2011Medical Devices Evidence and ResearchOpen access

A better effect of cilostazol for reducing in-stent restenosis after femoropopliteal artery stent placement in comparison with ticlopidine

Ichiro Ikushima, Yasuhiko Iryo, Yasuyuki Yamashita

Open full text 16 citations

Abstract

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to assess the preventive effect of cilostazol on in-stent restenosis in patients after superficial femoral artery (SFA) stent placement. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Of 28 patients with peripheral arterial disease, who had successfully undergone stent implantation, 15 received cilostazol and 13 received ticlopidine. Primary patency rates were retrospectively analyzed by means of Kaplan-Meier survival curves, with differences between the two medication groups compared by log-rank test. A multivariate Cox proportional hazards model was applied to assess the effect of cilostazol versus ticlopidine on primary patency. RESULTS: The cilostazol group had significantly better primary patency rates than the ticlopidine group. Cumulative primary patency rates at 12 and 24 months after stent placement were, respectively, 100% and 75% in the cilostazol group versus 39% and 30% in the ticlopidine group (P = 0.0073, log-rank test). In a multivariate Cox proportional hazards model with adjustment for potentially confounding factors, including history of diabetes, cumulative stent length, and poor runoff, patients receiving cilostazol had significantly reduced risk of restenosis (hazard ratio 5.4; P = 0.042). CONCLUSION: This retrospective study showed that cilostazol significantly reduces in-stent stenosis after SFA stent placement compared with ticlopidine.

Open-access reader

About this research paper

What this paper is about

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to assess the preventive effect of cilostazol on in-stent restenosis in patients after superficial femoral artery (SFA) stent placement. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Of 28 patients with peripheral arterial disease, who had successfully undergone stent implantation, 15 received cilostazol and 13 received ticlopidine. Primary patency rates were retrospectively analyzed by means of Kaplan-Meier survival curves, with differences between the two medication groups compared by log-rank test. A multivariate Cox proportional hazards model was applied to assess the effect of cilostazol versus ticlopidine on primary patency. RESULTS: The cilostazol group had significantly better primary patency rates than the ticlopidine group. Cumulative primary patency rates at 12 and 24 months after stent placement were, respectively, 100% and 75% in the cilostazol group versus 39% and 30% in the ticlopidine group (P = 0.0073, log-rank test). In a multivariate Cox proportional hazards model with adjustment for potentially confounding factors, including history of diabetes, cumulative stent length, and poor runoff, patients receiving cilostazol had significantly reduced risk of restenosis (hazard ratio 5.4; P = 0.042). CONCLUSION: This retrospective study showed that cilostazol significantly reduces in-stent stenosis after SFA stent placement compared with ticlopidine.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 16 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to assess the preventive effect of cilostazol on in-stent restenosis in patients after superficial femoral artery (SFA) stent placement. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Of 28 patients with peripheral arterial disease, who had successfully undergone stent implantation, 15 received cilostazol and 13 received ticlopidine. Primary patency rates were retrospectively analyzed by means of Kaplan-Meier survival curves, with differences between the two medication groups compared by log-rank test. A multivariate Cox proportional hazards model was applied to assess the effect of cilostazol versus ticlopidine on primary patency. RESULTS: The cilostazol group had significantly better primary patency rates than the ticlopidine group. Cumulative primary patency rates at 12 and 24 months after stent placement were, respectively, 100% and 75% in the cilostazol group versus 39% and 30% in the ticlopidine group (P = 0.0073, log-rank test). In a multivariate Cox proportional hazards model with adjustment for potentially confounding factors, including history of diabetes, cumulative stent length, and poor runoff, patients receiving cilostazol had significantly reduced risk of restenosis (hazard ratio 5.4; P = 0.042). CONCLUSION: This retrospective study showed that cilostazol significantly reduces in-stent stenosis after SFA stent placement compared with ticlopidine.

Key concepts: Cilostazol, Ticlopidine, Restenosis, Medicine, Stent, Hazard ratio, Proportional hazards model, Cardiology

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
A better effect of cilostazol for reducing in-stent restenosis after femoropopliteal artery stent placement in comparison with ticlopidine — Research Paper | ScholarLens