2014 Volume 36 Issue 6 Pages 419-424
Background: Previously, cilostazol (CIL) was reported as an alternative drug for acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) in cases with non cardioemboic (CE) stroke. We studied the difference of efficacy for non CE stroke patients between ASA and CIL. Especially, we evaluated the efficacy of these drugs for severity of stroke, functional outcome, and post-stroke depression.Objects and Methods: Patients with non CE stroke, who were admitted into our hospital and affiliated hospitals during April 2010 and December 2012, were objects of our study. We excluded patients who disagreed with our informed consent, already took antiplatelet drugs before onset of ischemic stroke, and had complicated atrial fibrillation. We included 168 patients, and divided these patients into two groups; group ASA and group CIL. We compared stroke severity, functional outcome and post-stroke depression using modified Rankin Scale (mRS), the National Institute of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) score, and Self-rating-Depression Scale (SDS) score between group ASA and group CIL. The times of assessment of the scores such as NIHSS, mRS, and SDS were at the time of admission into our hospitals and discharge from our hospitals, and 3 months after onset.Results: Baseline characteristics, NIHSS, mRS, and SDS of two groups were not significantly different. In both groups, functional outcome tended to be poor with advancing age and greater number of complications.Conclusion: The efficacy of ASA and CIL for stroke severity, functional outcome, and post-stroke depression was not significantly different in this study. Higher age and the greater number of complicated diseases were associated with poor functional outcome after ischemic stroke except for CE.
