3.8 Article

Ultra-Early Combination Antiplatelet Therapy with Cilostazol for the Prevention of Branch Atheromatous Disease: A Multicenter Prospective Study

Journal

CEREBROVASCULAR DISEASES EXTRA
Volume 6, Issue 3, Pages 84-95

Publisher

KARGER
DOI: 10.1159/000450835

Keywords

Branch atheromatous disease; Cilostazol; Dual antiplatelet therapy; Progressive stroke

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background and Purpose: The optimal use of antiplatelet therapy for intracranial branch atheromatous disease (BAD) is not known. Methods: We conducted a prospective multicenter, single-group trial of 144 consecutive patients diagnosed with probable BAD. All patients were treated within 12 h of symptom onset to prevent clinical progression using dual antiplatelet therapy with cilostazol plus one oral antiplatelet drug (aspirin or clopidogrel). Endpoints of progressive BAD in the dual therapy group at 2 weeks were compared with a matched historical control group of 142 patients treated with single oral antiplatelet therapy using either cilostazol, aspirin, or clopidogrel. Results: Progressive motor paresis occurred in 14 patients (9.7%) in the aggressive anti platelet group, compared with 48 (33.8%) in the matched single antiplatelet group. Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed the following variables to be associated with a better prognosis for BAD: baseline modified Rankin Scale score, dual oral antiplatelet therapy with cilostazol, and dyslipidemia (odds ratios of 0.616, 0.445, and 0.297, respectively). Hypertension was associated with a worse prognosis for BAD (odds ratio of 1.955). Conclusions: Our trial showed that clinical progression of BAD was significantly reduced with the administration of ultra-early aggressive combination therapy using cilostazol compared to treatment with antiplatelet monotherapy. (C) 2016 The Author(s) Published by S. Karger AG, Basel

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available