Cilostazol is associated with improved outcomes after peripheral endovascular interventions

The effect of cilostazol on late outcomes after endovascular treatment for occlusive femoropopliteal disease

OBJECTIVE

Restenosis and late occlusion remain a significant problem for endovascular treatment of peripheral artery disease. This meta-analysis aims to evaluate the effect of cilostazol on late outcomes after endovascular repair of occlusive femoropopliteal disease.

METHODS

A systematic literature review was conducted conforming to established criteria to identify articles published up to September 2023 evaluating late outcomes after endovascular treatment for atherosclerotic femoropopliteal disease. Eligible studies should compare outcomes between patients treated with cilostazol and patients not treated with cilostazol. Both prospective and retrospective studies were eligible. Late outcomes included primary patency (PP), restenosis, target lesion revascularization (TLR), and major amputation during follow-up.

RESULTS

Overall, 10 clinical studies were identified for analysis including 4721 patients (1831 with cilostazol vs 2890 without cilostazol) that were treated for 5703 lesions (2235 with cilostazol vs 3468 without cilostazol). All studies were performed in Japan. Mean follow-up was 24.1 ± 12.5 months. Cilostazol was associated with a lower risk for restenosis (pooled odds ratio [OR], 0.503; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.383-0.660; P < .0001). However, no association was found between cilostazol and TLR (pooled OR, 0.918; 95% CI, 0.300-2.812; P = .881) as well as major amputation (pooled OR, 1.512; 95% CI, 0.734-3.116; P = .263). Regarding primary patency, cilostazol was associated with a higher 12-month PP (OR, 3.047; 95% CI, 1.168-7.946; P = .023), and a higher 36-month PP (OR, 1.616; 95% CI, 1.412-1.850; P < .0001). No association was found between cilostazol and mortality during follow-up (pooled OR, .755; 95% CI, 0.293-1.946; P = .561).

CONCLUSIONS

Cilostazol seems to have a positive effect on 1- to 3-year PP and restenosis rates among patients treated endovascularly for atherosclerotic femoropopliteal disease. A positive effect on TLR and amputation risk was not verified in this review.

A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Efficacy and Safety of Cilostazol Prescription in Patients With Femoropopliteal Peripheral Artery Disease After Endovascular Therapy

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study is to assess the efficacy and safety of cilostazol prescription in patients with femoropopliteal peripheral artery disease (PAD) after endovascular therapy (EVT).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of all studies reporting the outcomes of cilostazol after femoropopliteal EVT of PAD up to September 2022. Clinical outcomes of interest included primary patency, in-stent restenosis (ISR), vessel re-occlusion, freedom from target lesion revascularization (TLR), repeat revascularization, all-cause mortality, amputation, major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) and major adverse limb events (MALEs), and bleeding complication.

RESULTS

A total of 4 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 8 observational studies containing a total of 4898 patients met the inclusion criteria and were included in this systematic review and meta-analysis. We found that the use of cilostazol was associated with higher primary patency after femoropopliteal artery EVT (odds ratio [OR]=1.67, 95% confidence interval [CI]=1.50-1.87, p<0.001, I2=33.2%), a lower risk of ISR (OR=0.43, 95% CI=0.29-0.63, p<0.001, I2=37.6%), repeat revascularization (OR=0.43, 95% CI=0.24-0.76, p<0.005, I2=27.4%), and vessel re-occlusion (OR=0.59, 95% CI=0.38-0.93, p<0.05, I2=0%). There was an increase in freedom from TLR rate (OR=2.19, 95% CI=1.58-3.05, p<0.001, I2=0%), as well as a reduction in the occurrence of MALEs (OR=0.50, 95% CI=0.29-0.85, p<0.05, I2=0%). However, there was no significant difference in amputation, MACEs, all-cause mortality, and major bleeding complications. Subgroup analysis showed that cilostazol treatment in patients with femoropopliteal drug-eluting stents (DES) implantation remained associated with higher primary patency and a lower risk of ISR.

CONCLUSIONS

After EVT of femoropopliteal artery lesions, additional oral cilostazol enhances primary patency, reduces the occurrences of ISR and vessel re-occlusion, diminishes the risks associated with MALEs, lowers the need for repeat revascularization, and increases freedom from TLR rates. However, it does not impact amputation, MACEs, all-cause mortality, or major bleeding complications. These findings suggest cilostazol as a potentially safe and effective adjunct therapy in patients with femoropopliteal PAD after EVT.

