Antiplatelet regimens for Asian patients with ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

Abstract

Background\nThe optimal antiplatelet treatment for the secondary prevention of non-cardioembolic stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA) remains uncertain in Asians.\n\n\nMethods\nWe searched for eligible randomized control trials in Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Library. A Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA) was performed to assess the efficacy and safety of antiplatelet regimens with placebo as the control. Each therapy was compared using relative risk ratios (RR) and 95% credible intervals (CrI), and ranked according to the value of the surface under the cumulative ranking curve.\n\n\nResults\nA total of 84,103 patients from 32 studies were included: patients in used aspirin (n=26,834); cilostazol (n=3,303); clopidogrel (n=12,406); prasugrel (n=1,885); sarpogrelate (n=752); ticagrelor (n=1,933); ticlopidine (n=1,644); triflusal (n=391); aspirin plus cilostazol (n=1,120), aspirin plus clopidogrel (n=4,623); aspirin plus dipyridamole (n=10,853); aspirin plus ticagrelor (n=5,859); aspirin plus ticlopidine (n=132). Patients who used aspirin plus clopidogrel and cilostazol had a lower risk of recurrent stroke than those who used placebo. Patients administered with aspirin plus ticagrelor, aspirin plus clopidogrel, and cilostazol had a lower risk of composite vascular events than those administered placebo. Patients administered aspirin plus ticagrelor had a higher risk of major bleeding than those administered placebo. Clustered three-dimensional rank plots of recurrent stroke, major bleeding, and composite vascular events demonstrated that cilostazol had higher values of the surface under the cumulative ranking curve than other treatments.\n\n\nConclusions\nOf the antiplatelet regimens, cilostazol showed the best net clinical benefits than other antiplatelet regimens in Asians with non-cardioembolic stroke or TIA.