Uchiyama Shinichiro
Department of Neurology, Tokyo Women's Medical University.
Rinsho Shinkeigaku. 2010 Nov;50(11):832-4. doi: 10.5692/clinicalneurol.50.832.
We compared the efficacy and safety of cilostazol and aspirin in 2,672 Japanese patients with non-cardioembolic ischemic stroke. The patients were randomized to be allocated either on cilostazol (200 mg/day) group or aspirin (81 mg/day) group, and were followed up for one to five years (average 29 months). The primary endpoint was any stroke, and safety endpoint was hemorrhagic stroke or hemorrhage requiring hospitalization. Annual incidence of stroke was significantly lower in the cilostazol group (2.76%) than in the aspirin group (3.71%) (relative risk reduction [RRR] 25.7%, p=0.0357) and annual incidence of hemorrhagic stroke or hemorrhage requiring hospitalization was 0.77% in the cilostazol group and 1.77% in the aspirin group (RRR 54.2%, p=0.0004). The sub-analyses between subtypes of ischemic stroke showed that annual incidence of hemorrhagic stroke was much lower in the cilostazol group (0.36%) than in the aspirin group (1.20%) among patients with lacunar stroke (p=0.003). The results suggest that cilostazol has a favorable risk-benefit profile alternative to aspirin for secondary stroke prevention in patients with non-cardioembolic ischemic stroke, particularly in patients with lacunar stroke, who are at high risk of hemorrhagic stroke.
我们比较了西洛他唑和阿司匹林对2672例日本非心源性缺血性卒中患者的疗效和安全性。患者被随机分为西洛他唑组(200毫克/天)或阿司匹林组(81毫克/天),并随访1至5年(平均29个月)。主要终点为任何卒中,安全终点为出血性卒中或需要住院治疗的出血。西洛他唑组的年卒中发生率(2.76%)显著低于阿司匹林组(3.71%)(相对风险降低[RRR]25.7%,p = 0.0357),西洛他唑组需要住院治疗的出血性卒中或出血的年发生率为0.77%,阿司匹林组为1.77%(RRR 54.2%,p = 0.0004)。缺血性卒中亚型之间的亚组分析显示,在腔隙性卒中患者中,西洛他唑组的出血性卒中年发生率(0.36%)远低于阿司匹林组(1.20%)(p = 0.003)。结果表明,对于非心源性缺血性卒中患者,尤其是出血性卒中高危的腔隙性卒中患者,西洛他唑在二级卒中预防方面具有优于阿司匹林的良好风险效益比。