Use of Cilostazol in Percutaneous Coronary Interventions

Diabetes and restenosis

Restenosis, defined as the re-narrowing of an arterial lumen after revascularization, represents an increasingly important issue in clinical practice. Indeed, as the number of stent placements has risen to an estimate that exceeds 3 million annually worldwide, revascularization procedures have become much more common. Several investigators have demonstrated that vessels in patients with diabetes mellitus have an increased risk restenosis. Here we present a systematic overview of the effects of diabetes on in-stent restenosis. Current classification and updated epidemiology of restenosis are discussed, alongside the main mechanisms underlying the pathophysiology of this event. Then, we summarize the clinical presentation of restenosis, emphasizing the importance of glycemic control in diabetic patients. Indeed, in diabetic patients who underwent revascularization procedures a proper glycemic control remains imperative.

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.

Clinical efficacy and safety of cilostazol: a critical review of the literature

Cilostazol is a unique antiplatelet agent that has been commercially available for over two decades. As a phosphodiesterase III inhibitor, it reversibly inhibits platelet aggregation yet also possesses vasodilatory and antiproliferative properties. It has been widely studied in a variety of disease states, including peripheral arterial disease, cerebrovascular disease, and coronary artery disease with percutaneous coronary intervention. Overall, cilostazol appears to be a promising agent in the management of these disease states with a bleeding profile comparable to placebo; even when combined with other antiplatelet agents, cilostazol does not appear to increase the rate of bleeding. Despite the possible benefit of cilostazol, its use is limited by tolerability as some patients often report drug discontinuation due to headache, diarrhea, dizziness, or increased heart rate. To date, it has been predominantly studied in the Asian population, making it difficult to extrapolate these results to a more diverse patient population. This paper discusses the evolving role of cilostazol in the treatment of vascular diseases.

The pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic interaction of clopidogrel and cilostazol in relation to CYP2C19 and CYP3A5 genotypes

AIM

The primary objective of the present study was to evaluate the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic interactions between clopidogrel and cilostazol in relation to the CYP2C19 and CYP3A5 genotypes.

METHODS

In a randomized, three-way crossover study, 27 healthy subjects were administered clopidogrel (300 mg), cilostazol (100 mg) or clopidogrel + cilostazol orally. Plasma concentrations of clopidogrel, cilostazol and their active metabolites (clopidogrel thiol metabolite, 3,4-dehydrocilostazol and 4″-trans-hydroxycilostazol), and adenosine diphosphate-induced platelet aggregation were measured for pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic assessment.

RESULTS

The area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC) of the active thiol metabolite of clopidogrel was highest in the CYP2C19 extensive metabolizers (EM) and lowest in the poor metabolizers (PM). Cilostazol decreased the thiol metabolite AUC by 29% in the CYP3A5*1/*3 genotype [geometric mean ratio (GMR) 0.71; 90% confidence interval (CI) 0.58, 0.86; P = 0.020] but not in the CYP3A5*3/*3 genotype (GMR 0.93; 90% CI 0.80, 1.10; P = 0.446). Known effects of the CYP2C19 and CYP3A5 genotypes on the exposure of cilostazol and its metabolites were observed but there was no significant difference in the AUC of cilostazol and 3,4-dehydrocilostazol between cilostazol and clopidogrel + cilostazol. The inhibition of platelet aggregation from 4 h to 24 h (IPA4-24 ) following the administration of clopidogrel alone was highest in the CYP2C19 EM genotype and lowest in the CYP2C19 PM genotype (59.05 ± 18.95 vs. 36.74 ± 13.26, P = 0.023). However, the IPA of the CYP2C19 PM following co-administration of clopidogrel and cilostazol was comparable with that of the CYP2C19 EM and intermediate metabolizers (IM) only in CYP3A5*3/*3 subjects.

CONCLUSIONS

The additive antiplatelet effect of cilostazol plus clopidogrel is maximized in subjects with both the CYP2C19 PM and CYP3A5*3/*3 genotypes because of a lack of change of clopidogrel thiol metabolite exposure in CYP3A5*3/*3 as well as the highest cilostazol IPA in CYP2C19 PM and CYP3A5*3/*3 subjects.

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.

Efficacy and safety of cilostazol based triple antiplatelet treatment versus dual antiplatelet treatment in patients undergoing coronary stent implantation: an updated meta-analysis of the randomized controlled trials

The aim of this study was to obtain best estimates of the efficacy and safety of cilostazol-based triple antiplatelet therapy (TAPT: aspirin, clopidogrel and cilostazol) compared with dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT: aspirin and clopidogrel) in patients undergoing coronary stent implantation. We searched the literature to identify all randomized clinical trials examining efficacy and safety of TAPT versus DAPT in patients undergoing coronary stent implantation. Major efficacy outcomes were death, non-fatal myocardial infarction (MI), ischemic stroke and stent thrombosis (ST) and the safety outcome was bleeding. Data were analyzed using the Review Manager 5.0.0 software. A total of 19 trials involving 7,464 patients were included. TAPT and DAPT were associated with similar rates of death, non-fatal MI, ischemic stroke and ST, but compared with DAPT, TAPT had lower rates of target lesion revascularization (TLR) (RR 0.67, 95 % CI 0.56-0.82, P < 0.0001) and target vessel revascularization (TVR) (RR 0.65, 95 % CI 0.55-0.77, P < 0.00001), as well as less late loss of minimal lumen diameter (mean difference -0.14, 95 % CI -0.17--0.11, P < 0.00001), and less binary angiographic restenosis (RR 0.54, 95 % CI 0.45-0.65, P < 0.00001). TAPT and DAPT had similar rates of bleeding, but TAPT had significantly higher rates of headache, palpitation, rash and gastrointestinal side-effects. Cilostazol-based TAPT compared with DAPT is associated with improved angiographic outcomes and decreased risk of TLR and TVR but does not reduce major cardiovascular events and is associated with an increase in minor adverse events.

