Cargando…

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....

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: HU, FENG-HUAN, YI, XIN, YANG, YUE-JING, QIAO, SHU-BIN, WU, YONG-JIAN, YUAN, JIAN-SONG
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: D.A. Spandidos 2013
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3786799/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24137273
http://dx.doi.org/10.3892/etm.2013.1190
_version_ 1782477774744715264
author HU, FENG-HUAN
YI, XIN
YANG, YUE-JING
QIAO, SHU-BIN
WU, YONG-JIAN
YUAN, JIAN-SONG
author_facet HU, FENG-HUAN
YI, XIN
YANG, YUE-JING
QIAO, SHU-BIN
WU, YONG-JIAN
YUAN, JIAN-SONG
author_sort HU, FENG-HUAN
collection PubMed
description 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.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3786799
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2013
publisher D.A. Spandidos
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-37867992013-10-17 Comparison of cilostazol versus ticlopidine following coronary stenting in patients with coronary heart disease: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials HU, FENG-HUAN YI, XIN YANG, YUE-JING QIAO, SHU-BIN WU, YONG-JIAN YUAN, JIAN-SONG Exp Ther Med Articles 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. D.A. Spandidos 2013-09 2013-07-01 /pmc/articles/PMC3786799/ /pubmed/24137273 http://dx.doi.org/10.3892/etm.2013.1190 Text en Copyright © 2013, Spandidos Publications http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0 This is an open-access article licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 Unported License. The article may be redistributed, reproduced, and reused for non-commercial purposes, provided the original source is properly cited.
spellingShingle Articles
HU, FENG-HUAN
YI, XIN
YANG, YUE-JING
QIAO, SHU-BIN
WU, YONG-JIAN
YUAN, JIAN-SONG
Comparison of cilostazol versus ticlopidine following coronary stenting in patients with coronary heart disease: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
title Comparison of cilostazol versus ticlopidine following coronary stenting in patients with coronary heart disease: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
title_full Comparison of cilostazol versus ticlopidine following coronary stenting in patients with coronary heart disease: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
title_fullStr Comparison of cilostazol versus ticlopidine following coronary stenting in patients with coronary heart disease: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of cilostazol versus ticlopidine following coronary stenting in patients with coronary heart disease: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
title_short Comparison of cilostazol versus ticlopidine following coronary stenting in patients with coronary heart disease: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
title_sort comparison of cilostazol versus ticlopidine following coronary stenting in patients with coronary heart disease: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
topic Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3786799/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24137273
http://dx.doi.org/10.3892/etm.2013.1190
work_keys_str_mv AT hufenghuan comparisonofcilostazolversusticlopidinefollowingcoronarystentinginpatientswithcoronaryheartdiseaseametaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials
AT yixin comparisonofcilostazolversusticlopidinefollowingcoronarystentinginpatientswithcoronaryheartdiseaseametaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials
AT yangyuejing comparisonofcilostazolversusticlopidinefollowingcoronarystentinginpatientswithcoronaryheartdiseaseametaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials
AT qiaoshubin comparisonofcilostazolversusticlopidinefollowingcoronarystentinginpatientswithcoronaryheartdiseaseametaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials
AT wuyongjian comparisonofcilostazolversusticlopidinefollowingcoronarystentinginpatientswithcoronaryheartdiseaseametaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials
AT yuanjiansong comparisonofcilostazolversusticlopidinefollowingcoronarystentinginpatientswithcoronaryheartdiseaseametaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials