Comparison of cilostazol and ticlopidine for one-month effectiveness and safety after elective coronary stenting

Masayuki Hashiguchi, Keiko Ohno, Rieko Nakazawa, Satoshi Kishino, Mayumi Mochizuki, Tsuyoshi Shiga

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

24 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose: To compare the oral antiplatelets, phosphodiesterase III inhibitor cilostazol and the thienopyridine ticlopidine, for one-month effectiveness and safety as an adjunctive therapy after coronary stenting. Methods: Published studies retrieved through Medline and other databases from 1966-2002. Meta-analyses evaluated effectiveness and adverse side effects for one-month administrations of aspirin plus cilostazol or aspirin plus ticlopidine therapy after coronary stenting. Major adverse cardiac events (MACE), stent-associated thrombosis or adverse side effects after coronary stenting were compared between the two study arms and expressed with the odds ratios (OR) specific for the individual studies and meta-analytic summary for OR. Results: Five clinical studies met the inclusion criteria, and 4 of these studies underwent meta-analysis. With regard to the comparison of the OR summary for MACE and stent-associated thrombosis for the clinical outcome, there were no statistical significant differences between aspirin plus cilostazol and aspirin plus ticlopidine. While, the incidence of adverse side effects tended to be lower, they were not statistically significant in patients with aspirin plus cilostazol. Conclusions: Our meta-analysis results indicated that there were no differences between cilostazol (plus aspirin) and ticlopidine (plus aspirin) with regard to effectiveness and safety for a one-month period when used as an adjunctive therapy after coronary stenting.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)211-217
Number of pages7
JournalCardiovascular Drugs and Therapy
Volume18
Issue number3
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2004 May
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Ticlopidine
Aspirin
Safety
Meta-Analysis
Odds Ratio
Stents
Thrombosis
Type 3 Cyclic Nucleotide Phosphodiesterases
Phosphodiesterase Inhibitors
cilostazol
Therapeutics
Databases
Incidence

Keywords

  • aspirin
  • cilostazol
  • coronary stenting
  • effectiveness
  • meta-analysis
  • one-month
  • oral antiplatelets
  • safety
  • ticlopidine

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Pharmacology (medical)
  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine
  • Pharmacology

Cite this

Comparison of cilostazol and ticlopidine for one-month effectiveness and safety after elective coronary stenting. / Hashiguchi, Masayuki; Ohno, Keiko; Nakazawa, Rieko; Kishino, Satoshi; Mochizuki, Mayumi; Shiga, Tsuyoshi.

In: Cardiovascular Drugs and Therapy, Vol. 18, No. 3, 05.2004, p. 211-217.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Hashiguchi, Masayuki ; Ohno, Keiko ; Nakazawa, Rieko ; Kishino, Satoshi ; Mochizuki, Mayumi ; Shiga, Tsuyoshi. / Comparison of cilostazol and ticlopidine for one-month effectiveness and safety after elective coronary stenting. In: Cardiovascular Drugs and Therapy. 2004 ; Vol. 18, No. 3. pp. 211-217.
@article{0283eb4d5796465382457e7586cc76ae,
title = "Comparison of cilostazol and ticlopidine for one-month effectiveness and safety after elective coronary stenting",
abstract = "Purpose: To compare the oral antiplatelets, phosphodiesterase III inhibitor cilostazol and the thienopyridine ticlopidine, for one-month effectiveness and safety as an adjunctive therapy after coronary stenting. Methods: Published studies retrieved through Medline and other databases from 1966-2002. Meta-analyses evaluated effectiveness and adverse side effects for one-month administrations of aspirin plus cilostazol or aspirin plus ticlopidine therapy after coronary stenting. Major adverse cardiac events (MACE), stent-associated thrombosis or adverse side effects after coronary stenting were compared between the two study arms and expressed with the odds ratios (OR) specific for the individual studies and meta-analytic summary for OR. Results: Five clinical studies met the inclusion criteria, and 4 of these studies underwent meta-analysis. With regard to the comparison of the OR summary for MACE and stent-associated thrombosis for the clinical outcome, there were no statistical significant differences between aspirin plus cilostazol and aspirin plus ticlopidine. While, the incidence of adverse side effects tended to be lower, they were not statistically significant in patients with aspirin plus cilostazol. Conclusions: Our meta-analysis results indicated that there were no differences between cilostazol (plus aspirin) and ticlopidine (plus aspirin) with regard to effectiveness and safety for a one-month period when used as an adjunctive therapy after coronary stenting.",
keywords = "aspirin, cilostazol, coronary stenting, effectiveness, meta-analysis, one-month, oral antiplatelets, safety, ticlopidine",
author = "Masayuki Hashiguchi and Keiko Ohno and Rieko Nakazawa and Satoshi Kishino and Mayumi Mochizuki and Tsuyoshi Shiga",
year = "2004",
month = "5",
doi = "10.1023/B:CARD.0000033642.49162.04",
language = "English",
volume = "18",
pages = "211--217",
journal = "Cardiovascular Drugs and Therapy",
issn = "0920-3206",
publisher = "Kluwer Academic Publishers",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparison of cilostazol and ticlopidine for one-month effectiveness and safety after elective coronary stenting

