review · The Egyptian Journal of Neurology Psychiatry and Neurosurgery
Abstract Background Stroke recurrence remains a major concern following non-cardioembolic ischemic stroke. Dual antiplatelet therapy has shown benefit in certain populations, but the optimal regimen is unclear. Cilostazol, a phosphodiesterase-III inhibitor with antiplatelet and vasodilatory properties and a potentially lower bleeding risk, has been proposed as an alternative to clopidogrel. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to evaluate the efficacy and safety of cilostazol combined with aspirin versus aspirin alone for secondary prevention after non-cardioembolic ischemic stroke. Results Four RCTs (Kwon and colleagues, 2005; Nakamura and colleagues, 2012; Uchiyama and colleagues, 2015; Aoki and colleagues, 2019) met inclusion criteria, involving 1570 participants. Pooled analysis showed no significant reduction in stroke recurrence with the aspirin–cilostazol combination (AC) compared with aspirin alone at ≤ 2 weeks (risk difference [RD]: −0.01; 95% CI −0.02 to 0.01; p = 0.48) or at 6 months (RD: −0.02; 95% CI −0.06 to 0.01; p = 0.15). There was no increase in intracerebral hemorrhage, gastrointestinal bleeding, hematuria, or serious adverse events. AC was associated with a small but significant increase in palpitations (RD: 0.02; 95% CI 0.001−0.03; p = 0.04). Numerical data on functional outcomes were not consistently reported, but qualitative assessment suggested possible benefits in neurological recovery and disability reduction. Conclusions Cilostazol plus aspirin does not significantly reduce recurrent stroke compared with aspirin monotherapy, though it maintains a comparable safety profile with only a slight increase in palpitations. This regimen may be considered for patients at high risk of hemorrhage or with clopidogrel intolerance, but current evidence does not support its routine use over standard therapy. Larger, multi-ethnic randomized trials are needed to clarify benefits in specific subgroups, such as those with intracranial stenosis, and to evaluate functional outcomes using standardized reporting. PROSPERO Registration Number : CRD42021238520.
This page summarises published work. The authoritative version sits with the publisher.
DOI: 10.1186/s41983-025-01033-9
Is something wrong with this record? Report it or request removal.
Discussion
Have you built on this work, tried to replicate it, or seen it applied in practice? Share what you know. Verified researchers and MARATTO™ domain experts can open a discussion, and any member can reply. Contributions are reviewed before they appear.
No discussion yet. Open the first thread.
New to MARATTO™? Create a free account.