CLINICAL IMPACT

After undergoing endovascular therapy (EVT) for femoropopliteal artery lesions, the addition of cilostazol to antiplatelet therapy can significantly improve primary patency, reducing the incidence of in-stent restenosis, repeat revascularization, vessel re-occlusion, and major adverse limb events while increasing freedom from target lesion revascularization rate. The simultaneous use of drug-eluting stents in the femoropopliteal artery lesions, combined with cilostazol, potentially results in a synergistic anti-stenotic effect. This therapeutic approach does not appear to be associated with an increased risk of major bleeding events or all-cause mortality. These findings provide additional evidence supporting the treatment of anti-stenosis in patients with femoropopliteal artery lesions after EVT.

Cilostazol for peripheral arterial disease - a position paper from the Italian Society for Angiology and Vascular Medicine

Cilostazol is a quinolinone-derivative selective phosphodiesterase inhibitor and is a platelet-aggregation inhibitor and arterial vasodilator for the symptomatic treatment of intermittent claudication (IC). Cilostazol has been shown to improve walking distance for patients with moderate to severe disabling intermittent claudication who do not respond to exercise therapy and who are not candidates for vascular surgical or endovascular procedures. Several studies evaluated the pharmacological effects of cilostazol for restenosis prevention and indicated a possible effect on re-endothelialization mediated by hepatocyte growth factor and endothelial precursor cells, as well as inhibiting smooth muscle cell proliferation and leukocyte adhesion to endothelium, thereby exerting an anti-inflammatory effect. These effects may suggest a potential effectiveness of cilostazol in preventing restenosis and promoting the long-term outcome of revascularization interventions. This review aimed to point out the role of cilostazol in treating patients with peripheral arterial disease, particularly with IC, and to explore its possible role in restenosis after lower limb revascularization.

The Use and Impact of Cilostazol on Patients Undergoing Endovascular Peripheral Interventions

OBJECTIVES

Cilostazol is used for the treatment of intermittent claudication. The impact of cilostazol on the outcomes of peripheral vascular interventions (PVI) remains controversial. This study assesses the use and impact of cilostazol on patients undergoing PVI for peripheral arterial disease (PAD).

METHODS

The Vascular Quality Initiative (VQI) database files for PVI were reviewed. Patients with PAD who underwent PVI for CLTI or claudication were included and divided based on the use of cilostazol preoperatively. After propensity matching for patient demographics and comorbidities, the short-term and long-term outcomes of the two groups (preoperative cilostazol use versus no pre-operative cilostazol use) were compared. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to determine outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 245,309 patients underwent PVI procedures and 6.6% (N=16,366) were on cilostazol prior to intervention. Patients that received cilostazol were more likely to be male (62% vs 60%; P < .001), White (77% vs 75%; P < .001), and smokers (83% vs 77%; P < .001). They were less likely to have diabetes mellitus (50% vs 56%; P < .001) and congestive heart failure (14% vs 23%; P < .001). Patient on cilostazol were more likely to be treated for claudication (63% vs 40%, P < .001), undergo prior lower extremity revascularization (55% vs 51%, P<.001) and less likely to have undergone prior minor and major amputation (10% vs 19%; P < .001) compared to patients who did not receive cilostazol. After 3:1 propensity matching, there were 50,265 patients included in the analysis with no differences in baseline characteristics. Patients on cilostazol were less likely to develop renal complications and more likely to be discharged home. Patients on cilostazol had significantly lower rates of long-term mortality (11.5% vs 13.4%, P <.001 and major amputation (4.0% vs 4.7%, P=0.022). However, there were no significant differences in rates of reintervention, major adverse limb events, or patency after PVI. Amputation-free survival rates were significantly higher for patients on cilostazol, after four years of follow-up (89% vs 87%, P=0.03).

CONCLUSION

Cilostazol is underutilized in the VQI database and seems to be associated with improved amputation-free survival. Cilostazol therapy should be considered in all patients with PAD who can tolerate it prior to PVI.

Impact of cilostazol on prevention of late failure of autologous vein grafts

OBJECTIVES

The effectiveness of postoperative medication for the prevention of late graft failure is controversial. We conducted the present study to investigate whether cilostazol improved the mid-term outcomes after infrainguinal autologous vein bypass for chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI).

METHODS

From April 1994 to March 2022, we performed 590 de novo infrainguinal bypass procedures using autologous vein grafts (AVGs) in three hospitals. The bypass grafts were classified according to the postoperative prescription of cilostazol. The loss of graft patency and major adverse limb events (MALEs) were set as endpoints. Patients who died within 30 days and grafts that lost primary patency within 30 days after surgery were excluded. Data up to 3 years were analyzed. The cumulative primary patency (PP), assisted primary patency (AP), secondary patency (SP), and freedom from MALE (ffMALE) rates were calculated by the Kaplan-Meier method and compared between the cilostazol group and the non-cilostazol group. After a propensity score matching, same statistical analyses were performed. In addition, a Cox proportional hazards regression analysis that included preoperative factors, intraoperative factors, and postoperative medications was performed to identify whether cilostazol is an independent predictor for the outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 523 AVGs met inclusion criteria. Kaplan-Meier curves showed that the cilostazol group was superior to the non-cilostazol group in all outcomes, while the cilostazol group was superior to the non-cilostazol group in AP and SP after a propensity score matching. A multivariable analysis showed that non-use of cilostazol was identified as an independent predictor for loss of AP, SP, and ffMALE.

