Efficacy and safety of abciximab in combination with cilostazol in patients undergoing stenting

Triple antiplatelet therapy vs. dual antiplatelet therapy in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: an evidence-based approach to answering a clinical query

AIMS

Outcomes of patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stents (DES) and bare metal stents (BMS) have not been evaluated separately for specific dual and triple antiplatelet agent use. The purpose of this meta-analysis was to determine whether triple antiplatelet therapy (combination of clopidogrel, aspirin and cilostazol) has any advantage in efficacy compared with standard dual antiplatelet therapy (aspirin and clopidogrel) in patients undergoing PCI.

METHODS

Electronic and printed sources were searched till May 2008 for randomized controlled clinical trials (RCTs) of cilostazol in combination with aspirin and clopidogrel. Pooled weighted mean difference (WMD) and pooled odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated.

RESULTS

A total of four RCTs including 1457 patients with a median follow-up period of 6-9 months were included in the analysis. The rates of major adverse cardiac and/or cerebrovascular events (MACE/MACCE), stent thrombosis and bleeding were not significantly different between triple and dual antiplatelet therapy groups. Pooled analysis showed that cilostazol was associated with significantly decreased incidence of in segment restenosis (ISR) (OR 0.51, 95% CI 0.38, 0.68; P < 0.00001), increased minimum luminal diameter (MLD) (WMD 0.16, 95% CI 0.10, 0.22; P < 0.00001) for both DES and BMS and also individually. However, the rates of target vessel revascularization (OR 0.45, 95% CI 0.25, 0.83; P = 0.01 and late lumen loss (pooled WMD 0.14, 95% CI 0.2, 0.07; P = 0.001) were decreased significantly only in the DES group receiving triple therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Cilostazol appears to be effective in reducing the rates of ISR without any significant benefit for MACE/MACCE.