomes and significantly reduced mortality after an ACS. Although clear benefits of novel oral anticoagulants post-ACS have been proven, concerns regarding bleeding are still a barrier to widespread use. This review explores key trials of dual antiplatelet therapy and examines the latest research in anticoagulation aiming to optimize clinical outcomes post-ACS.

Systematic reviews and meta-analyses for more profitable strategies in peripheral artery disease

In the peripheral arteries, a thrombus superimposed on atherosclerosis contributes to the progression of peripheral artery disease (PAD), producing intermittent claudication (IC), ischemic necrosis, and, potentially, loss of the limb. PAD with IC is often undiagnosed and, in turn, undertreated. The low percentage of diagnosis (∼30%) in this setting of PAD is of particular concern because of the potential worsening of PAD (amputation) and the high risk of adverse vascular outcomes (vascular death, coronary artery disease, stroke). A Medline literature search of the highest-quality systematic reviews and meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials documents that, due to risk of bias, imprecision, and indirectness, the overall quality of the evidence concerning diagnostic tools and antithrombotic interventions in PAD is generally low. Areas of research emerge from the information collected. Appropriate treatments for PAD patients will only derive from ad-hoc studies. Innovative imaging techniques are needed to identify PAD subjects at the highest vascular risk. Whether IC unresponsive to physical exercise and smoking cessation identifies those with a heritable predisposition to more severe vascular events deserves to be addressed. Devising ways to improve prevention of vascular events in patients with PAD implies a co-ordinated approach in vascular medicine.

Efficacy of cilostazol on platelet reactivity and cardiovascular outcomes in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: insights from a meta-analysis of randomised trials

BACKGROUND

Cilostazol overcomes high on-treatment platelet reactivity (HTPR) and reduces adverse cardiovascular (CV) outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). However, the role for triple antiplatelet therapy (TAPT) with cilostazol in addition to aspirin and clopidogrel after PCI is not well defined.

METHODS

We conducted a MEDLINE/EMBASE/CENTRAL search for randomised trials, until May 2014, evaluating TAPT compared with dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) of aspirin and clopidogrel alone in patients undergoing PCI and reporting platelet reactivity and/or CV outcomes. The primary platelet reactivity outcome was differences in platelet reactivity unit (PRU) with secondary outcomes of %platelet inhibition and rate of HTPR. The primary CV outcome was major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), with secondary outcomes of death, cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis (ST), target lesion revascularisation (TLR) and target vessel revascularisation (TVR) as well as safety outcomes of bleeding and drug discontinuations.

RESULTS

In 17 trials that evaluated platelet reactivity outcomes, the mean PRU value was 47.73 units lower with TAPT versus DAPT (95% CI -61.41 to -34.04, p<0.0001; mean PRU 182.90 vs 232.65). TAPT also increased platelet inhibition by 12.71% (95% CI 10.76 to 14.67, p<0.0001), and led to a 60% reduction in the risk of HTPR (relative risk=0.40; 95% CI 0.30 to 0.53) compared with DAPT. Moreover, among the 34 trials that evaluated CV outcomes, TAPT reduced the risk of MACE (incident rate ratio (IRR)=0.68; 95% CI 0.60 to 0.78), TLR (IRR=0.57; 95% CI 0.44 to 0.73), TVR (IRR=0.69; 95% CI 0.59 to 0.81) and ST (IRR=0.63; 95% CI 0.40 to 0.98) with no difference for other outcomes including bleeding, even in trials using drug-eluting stents. Drug discontinuation due to adverse effects was, however, higher with TAPT vs DAPT (IRR=1.59; 95% CI 1.32 to 1.91).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients undergoing PCI, addition of cilostazol to DAPT results in decreased platelet reactivity and a significant reduction in CV outcomes including ST, even in the drug-eluting stent era.