CONCLUSIONS

Cilostazol improved the mid-term outcomes after infrainguinal autologous vein bypass.

[Prospects of clinical application of cilostazol for peripheral artery disease]

This article presents a review of the literature on studying Cilostazol, a type 3 phosphodiesterase inhibitor, also providing the Russian and foreign statistics on the prevalence of peripheral artery disease. It is underlined that the majority of patients with peripheral artery disease have atherosclerotic lesions in the coronary and cerebral vascular basins. Cilostazol deservedly occupies the first lines in the sections of pharmacotherapy for intermittent claudication in international and Russian consensus documents on peripheral artery disease. The drug has an extensive evidence base for the following pharmacological effects: vasodilating, antiplatelet, endothelial protective, and vasculogenic. Clinical efficacy of Cilostazol was confirmed in 15 randomized clinical trials (3 718 patients with intermittent claudication) studying the use of Cilostazol taken twice daily at doses of 50 mg, 100 mg, and 150 mg as compared with placebo or versus pentoxifylline given in a dose of 400 mg three times daily, with a demonstrable increase in the pain-free walking distance and the maximal walking distance on the background of taking Cilostazol. The drug significantly improves the outcomes of endovascular interventions on arteries of lower extremities, decreasing the incidence of restenosis, prolonging limb survival, and reducing the frequency of major amputations. Many studies addressing the use of Cilostazol in patients with coronary and cerebral atherosclerosis have investigated the effect of the drug as a component of dual antiplatelet therapy (aspirin + Cilostazol) and triple antiplatelet therapy (aspirin + clopidogrel + Cilostazol) after endovascular interventions. The addition of Cilostazol to treatment resulted in a significant decrease in the occurrence of re-stenosis, with no increase in the incidence of haemorrhage. Cilostazol may be recommended for patients with multifocal atherosclerosis and resistance to aspirin and clopidogrel. Also presented in the article are the results of a Russian clinical trial studying comparative efficacy of Cilostazol and pentoxifylline in patients with intermittent claudication.

Literature review and meta-analysis of the efficacy of cilostazol on limb salvage rates after infrainguinal endovascular and open revascularization

BACKGROUND

Current clinical guidelines recommend the use of cilostazol in the treatment of patients with infrainguinal peripheral artery disease (PAD) who experience intermittent claudication. However, the role of cilostazol therapy in patients with advanced PAD and critical limb ischemia (CLI) remains unclear. To conduct a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and cohort studies that evaluated the effect of cilostazol vs standard antiplatelet therapy on limb-related and arterial patency-related outcomes. We also reviewed literature pertinent to the effect of cilostazol on wound healing in patients with advanced PAD.

METHODS

We performed a MEDLINE, EMBASE, COCHRANE (CENTRAL), SCOPUS, and US Clinical Trials database search for all trials and studies since 1999 that compared cilostazol with standard antiplatelet therapy in the setting of infrainguinal PAD revascularization procedures (endovascular or open). Aggregate data was collected from four randomized control trials and six retrospective cohort studies. The end point incidence ratios and treatment effects were generated from each study and reported as hazard ratios (HR) using a random-effect model. We also reviewed 10 studies that evaluated the effect of cilostazol on wound healing in patients with advanced PAD.

RESULTS

From more than 25,000 total patients, 3136 patients met our inclusion criteria. All patients had at least lifestyle-impacting intermittent claudication, and more than 50% met the definition of CLI (Rutherford class ≥4). Patient age range was 53 to 83 years, and the majority were male (66%). The mean follow-up time averaged 2 years across all studies. Meta-analysis revealed that cilostazol treatment favored amputation-free survival (hazard ratio [HR], 0.79; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.69-0.91), limb salvage rate (HR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.27-0.66), decreased repeat revascularization (risk ratio [RR], 0.44; 95% CI, 0.37-0.52), and decreased restenosis (RR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.61-0.76). Cilostazol treatment also increased freedom from target lesion revascularization (RR, 1.35; 95% CI, 1.21-1.53) with no difference in all-cause mortality. Effective wound healing was found to be an inconsistent outcome measure in patients receiving cilostazol therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

We observed that cilostazol therapy has a beneficial impact on all limb-related and arterial patency-related outcomes, but no effect on all-cause mortality in patients with advanced PAD and CLI undergoing revascularization procedures. Additional studies are needed to evaluate the effect of cilostazol therapy on wound healing in patients with advanced PAD.