AU - Hashiguchi, Masayuki

AU - Ohno, Keiko

AU - Nakazawa, Rieko

AU - Kishino, Satoshi

AU - Mochizuki, Mayumi

AU - Shiga, Tsuyoshi

PY - 2004/5

Y1 - 2004/5

N2 - Purpose: To compare the oral antiplatelets, phosphodiesterase III inhibitor cilostazol and the thienopyridine ticlopidine, for one-month effectiveness and safety as an adjunctive therapy after coronary stenting. Methods: Published studies retrieved through Medline and other databases from 1966-2002. Meta-analyses evaluated effectiveness and adverse side effects for one-month administrations of aspirin plus cilostazol or aspirin plus ticlopidine therapy after coronary stenting. Major adverse cardiac events (MACE), stent-associated thrombosis or adverse side effects after coronary stenting were compared between the two study arms and expressed with the odds ratios (OR) specific for the individual studies and meta-analytic summary for OR. Results: Five clinical studies met the inclusion criteria, and 4 of these studies underwent meta-analysis. With regard to the comparison of the OR summary for MACE and stent-associated thrombosis for the clinical outcome, there were no statistical significant differences between aspirin plus cilostazol and aspirin plus ticlopidine. While, the incidence of adverse side effects tended to be lower, they were not statistically significant in patients with aspirin plus cilostazol. Conclusions: Our meta-analysis results indicated that there were no differences between cilostazol (plus aspirin) and ticlopidine (plus aspirin) with regard to effectiveness and safety for a one-month period when used as an adjunctive therapy after coronary stenting.

AB - Purpose: To compare the oral antiplatelets, phosphodiesterase III inhibitor cilostazol and the thienopyridine ticlopidine, for one-month effectiveness and safety as an adjunctive therapy after coronary stenting. Methods: Published studies retrieved through Medline and other databases from 1966-2002. Meta-analyses evaluated effectiveness and adverse side effects for one-month administrations of aspirin plus cilostazol or aspirin plus ticlopidine therapy after coronary stenting. Major adverse cardiac events (MACE), stent-associated thrombosis or adverse side effects after coronary stenting were compared between the two study arms and expressed with the odds ratios (OR) specific for the individual studies and meta-analytic summary for OR. Results: Five clinical studies met the inclusion criteria, and 4 of these studies underwent meta-analysis. With regard to the comparison of the OR summary for MACE and stent-associated thrombosis for the clinical outcome, there were no statistical significant differences between aspirin plus cilostazol and aspirin plus ticlopidine. While, the incidence of adverse side effects tended to be lower, they were not statistically significant in patients with aspirin plus cilostazol. Conclusions: Our meta-analysis results indicated that there were no differences between cilostazol (plus aspirin) and ticlopidine (plus aspirin) with regard to effectiveness and safety for a one-month period when used as an adjunctive therapy after coronary stenting.

KW - aspirin

KW - cilostazol

KW - coronary stenting

KW - effectiveness

KW - meta-analysis

KW - one-month

KW - oral antiplatelets

KW - safety

KW - ticlopidine

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=3142781372&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=3142781372&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1023/B:CARD.0000033642.49162.04

DO - 10.1023/B:CARD.0000033642.49162.04

M3 - Article

C2 - 15229389

AN - SCOPUS:3142781372

VL - 18

SP - 211

EP - 217

JO - Cardiovascular Drugs and Therapy

JF - Cardiovascular Drugs and Therapy

SN - 0920-3206

IS - 3

ER -