ReviewReviews in cardiovascular medicine2026
Exploration of the Role of Cilostazol in Brugada Syndrome: Mechanisms, Therapeutic Potential, and Implications in the Prevention of Ventricular Arrhythmias.
Review in Reviews in cardiovascular medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Despite the relatively low incidence of Brugada syndrome (BrS) globally, the risk of sudden cardiac death remains alarmingly high, reaching rates of up to 28%. According to current clinical guidelines, implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) are recommended for high-risk patients. Meanwhile, pharmacological interventions must be used as a backup owing to the limited access to ICDs by eligible patients. Cilostazol, an adenosine uptake inhibitor and phosphodiesterase III inhibitor, has been suggested to reduce the risk of ventricular arrhythmias in BrS patients by stabilizing the action potential dome and lowering the epicardial-to-endocardial repolarization gradient, consequently decreasing the probability of phase II re-entry. However, the effectiveness of cilostazol in this situation has been questioned due to the existence of contradictory results from different case reports. Thus, this literature review aims to synthesize current evidence regarding the potential of cilostazol to lower the risk of ventricular arrhythmias in patients with BrS.
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.