CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

科学研究

科研文章

荐读文献

Fractional flow reserve derived from CCTA may have a prognostic role in myocardial bridging Intravascular ultrasound predictors for edge restenosis after newer generation drug-eluting stent implantation Intravascular ultrasound-guided implantation of drug-eluting stents to improve outcome: a meta-analysis A pragmatic approach to the use of inotropes for the management of acute and advanced heart failure: An expert panel consensus 中国心力衰竭诊断和治疗指南2018 Mechanical complications of everolimus-eluting stents associated with adverse events: an intravascular ultrasound study Vaccination Trends in Patients With Heart Failure - Insights From Get With The Guidelines–Heart Failure Comparison of intravascular ultrasound guided versus angiography guided drug eluting stent implantation: a systematic review and meta-analysis Impact of Myocardial Scar on Prognostic Implication of Secondary Mitral Regurgitation in Heart Failure Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction in the Young

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).