Sun Jing, Wang Duo, Zhao Yue, Bai Ying, Meng Chang, Miao Guobin, Liu Peng
Department of Critical Care Medicine, Emergency General Hospital, XiBaHe South Road 29, Chaoyang District, Beijing, 100028, P. R. China.
Department of General Medicine, Ordos School of Clinical Medicine, Ordos Central Hospital, Inner Mongolia Medical University, 23 Yijinhuoluo West Street, Dongsheng District, Ordos, 017000, Inner Mongolia, P. R. China.
J Cardiothorac Surg. 2025 Jun 28;20(1):275. doi: 10.1186/s13019-025-03522-7.
There is some controversy regarding drug therapy to prevent in-stent restenosis (ISR) after carotid artery stenting. In recent years, cilostazol has received increasing research attention. We performed a meta-analysis to evaluate the effects of cilostazol on the outcome of ISR after carotid stenting.
A meta-analysis was carried out to identify the clinical trials that had been published up to 22 December 2024. The databases PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, CNKI and Wanfang have all been queried. The study population was composed of patients with stent carotid heart disease who were receiving cilostazol. Results included in-stent-restenosis, ischemic stroke and all-cause mortality. Publications were reviewed according to the Cochrane Handbook and the guidelines set out in the Preferred Reporting Project for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA 2020). The methodological quality of the studies was assessed using the Revised Cochrane Risk of Bias tool for randomized trials (RoB 2.0) and the Risk of Bias in Non-Randomized Studies of Interventions (ROBINS-I).
This study was registered with INPLASY (number INPLASY202510004). A total of 1975 patients were included in 4 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 5 non-RCTs. A statistically significant reduction in ISR was observed for antiplatelet regimens including cilostazol compared to the control group (OR = 0.27, 95%CI: 0.13 ~ 0.54, P<0.01, I = 30%). Subgroup analysis revealed this finding was primarily driven by non-randomized controlled trials (non-RCTs), demonstrating a consistent effect (OR = 0.17, 95%CI: 0.08 ~ 0.39, P<0.01, I = 0%). For other primary end events, no significant differences were noted in the incidence of ischemic stroke (OR = 0.83, 95%CI: 0.50 ~ 1.39, P = 0.49, I = 0%) or all cause death (OR = 0.53, 95%CI: 0.26 ~ 1.05, P = 0.07, I = 0%). The certainty of evidence for the ISR outcome was rated as low.
Cilostazol was associated with less postoperative carotid stent restenosis, with no statistically significant difference in ischemic stroke and all-cause mortality.
关于药物治疗预防颈动脉支架置入术后支架内再狭窄(ISR)存在一些争议。近年来,西洛他唑受到越来越多的研究关注。我们进行了一项荟萃分析,以评估西洛他唑对颈动脉支架置入术后ISR结局的影响。
进行荟萃分析以确定截至2024年12月22日已发表的临床试验。对PubMed、Embase、Cochrane图书馆、中国知网和万方数据库进行了查询。研究人群由接受西洛他唑治疗的颈动脉支架置入心脏病患者组成。结果包括支架内再狭窄、缺血性卒中和全因死亡率。根据Cochrane手册以及系统评价和荟萃分析优先报告项目(PRISMA 2020)中规定的指南对出版物进行审查。使用修订的Cochrane随机试验偏倚风险工具(RoB 2.0)和干预非随机研究中的偏倚风险(ROBINS-I)评估研究的方法学质量。
本研究已在INPLASY注册(编号INPLASY2025I0004)。4项随机对照试验(RCT)和5项非RCT共纳入1975例患者。与对照组相比,观察到包括西洛他唑在内的抗血小板方案使ISR有统计学意义的降低(OR = 0.27,95%CI:0.13~0.54,P<0.01,I² = 30%)。亚组分析显示,这一发现主要由非随机对照试验(非RCT)驱动,显示出一致的效果(OR = 0.17,95%CI:0.08~0.39,P<0.01,I² = 0%)。对于其他主要终点事件,缺血性卒中的发生率(OR = 0.83,95%CI:0.50~1.39,P = 0.49,I² = 0%)或全因死亡(OR = 0.53,95%CI:0.26~1.05,P = 0.07,I² = 0%)没有显著差异。ISR结局的证据确定性被评为低。
西洛他唑与术后颈动脉支架再狭窄较少相关,在缺血性卒中和全因死亡率方面无统计学显著差异。