Umbrella review and meta-analysis of antiplatelet therapy for peripheral artery disease

Background

The literature on antiplatelet therapy for peripheral artery disease has historically been summarized inconsistently, leading to conflict between international guidelines. An umbrella review and meta-analysis was performed to summarize the literature, allow assessment of competing safety risks and clinical benefits, and identify weak areas for future research.

Methods

MEDLINE, Embase, DARE, PROSPERO and Cochrane databases were searched from inception until January 2019. All meta-analyses of antiplatelet therapy in peripheral artery disease were included. Quality was assessed using AMSTAR scores, and GRADE analysis was used to quantify the strength of evidence. Data were pooled using random-effects models.

Results

Twenty-eight meta-analyses were included. Thirty-three clinical outcomes and 41 antiplatelet comparisons in 72 181 patients were analysed. High-quality evidence showed that antiplatelet monotherapy reduced non-fatal strokes (3 (95 per cent c.i. 0 to 6) fewer per 1000 patients), In symptomatic patients, it reduced cardiovascular deaths (8 (0 to 16) fewer per 1000 patients), but increased the risk of major bleeding (7 (3 to 14) more events per 1000). In asymptomatic patients, monotherapy reduced non-fatal strokes (5 (0 to 8) fewer per 1000), but had no other clinical benefit. Dual antiplatelet therapy caused more major bleeding after intervention than monotherapy (37 (8 to 102) more events per 1000), with very low-quality evidence of improved endovascular patency (risk ratio 4·00, 95 per cent c.i. 0·91 to 17·68).

Conclusion

Antiplatelet monotherapy has minimal clinical benefit for asymptomatic peripheral artery disease, and limited benefit for symptomatic disease, with a clear risk of major bleeding. There is a lack of evidence to guide antiplatelet prescribing after peripheral endovascular intervention.

Outcomes with cilostazol after endovascular therapy of peripheral artery disease

The role of cilostazol after endovascular therapy (EVT) of peripheral artery disease (PAD) remains unclear. We conducted a meta-analysis for all studies reporting the outcomes of cilostazol after EVT of PAD from January 2000 through November 2018 with the outcomes of interest including primary patency, major adverse limb events (MALE), target lesion revascularization (TLR), and major amputation. We included eight studies (three randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and five observational studies) with a total of 3846 patients (4713 lesions). During a mean follow-up duration of 12.5 ± 5 months, the use of cilostazol was associated with higher primary patency (OR 2.28, 95% CI (1.77, 2.94), p < 0.001, I² = 24%), lower risk of TLR (OR 0.37, 95% CI (0.26, 0.52), p < 0.001, I² = 0%), and lower risk of major amputation (OR 0.15, 95% CI (0.04, 0.62), p = 0.008, I² = 0%). The use of cilostazol in RCTs was associated with significantly higher odds of primary patency compared with observational studies (OR 3.37 vs 2.28, p-interaction = 0.03). After further subgroup analysis, cilostazol remained associated with higher primary patency regardless of the use of anticoagulants (warfarin) (p-interaction = 0.49). We conclude that the use of cilostazol after EVT of femoropopliteal and iliac lesions is associated with improved primary patency and lower risk of major amputation and TLR. The favorable impact of cilostazol is independent of the use of warfarin. PROSPERO identifier: CRD42018092715.

Prognostic factors of ulcer healing and amputation-free survival in patients with critical limb ischemia

Objective

A multidisciplinary approach is required to treat critical limb ischemia. We determined the poor prognostic factors of ischemic ulcer healing after optimal arterial revascularization, and assessed the efficacy of the medication therapy using cilostazol, which is a selective inhibitor of phosphodiesterase 3.

Methods

In this retrospective, single-center, cohort study, 129 limbs that underwent infrainguinal arterial revascularization for Rutherford class 5 critical limb ischemia were reviewed. The primary end point was the ulcer healing time after arterial revascularization. The secondary end point was the amputation-free survival rate.

Results

Of the 129 limbs, endovascular therapy was performed in 69 limbs, and surgical reconstructive procedures were performed in 60 limbs for initial therapy. Complete ulcer healing was achieved in 95 limbs (74%). The median ulcer healing time was 90 days. In multivariate analysis, no cilostazol use significantly inhibited ulcer healing ( p = 0.0114). A white blood cell count >10,000 ( p = 0.0185), a major defect after debridement ( p = 0.0215), and endovascular therapy ( p = 0.0308) were significant poor prognostic factors for ulcer healing. Additionally, ischemic heart disease ( p < 0.0001), albumin levels <3 g/dl ( p = 0.0016), no cilostazol use ( p = 0.0078), and a major defect after debridement ( p = 0.0208) were significant poor prognostic factors for amputation-free survival rate.

