Randomized comparison of cilostazol vs ticlopidine for antiplatelet therapy after coronary stenting

Abstract

Background: Cilostazol and ticlopidine are commonly prescribed for prevention of thrombosis after coronary stenting, but few studies have compared them. Methods and Results: In the present study 642 patients who underwent stenting were randomized to treatment either with cilostazol+aspirin (C group, 321 patients) or ticlopidine+aspirin (T group, 321 patients). Quantitative coronary angiography (QCA) was performed immediately after stenting and at the 6-month follow-up. Treatment was continued until follow-up angiography. Baseline patient characteristics did not differ signifi-cantly. With the exception of a higher rate of stenting in a venous graft in the C group, there were no differences in angiographic characteristics or stent type. Baseline QCA analysis of the reference diameter, minimal lumen diameter (MLD) showed no significant differences. Follow-up QCA analysis of the MLD showed no significant differences. There were also no differences in restenosis or target lesion revascularization rates, or in the incidence of adverse reactions. However, the rate of subacute thrombosis (SAT) was significantly higher in the C group than in the T group (2% vs 0.3%, p=0.02). Conclusion: In the present study there was a similar restenosis rate with cilostazol or ticlopidine, but the rate of SAT was significantly higher with cilostazol. There was no significant difference in adverse reactions.