SynthesisEuropean journal of medical research2013
Systematic study of cilostazol on secondary stroke prevention: a meta-analysis.
Synthesis in European journal of medical research, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It has been retracted, and should not be counted. Cited by 9 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparative Efficacy and Safety of Nine Anti-Platelet Therapies for Patients with Ischemic Stroke or Transient Ischemic Attack: a Mixed Treatment Comparisons.Molecular neurobiology · 2017Pooled it
- The efficacy and safety of cilostazol for the secondary prevention of ischemic stroke in acute and chronic phases in Asian population--an updated meta-analysis.BMC neurology · 2014Pooled it
- Relationship between nitrate headache and outcome in patients with acute stroke: results from the efficacy of nitric oxide in stroke (ENOS) trial.Stroke and vascular neurology · 2021Trial
- Role of Cilostazol Therapy in Hemodialysis Patients with Asymptomatic Peripheral Arterial Disease: A Retrospective Cohort Study.BioMed research international · 2016Article
- Oral Levosimendan Increases Cerebral Blood Flow Velocities in Patients with a History of Stroke or Transient Ischemic Attack: A Pilot Safety Study.Current therapeutic research, clinical and experimental · 2015Article
- Long-Term Antiplatelet Mono- and Dual Therapies After Ischemic Stroke or Transient Ischemic Attack: Network Meta-Analysis.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2015Review
- Effects of cilostazol on the progression and regression of symptomatic intracranial artery stenosis: it reduces the risk of ischemic stroke.Neural regeneration research · 2015Article
- Retraction note: Systematic study of cilostazol on secondary stroke prevention: a meta-analysis.European journal of medical research · 2015Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
- Retraction · 2015-03-26Compromised Peer Review · Investigation by Journal/Publisher ·
- Retracted
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo study the efficacy and safety of cilostazol on ischemic stroke prevention and treatment, systematic reviews of related clinical randomized controlled trials were analyzed.
methodsWe searched the main databases for eligible trials including literature from January 1966 to November 2012 in MEDLINE, reports from 1980 to November 2012 in EMBASE, and all the studies published in EBSCO, Springer, Ovid, and Cochrane library citations. We also searched for keywords, including cilostazol and aspirin. RewMan 5.0 software was used to conduct the meta-analysis.
resultsOur search yielded five eligible trials. The effects of cilostazol and aspirin on ischemic stroke prevention and treatment were almost equal (combined odds ratio (OR) 0.78, 95% confidence interval (CI) (0.59, 1.04)). Additionally, both magnetic resonance angiography (MRA) and transcranial Doppler (TCD) examination showed that cilostazol could significantly decrease the incidence of intracranial artery stenosis exacerbation (MRA: combined OR 0.22, 95% CI (0.07, 0.68); TCD: combined OR 0.17, 95% CI (0.05, 0.51)). In terms of adverse reactions, there were slightly fewer incidences of major bleeding with cilostazol than with aspirin (combined OR 0.38, 95% CI (0.24, 0.60)), and there was no difference in the number of heart palpitations between cilostazol and aspirin. However, the incidence of gastrointestinal disorders, dizziness, and headaches caused by cilostazol was greater.
conclusionsCilostazol might be a more effective and safer alternative to aspirin for patients with ischemic stroke. Further studies are required to confirm whether cilostazol is a suitable therapeutic option for secondary stroke prevention in larger cohorts of patients with ischemic stroke.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.