Conclusions

Ulcer healing within 90 days after arterial revascularization is impaired by no cilostazol use, a white blood cell count >10,000, a major defect after debridement, and endovascular therapy. Furthermore, cilostazol improves amputation-free survival rate in patients with critical limb ischemia.

Cilostazol Improves Wound Healing in Patients Undergoing Open Bypass for Ischemic Tissue Loss: A Propensity Score Matching Analysis

BACKGROUND

Few reports have described the effects of medication on the wound healing of ischemic ulcers after revascularization. This study was conducted to investigate the effects of cilostazol on wound healing in patients who underwent infrainguinal bypass for ischemic tissue loss.

METHODS

Two hundred sixty-three limbs undergoing de novo infrainguinal bypass for tissue loss from January 2004 to December 2015 were divided into 2 groups based on whether or not cilostazol was administered after surgery. The end point was wound healing. The 1-year outcomes of the groups were analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method, and a propensity score matching analysis was performed to examine the effects of cilostazol on wound healing. In addition, the significant predictors were determined using a Cox proportional hazards regression analysis.

RESULTS

Sixty-one and 202 limbs were included in the cilostazol and non-cilostazol group, respectively. The cilostazol group showed superior wound healing to the non-cilostazol group (cilostazol versus non-cilostazol, 1-year wound healing rate: 92% vs. 81%; median wound healing time: 45 vs. 78 days, P = 0.002). The results of the cilostazol group remained superior after a propensity score matching (cilostazol versus non-cilostazol, 1-year wound healing rate: 95% vs. 83%; median wound healing time: 45.5 vs. 57 days, P = 0.048). A Cox proportional hazards regression analysis indicated that foot infection, Rutherford classification, diabetes mellitus, coronary artery disease, angiosome, the administration of cilostazol, and graft patency were significant factors that influenced wound healing.

CONCLUSIONS

The postoperative use of cilostazol help to promote wound healing after open surgery.

Impact of Cilostazol Administration on Femoropopliteal In-Stent Restenosis

Purpose: To investigate whether administering cilostazol after treatment for femoropopliteal in-stent restenosis (ISR) can have a positive impact on recurrent ISR (Re-ISR). Methods: The database of a multicenter, retrospective, observational registry was interrogated to identify 338 consecutive patients (mean age 72.3±8.8 years; 148 men) who underwent endovascular therapy for femoropopliteal ISR in 379 limbs from January 2010 to December 2014. Ninety-seven patients (103 limbs) who received cilostazol after the initial stent implantation procedure were excluded. This left 24 ISR patients (30 limbs) who received cilostazol initially after ISR treatment for comparison with 217 ISR patients (246 limbs) who did not receive the drug. The primary endpoint was 2-year Re-ISR after treatment. The secondary endpoints were recurrent target lesion revascularization (Re-TLR) and reocclusion at 2 years. Restenosis was determined by a peak systolic velocity ratio >2.4 on a duplex scan or >50% stenosis on angiography. Results: The mean follow-up was 23.3±15.5 months. At 2 years, freedom from Re-ISR was significantly higher in the cilostazol group than in the no cilostazol group (48.6% vs 32.4%, p=0.047). However, freedom from Re-TLR and reocclusion between the 2 groups did not differ significantly [64.7% vs 53.8% (p=0.15) and 88.3% vs 73.9% (p=0.11), respectively]. After adjusting for prespecified risk factors, cilostazol administration was a negative predictor of Re-ISR. Conclusion: This small comparative study suggests that administering cilostazol for ISR lesions after femoropopliteal stenting reduces recurrent ISR.

Outcome of Triple Antiplatelet Therapy Including Cilostazol in Elderly Patients with ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction who Underwent Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Results from the INTERSTELLAR Registry

OBJECTIVES

Compared with dual antiplatelet therapy including aspirin and clopidogrel, triple antiplatelet therapy including cilostazol has a mortality benefit in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. However, whether the mortality benefit persists in elderly patients is not clear.

METHODS

From 2007 to 2014, 1278 patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction who underwent primary percutaneous coronary intervention were retrospectively analyzed. The patients were divided into four groups by age (<75 or ≥75 years; young and elderly, respectively) and antiplatelet strategy (triple or dual antiplatelet therapy). We compared the mortality rates between the triple and dual antiplatelet therapy groups.

RESULTS

There were 1052 (male, 85%; mean age, 56.3 ± 10.4 years) patients in the young group and 241 (male, 52.7%; mean age, 80.3 ± 4.5 years) patients in the elderly group. In the young and elderly groups, 220 (20.9%) and 28 (12.3%) patients were treated with triple antiplatelet therapy. During a 1-year follow-up period, 80 patients died (4.2% in the young group vs. 15.5% in the elderly group). Kaplan-Meier survival analysis revealed that triple antiplatelet therapy was associated with a lower mortality rate in the young group (log-rank, p = 0.005). Although there were more angiographic high-risk patients in the elderly group, similar mortality rates were reported (log-rank, p = 0.803) without increased bleeding rates (1 vs. 3.6% in the elderly group, p = 0.217).

