Efficacy and safety of cilostazol-based triple antiplatelet therapy compared with clopidogrel-based dual antiplatelet therapy in patients with acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: A multicenter, randomized, open-label, phase 4 trial

Previous studies reported that compared to conventional dual antiplatelet therapy (DAT; aspirin + clopidogrel), triple antiplatelet therapy (TAT), involving the addition of cilostazol to DAT, had better clinical outcomes in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). However, the optimal duration of TAT is yet to be determined. In total, 985 patients with STEMI who underwent primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stents (DESs) were prospectively enrolled in 15 PCI centers in South Korea and China. We randomly assigned patients into 3 groups: DAT (aspirin and clopidogrel for 12 months), TAT 1M (aspirin, clopidogrel, and cilostazol for 1 month), and TAT 6M (aspirin, clopidogrel, and cilostazol for 6 months). The primary endpoint was 1-year major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs), defined as a composite of all-cause death, recurrent myocardial infarction, stroke, or repeat revascularization. The primary endpoint did not differ among the 3 groups (8.8% in DAT, 11.0% in TAT 1M, and 11.6% in TAT 6M; hazard ratio for TAT 1M vs DAT, 1.302; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.792-2.141; P = .297; hazard ratio for TAT 6M vs DAT, 1.358; 95% CI, 0.829-2.225; P = .225). With respect to in-hospital outcomes, more bleeding events occurred in the TAT group than in the DAT group (1.3% vs 4.7% vs 2.6%, P = .029), with no significant differences in major bleeding events. Additionally, the TAT group had a higher incidence of headaches (0% vs 1.6% vs 2.6%, P = .020). The addition of cilostazol to DAT did not reduce the incidence of 1-year MACEs compared with DAT alone. Instead, it may be associated with an increased risk of drug intolerance and side effects, including in-hospital bleeding and headaches.