Comparison of cilostazol versus ticlopidine following coronary stenting in patients with coronary heart disease: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Previous studies have shown that the combination of cilostazol and aspirin may be a more effective regimen than ticlopidine plus aspirin in the prevention of late restenosis and acute or subacute stent thrombosis following coronary stenting; however, individually published results are inconclusive. The aim of this meta-analysis was to compare the differences in late restenosis and stent thrombosis between cilostazol plus aspirin and ticlopidine plus aspirin for patients with coronary heart disease (CHD) following coronary stenting. A literature search of Pubmed, Embase, Web of Science and Chinese BioMedicine (CBM) databases was conducted from 1998 to March 1, 2013 and statistical analysis was performed using Stata statistical software, version 12.0. Twelve randomized controlled trials were included in the study, with a total of 2,708 patients with CHD following coronary stenting. The patient population comprised 1,371 patients treated with cilostazol plus aspirin and 1,337 patients treated with ticlopidine plus aspirin. The meta-analysis showed that cilostazol plus aspirin demonstrated a lower rate of restenosis than ticlopidine plus aspirin [odds ratio (OR)=0.83, 95% confidence interval (CI)=0.69–0.99, P=0.047]. A significant difference was also observed in the average percent diameter stenosis between cilostazol plus aspirin and ticlopidine plus aspirin [standardized weight difference (SMD)= −0.57, 95% CI=−0.92, −0.23, P=0.001). However, there were no significant differences in the rates of acute or subacute stent thrombosis between cilostazol plus aspirin and ticlopidine plus aspirin. The present meta-analysis suggests that cilostazol plus aspirin may result in a lower restenosis rate and percent diameter stenosis than ticlopidine plus aspirin for patients with CHD following coronary stenting.

Triple antiplatelet therapy with addition of cilostazol to aspirin and clopidogrel for Y-stent-assisted coil embolization of cerebral aneurysms

BACKGROUND

Dual antiplatelet therapy for stent-assisted coiling of cerebral aneurysms is essential to prevent thromboembolic complications. There is concern that Y-stent-assisted coiling may increase thromboembolic complications compared with coiling with a single stent. Several reports have demonstrated that cilostazol may improve clopidogrel responsiveness. We investigated whether triple antiplatelet therapy with addition of cilostazol to aspirin plus clopidogrel for Y-stents can prevent thromboembolic events.

METHODS

Between July 2010 and October 2012, we treated 40 consecutive aneurysms with coil embolization using Enterprise stents. At the peri-procedural period, dual antiplatelet agents (100 mg aspirin and 75 mg clopidogrel) were used for the single stent group (n = 36), and triple antiplatelet agents (addition of 200 mg cilostazol) were used for the Y-stent group (n = 4). We evaluated post-operative diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) and any complications. We assessed the following for statistical analysis: age, sex, aneurysm location, shape, and size, neck size, size of parent vessels, and stent length.

RESULTS

We found two neurological peri-procedural complications: one transient ischemic attack and one infarction. Both complications belonged to the Y-stent group, which was a significant factor of thromboembolic events (P = 0.008). There were no other significant factors related to neurological complications or positive DWI. For subgroup analysis of the single stent group, stent length was significantly longer in positive DWI than negative DWI (P = 0.04). In the follow-up period of 20 ± 8.6 months, there were no symptomatic late complications in any patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the number of patients in the Y-stent group is small, this group had a significantly higher risk of thromboembolic complications. While our protocol of a routine dose of dual antiplatelet therapy may be sufficient for single stent therapy, our protocol of a routine dose of triple antiplatelet therapy for Y-stents may not prevent thromboembolic events. This suggests that evaluation of platelet function may be essential, especially for Y-stents.

Phosphodiesterase-3 inhibition augments the myocardial infarct size-limiting effects of exenatide in mice with type 2 diabetes

Glucagon-like peptide (GLP)-1 receptor activation increases intracellular cAMP with downstream activation of PKA. Cilostazol (CIL), a phosphodiesterase-3 inhibitor, prevents cAMP degradation. We assessed whether CIL amplifies the exenatide (EX)-induced increase in myocardial cAMP levels and PKA activity and augments the infarct size (IS)-limiting effects of EX in db/db mice. Mice fed a Western diet received oral CIL (10 mg/kg) or vehicle by oral gavage 24 h before surgery. One hour before surgery, mice received EX (1 μg/kg sc) or vehicle. Additional mice received H-89, a PKA inhibitor, alone or with CIL + EX. Mice underwent 30 min of coronary artery occlusion and 24 h of reperfusion. Both EX and CIL increased myocardial cAMP levels and PKA activity. Levels were significantly higher in the EX + CIL group. Both EX and CIL reduced IS. IS was the smallest in the CIL + EX group. H-89 completely blocked the IS-limiting effects of EX + CIL. EX + CIL decreased phosphatase and tensin homolog on chromosome 10 upregulation and increased Akt and ERK1/2 phosphorylation after ischemia-reperfusion. These effects were blocked by H-89. In conclusion, EX and CIL have additive effects on IS limitation in diabetic mice. The additive effects are related to cAMP-induced PKA activation, as H-89 blocked the protective effect of CIL + EX.