CONCLUSIONS

Triple antiplatelet therapy might be a better antiplatelet regimen than dual antiplatelet therapy for patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. Although this benefit was strong in patients aged <75 years, no definite increase in major bleeding was seen for elderly patients (aged ≥75 years).

Restenosis after Coronary and Peripheral Intervention: Efficacy and Clinical Impact of Cilostazol

Restenosis is one of the main complications in patients undergoing coronary or peripheral revascularization procedures and is the leading cause for their long-term failures. Cilostazol is the only pharmacotherapy that showed an adequate efficacy for preventing restenosis in randomized, controlled studies after coronary or peripheral revascularization procedures. The present review sums up the main clinical evidence supporting the use of cilostazol after revascularization interventions, focusing on all its benefits, warnings, and administration schedules.

Impact of stent diameter on vascular response after self-expanding paclitaxel-eluting stent implantation in the superficial femoral artery

BACKGROUND

The optimal sizing of self-expanding paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES) in the treatment for superficial femoral artery (SFA) lesions is unclear. This study sought to investigate the influence of PES diameter on stent patency in SFA lesions using optical frequency domain imaging (OFDI).

METHODS

A total of 20 de novo SFA lesions were randomized 1:1 to receive either self-expanding PES with a nominal diameter of 6mm or 8mm. Follow-up angiography and OFDI was scheduled six months after stent implantation, and volumetric OFDI analysis was performed to evaluate vascular response to the stents. Volume index (VI) was defined as the volume divided by the stent length. The primary end point was lumen VI at the 6-month follow-up. Secondary end point was minimum lumen diameter (MLD) by quantitative vascular angiography (QVA) at the follow-up.

RESULTS

Stent length was 78.0±23.9mm in the 6-mm group and 70.0±23.6mm in the 8-mm group (p=0.46). Baseline QVA data were also similar between the two groups. MLD immediately after stent implantation was similar between the two groups (4.2±0.5mm in the 6-mm group and 3.9±0.5mm in the 8-mm group, p=NS). At the 6-month follow-up, MLD was greater in the 8-mm group compared to the 6-mm group (4.0±1.0mm vs. 3.2±0.4mm, p<0.05). Stent VI was larger in the 8-mm group (28.4±6.7mm³/mm vs. 22.2±1.2mm³/mm, p=0.01). Neointimal VI was similar between the two groups (5.8±2.9mm³/mm vs. 5.2±2.6mm³/mm, p=0.68). Lumen VI was greater in the 8-mm group (23.2±7.6mm³/mm vs. 17.3±2.6mm³/mm, p=0.04).

CONCLUSIONS

Chronic stent enlargement resulted in greater lumen area after implantation of self-expanding PES with a large diameter at the mid-term follow-up. Stent diameter might be important for stent patency in procedure with PES for SFA lesions.

Role of Cilostazol Therapy in Hemodialysis Patients with Asymptomatic Peripheral Arterial Disease: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Background. Peripheral arterial disease (PAD) and its relevant complications are more common in hemodialysis (HD) patients, while the evidence regarding antiplatelet therapy in CKD patients is scarce. We retrospectively analyzed the efficacy of cilostazol on outcomes in HD patients with asymptomatic PAD (aPAD). Methods. This cohort study enrolled 217 HD patients (median follow-up time: 5.75 years). Associations between cilostazol use and the outcomes were evaluated by time-dependent Cox regression analysis. Results. During follow-up, 39.5% (47/119) patients used cilostazol for aPAD and 31.8% (69/217) patients died. Cilostazol users had significantly lower CVD and all-cause mortalities (adjusted HR [95% CI]: 0.11 [0.03, 0.51] and 0.2 [0.08, 0.52]) than nonusers. Both death risks were nonsignificantly higher in cilostazol users than in HD patients without aPAD. The unadjusted and adjusted HR [95% CI] of CVD death risk were 0.4 [0.07, 2.12] and 0.14 [0.02, 0.8] for patients with aPAD during follow-up and were 0.74 [0.16, 3.36] and 0.19 [0.04, 0.93] for those with aPAD at initial. Conclusions. In HD patients with aPAD, lower CVD and all-cause mortality rates were observed in low-dose cilostazol user. Further evidences from large-scale prospective study and randomization trial are desired to confirm the effect of cilostazol.

