CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

科学研究

科研文章

荐读文献

The Year in Cardiovascular Medicine 2020: Coronary Intervention Utilization and programming of an automatic MRI recognition feature for cardiac rhythm management devices SGLT2 Inhibitors in Patients With Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction: A Meta-Analysis of the EMPEROR-Reduced and DAPA-HF Trials Home-Based Cardiac Rehabilitation: A Scientific Statement From the American Association of Cardiovascular and Pulmonary Rehabilitation, the American Heart Association, and the American College of Cardiology Prevention of Bleeding in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation Undergoing PCI Treating Multivessel Coronary Artery Disease in ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction: Why, How, and When? Cardiorespiratory Fitness and Mortality in Healthy Men and Women Classification of Deaths in Cardiovascular Outcomes Trials Known Unknowns and Unknown Unknowns Contrast-Associated Acute Kidney Injury and Serious Adverse Outcomes Following Angiography Cholesterol-Lowering Agents

Original Research2020 Jun 1;9(6):E1678.

JOURNAL:J Clin Med. Article Link

Adjunctive Cilostazol to Dual Antiplatelet Therapy to Enhance Mobilization of Endothelial Progenitor Cell in Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction: A Randomized, Placebo-Controlled EPISODE Trial

Y Park, JH Kim, TH Kim et al. Keywords: cilostazol; endothelial progenitor cell; MI; platelet.

ABSTRACT


BACKGROUND - Endothelial progenitor cells (EPCs) have the potential to protect against atherothrombotic event occurrences. There are no data to evaluate the impact of cilostazol on EPC levels in high-risk patients.


METHODS - We conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial to assess the effect of adjunctive cilostazol on EPC mobilization and platelet reactivity in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI). Before discharge, patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) were randomly assigned to receive cilostazol SR capsule (200-mg) a day (n = 30) or placebo (n = 30) on top of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) with clopidogrel and aspirin. Before randomization (baseline) and at 30-day follow-up, circulating EPC levels were analyzed using flow cytometry and hemostatic measurements were evaluated by VerifyNow and thromboelastography assays. The primary endpoint was the relative change in EPC levels between baseline and 30-day.


RESULTS - At baseline, there were similar levels of EPC counts between treatments, whereas patients with cilostazol showed higher levels of EPC counts compared with placebo after 30 days. Cilostazol versus placebo treatment displayed significantly higher changes in EPC levels between baseline and follow-up (ΔCD133+/KDR+: difference 216%, 95% confidence interval (CI) 44~388%, p = 0.015; ΔCD34+/KDR+: difference 183%, 95% CI 25~342%, p = 0.024). At 30-day follow-up, platelet reactivity was lower in the cilostazol group compared with the placebo group (130 ± 45 versus 169 ± 62 P2Y12 Reaction Unit, p = 0.009). However, there were no significant correlations between the changes of EPC levels and platelet reactivity.


CONCLUSIONS - Adjunctive cilostazol on top of clopidogrel and aspirin versus DAPT alone is associated with increased EPC mobilization and decreased platelet reactivity in AMI patients, suggesting its pleiotropic effects against atherothrombotic events (NCT04407312).