SynthesisFrontiers in neurology2022
The Efficacy and Safety of Cilostazol vs. Aspirin for Secondary Stroke Prevention: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in neurology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 3 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effects of cilostazol for in-stent restenosis after carotid artery stenting: a meta-analysis.Journal of cardiothoracic surgery · 2025Pooled it
- Efficacy and safety of using cilostazol versus aspirin in secondary stroke prevention: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled clinical trials.Internal medicine journal · 2025Pooled it
- New options for cilostazol-based dual antiplatelet therapy for ischaemic stroke prevention in East Asian populations: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2025Pooled it
- Article
- Observation of the Therapeutic Effect of Dual Antiplatelet Therapy with Aspirin and Clopidogrel on the Incidence, Characteristics, and Outcome in Acute Ischemic Stroke Patients with Cerebral Microbleeds at a Teaching Hospital, China.International journal of general medicine · 2024Article
- Basilar Artery Dissection Diagnosed Using Fluid-Attenuated Inversion Recovery and Managed with Stepwise Antithrombotic Therapy: A Case Report.Case reports in neurologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCilostazol is often used in Asia-Pacific countries for stroke prevention. The current systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the effectiveness, safety, and adverse outcomes of cilostazol monotherapy compared to aspirin monotherapy for secondary stroke prevention.
methodsThe researchers conducted a comprehensive research in multiple databases (PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane library) of randomized controlled trials from conception to December 2020. The primary efficacy outcome was the occurrence of any stroke, the primary safety outcome was the bleeding risk, and the primary adverse outcome was the rate of headache and dizziness. The Mantel-Haenszel method was used to calculate a random-effects prediction. Cilostazol and aspirin were compared using a pooled risk assessment with 95% CIs.
resultsSix studies involving 5,617 patients were included in this review. Compared with aspirin monotherapy, cilostazol was associated with significantly lower rates of any strokes (RR: 0.67; 95% CI: 0.55-0.82) and significantly lower bleeding rates [risk ratio (RR): 0.53; 95% CI: 0.37-0.74]. However, compared with aspirin monotherapy, cilostazol was associated with significantly higher rates of headache (RR: 1.77; 95% CI: 1.41-2.20) and dizziness (RR: 1.28; 95% CI: 1.08-1.52).
conclusionsConsistent with previous studies, cilostazol monotherapy is superior to aspirin monotherapy in reducing the rate of any strokes and the bleeding risk after having a stroke. However, the use of cilostazol monotherapy is associated with several adverse life outcomes such as headaches and dizziness.
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.