Medical Therapy in Peripheral Artery Disease and Critical Limb Ischemia

OPINION STATEMENT

Peripheral artery disease (PAD) comprises atherosclerosis of the aorta and lower extremities. Many patients with PAD are asymptomatic, while others present with intermittent claudication (IC) or critical limb ischemia (CLI). Defined as rest pain or tissue loss that persists for >2 weeks, CLI represents the most severe clinical manifestation of PAD and is associated with an increased risk of limb loss and death. Patients with PAD, including those with CLI, are underdiagnosed and undertreated. In addition to smoking cessation, medical therapy with an antiplatelet agent and statin is recommended for all patients with PAD. Regular exercise has been shown to improve walking distance and quality of life in patients with symptomatic PAD and should be incorporated into each patient's treatment plan. In patients who have CLI and in those with persistent lifestyle-limiting claudication despite optimal medical therapy and an exercise program, revascularization is indicated for limb salvage and symptom relief, respectively. Consensus guidelines currently support an endovascular first approach to revascularization in the majority of cases. Surgical procedures provide an alternative to endovascular therapy in select cases.

The Effect of Cilostazol on Endothelial Function as Assessed by Flow-Mediated Dilation in Patients with Coronary Artery Disease

Aim: The vascular endothelium plays a key role in the pathophysiology of atherosclerosis. Flow-mediated dilation (FMD) is a novel way of assessing endothelial function. Cilostazol is a unique antiplatelet drug that also has the potential to improve endothelial function. The objective of this present study was to investigate the effects of cilosatzol on endothelial function as assessed by FMD.

Methods: Fifty-one patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) were assigned to one of two groups: the Cilostazol(+) group (with cilostazol) and Cilostazol(−) group (without cilostazol). In addition to conventional dual antiplatelet therapy with aspirin and clopidogrel/ticlopidine, the Cilostazol(+) group (n = 27) was also given cilostazol (100 mg/day). The Cilostazol(−) group (n = 24) did not receive cilostazol. FMD was assessed at enrollment and after 6–9 months.

Results: The FMD of both the Cilostazol(+) and Cilostazol(−) groups remained similar at 5.2 (interquartile range: 3.8–8.5) to 5.4 (interquartile range: 4.2–6.7) (P = 0.29) and 5.0 (interquartile range: 3.6–6.4) to 4.9 (interquartile range: 4.0–7.0) (P = 0.38), respectively. However, the diameters of the baseline and maximal brachial arteries tended to increase in the Cilostazol(−) group (baseline: 4.2 ± 0.7 to 4.4 ± 0.7, P = 0.18; maximal: 4.5 ± 0.7 to 4.6 ± 0.7 P = 0.22), whereas that of the Cilostazol(−) group tended to decrease (baseline: 4.1 ± 0.6 to 3.9 ± 0.5, P = 0.10; maximal: 4.3 ± 0.7 to 4.1 ± 0.5, P = 0.05). The rates of change in the baseline diameter (Cilostazol(+): 3.7 ± 9.8% vs. Cilostazol(−): −3.8 ± 12.2%, P = 0.03) and maximal diameter (Cilostazol(+): +3.1 ± 8.9% vs. Cilostazol(−): −4.4 ± 12.0%, P = 0.02) were significantly different.

Conclusion: Although cilostazol didn't affect the FMD, there was a significant difference in the rates of change in baseline and maximal brachial artery diameter. This may have a beneficial effect in patients with cardiovascular disease.

Clinical efficacy and safety of cilostazol: a critical review of the literature

Cilostazol is a unique antiplatelet agent that has been commercially available for over two decades. As a phosphodiesterase III inhibitor, it reversibly inhibits platelet aggregation yet also possesses vasodilatory and antiproliferative properties. It has been widely studied in a variety of disease states, including peripheral arterial disease, cerebrovascular disease, and coronary artery disease with percutaneous coronary intervention. Overall, cilostazol appears to be a promising agent in the management of these disease states with a bleeding profile comparable to placebo; even when combined with other antiplatelet agents, cilostazol does not appear to increase the rate of bleeding. Despite the possible benefit of cilostazol, its use is limited by tolerability as some patients often report drug discontinuation due to headache, diarrhea, dizziness, or increased heart rate. To date, it has been predominantly studied in the Asian population, making it difficult to extrapolate these results to a more diverse patient population. This paper discusses the evolving role of cilostazol in the treatment of vascular diseases.

Meta-Analysis of Studies Evaluating the Effect of Cilostazol on Major Outcomes After Carotid Stenting

PURPOSE

To evaluate the effect of cilostazol on major outcomes after carotid artery stenting (CAS).

