Summary of findings 4. Summary of findings table ‐ Cilostazol compared to aspirin for adults within 180 days of non‐cardioembolic ischaemic stroke or transient ischaemic attack and a clinical history of prior intracerebral haemorrhage.
| Cilostazol compared to aspirin for adults within 180 days of non‐cardioembolic ischaemic stroke or transient ischaemic attack and a clinical history of prior intracerebral haemorrhage | ||||||
| Patient or population: adults within 180 days of non‐cardioembolic ischaemic stroke or transient ischaemic attack and a clinical history of prior intracerebral haemorrhage Setting: Secondary care Intervention: cilostazol Comparison: aspirin | ||||||
| Outcomes | Anticipated absolute effects* (95% CI) | Relative effect (95% CI) | № of participants (studies) | Certainty of the evidence (GRADE) | Comments | |
| Risk with aspirin | Risk with cilostazol | |||||
| MACE assessed with: clinical assessment follow‐up: median 1.8 years | 116 per 1000 | 155 per 1000 (86 to 279) | RR 1.33 (0.74 to 2.40) | 288 (1 RCT) | ⊕⊕⊝⊝ Lowa,b | |
| Death assessed with: clinical assessment follow‐up: median 1.8 years | 34 per 1000 | 57 per 1000 (19 to 168) | RR 1.65 (0.55 to 4.91) | 288 (1 RCT) | ⊕⊕⊝⊝ Lowb | |
| All major occlusive vascular events ‐ not reported | ‐ | ‐ | ‐ | ‐ | ‐ | |
| Intracerebral haemorrhage (ICH) assessed with: clinical assessment follow‐up: median 1.8 years | 27 per 1000 | 35 per 1000 (10 to 128) | RR 1.29 (0.35 to 4.69) | 288 (1 RCT) | ⊕⊕⊝⊝ Lowb | |
| Functional status ‐ not reported | ‐ | ‐ | ‐ | ‐ | ‐ | |
| *The risk in the intervention group (and its 95% confidence interval) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI). CI: confidence interval; RR: risk ratio | ||||||
| GRADE Working Group grades of evidence High certainty: we are very confident that the true effect lies close to that of the estimate of the effect. Moderate certainty: we are moderately confident in the effect estimate: the true effect is likely to be close to the estimate of the effect, but there is a possibility that it is substantially different. Low certainty: our confidence in the effect estimate is limited: the true effect may be substantially different from the estimate of the effect. Very low certainty: we have very little confidence in the effect estimate: the true effect is likely to be substantially different from the estimate of effect. | ||||||
| See interactive version of this table: https://gdt.gradepro.org/presentations/#/isof/isof_question_revman_web_431449016706363235. | ||||||
a The report of the sub‐group of the PICASSO trial did not report major extracerebral haemorrhage, DVT or functional status. b Small sample size from a sub‐group of the PICASSO trial