METHODS

A systematic literature review was conducted conforming to established criteria in order to identify articles published prior to May 2015 evaluating major post-CAS outcomes in patients treated with cilostazol vs patients not treated with cilostazol. Major outcomes included in-stent restenosis (ISR) within the observation period, the revascularization rate, major/minor bleeding, and the myocardial infarction/stroke/death rate (MI/stroke/death) at 30 days and within the observation period. Data were pooled for all studies containing adequate data for each outcome investigated; effect estimates are presented as the odds ratios (ORs) and 95 confidence intervals (CI).

RESULTS

Overall, 7 studies pertaining to 1297 patients were eligible. Heterogeneity was low among studies so a fixed-effect analysis was conducted. Six studies (n=1233) were compared for the ISR endpoint, showing a significantly lower ISR rate with cilostazol treatment after a mean follow-up of 20 months (OR 0.158, 95% CI 0.072 to 0.349, p<0.001). Five studies (n=649) were compared regarding 30-day MI/stroke/death (OR 0.724, 95% CI 0.293 to 1.789, p=0.484) and 3 studies (n=1076) were analyzed regarding MI/stroke/death within the entire follow-up period (OR 0.768, 95% CI 0.477 to 1.236, p=0.276); no significant difference was found between the groups. Data on bleeding rates and revascularization rates post ISR were inadequate to conduct further analysis.

CONCLUSION

Cilostazol seems to decrease total ISR rates in patients undergoing CAS without affecting MI/stroke/death events, both in the early and late settings.

Prevention of Femoropopliteal In-Stent Restenosis With Cilostazol

Severe peripheral artery disease requires revascularization to relieve life-limiting ischemic symptoms. Postrevascularization in-stent restenosis continues to be a problem after femoropopliteal procedures. Our aim was to evaluate the use of cilostazol to prevent in-stent restenosis among patients with lower extremity arterial stenting. We performed a MEDLINE and EMBASE search and reviewed the abstracts and manuscripts following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. The primary efficacy outcome was patency rate after stenting. The odds ratio estimates were pooled using the Mantel–Haenszel random-effects method. We identified 524 studies, and 20 articles were fully abstracted and 4 were included in the meta-analysis. The total number of patients included was 2434. Patients in the cilostazol group had better primary patency rates after endovascular stenting than those not taking cilostazol (odds ratio: 0.55; 95% confidence interval: 0.43-0.71). The use of cilostazol appears to prevent in-stent restenosis of high-risk patients.

Efficacy of cilostazol for the treatment of Raynaud's phenomenon in systemic sclerosis patients

Cilostazol is a selective inhibitor of phosphodiesterase-III with antiplatelet, antithrombotic and vasodilating properties. The aim of our study was to evaluate the effect of the drug on vasculopathy and Raynaud's phenomenon (RP), in a series of patients with systemic sclerosis (SSc), before and after cilostazol treatment. Twenty-one consecutive SSc patients with moderate or severe RP were enrolled in an open-label study. Cilostazol was administered at the dose of 100 mg twice a day, for 12 months. Evaluations included: daily RP attack diary documenting the frequency and duration of RP episodes, Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index, scleroderma visual analogue scales (VAS), flow-mediated dilation and immunological status, including endothelin 1 and interleukin 6 plasma levels. Thirteen patients completed the study. RP duration and daily number episodes recorded over a 3-week period significantly decreased after cilostazol treatment (p = 0.0049 and p = 0.0067, respectively). VAS score indicated a significant amelioration of the patients' perception of RP (p = 0.0117), and both baseline and post-ischemic brachial artery diameters were significantly increased after cilostazol treatment, as compared with basal values (p = 0.0119 and p = 0.0076, respectively). None of the patients developed digital ulcers during the study. A significant clinical improvement of RP was recorded in SSc patients undergoing cilostazol treatment. Study results indicate a potential role of cilostazol as oral maintenance therapy in SSc patients with RP.

Effect of Cilostazol Following Endovascular Intervention for Peripheral Artery Disease

Efficacy of endovascular therapy (EVT) with nitinol stents for femoropopliteal (FP) lesions is limited by restenosis. Oral cilostazol reduces angiographic restenosis rate; however, treatment duration remains unclear. In a retrospective analysis of a multicenter database of 3471 consecutive limbs in 2737 patients (mean age: 72 ± 9 years; 61% diabetic; and 26% on regular dialysis) undergoing EVT for FP lesions between January 2004 and December 2011, we compared Kaplan-Meier estimated primary patency after EVT followed or not by cilostazol treatment. We used Cox hazard regression analysis to assess temporal association between cilostazol treatment and post-EVT restenosis. Five-year primary patency was higher in the cilostazol group than in the noncilostazol group (57% vs 47%, P < .0001). Cilostazol treatment was inversely associated with restenosis for the first 2 years following EVT (P < .05); however, no significant association was observed thereafter. Cilostazol use therefore appears efficacious in preventing restenosis up to 2 years after EVT for FP lesions.