This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) All Versions of this Article: 37/1/134    most recent 01.STR.0000195045.40409.85v1 Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Request Permissions Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Ariesen, M.-J. Articles by Kappelle, L. J. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Ariesen, M.-J. Articles by Kappelle, L. J. Pubmed/NCBI databases Compound via MeSH Substance via MeSH Hazardous Substances DB ACETYLSALICYLIC ACID Medline Plus Health Information Stroke Related Collections Primary and Secondary Stroke Prevention Antiplatelets

(Stroke. 2006;37:134.)
© 2006 American Heart Association, Inc.

Original Contributions

Antiplatelet Drugs In the Secondary Prevention After Stroke

Differential Efficacy in Large Versus Small Vessel Disease? A Subgroup Analysis From ESPS-2

From the Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care (M.J.A., A.A.), University Medical Center, Utrecht, The Netherlands; and the Department of Neurology (A.A., L.J.K.), Rudolf Magnus Institute of Neuroscience, University Medical Center Utrecht, The Netherlands.

Correspondence to Ale Algra, MD, FAHA, Department of Neurology and Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Str.06.131, PO Box 85500, 3508 GA Utrecht, The Netherlands. E-mail A.Algra{at}umcutrecht.nl

Background and Purpose— Arterial disease resulting in cerebral ischemia can be classified into large vessel disease (LVD) and small vessel disease (SVD). We assessed whether antiplatelet drugs were more efficacious in large than in small vessel cerebrovascular disease.

Methods— Individual patient data of the second European Stroke Prevention Study (n=6602), in which patients with a previous transient ischemic attack or ischemic stroke were randomized to aspirin, dipyridamole, their combination, or placebo, were reanalyzed. Type of vessel disease was classified according to clinical symptoms or physical examination. Presence of a lacunar syndrome was considered typical for SVD and evidence of cortical dysfunction for LVD. Vascular events (nonfatal stroke, nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal other vascular event, or vascular death) were taken as outcome. Cox regression analyses were performed.

Results— A total of 419 first vascular events occurred in 2600 patients with SVD and 367 in 1816 patients with LVD (mean follow-up 1.7 years). For aspirin versus placebo, the hazard ratio (HR) was 0.86 (95% CI, 0.66 to 1.11) in patients with SVD and 0.80 (95% CI, 0.61 to 1.06) in those with LVD (P_interaction=0.74). For dipyridamole versus placebo, the HR was 0.86 (95% CI, 0.67 to 1.12) in patients with SVD and 0.90 (95% CI, 0.68 to 1.19) in patients with LVD (P_interaction=0.84). Similar observations were made for the outcome stroke only.

Conclusions— Our findings do not concur with the hypothesis that aspirin, dipyridamole, or the combination may be especially effective in preventing vascular events in patients with previous cerebral ischemia that was caused by LVD compared with SVD.

Key Words: aspirin • dipyridamole • vascular disease

This article has been cited by other articles:

				P. Talelli and R. J. Greenwood Review: Recurrent stroke: where do we stand with the secondary prevention of noncardioembolic ischaemic strokes? Therapeutic Advances in Cardiovascular Disease, October 1, 2008; 2(5): 387 - 405. [Abstract] [PDF]

				R. Landolfi and L. Di Gennaro Prevention of thrombosis in polycythemia vera and essential thrombocythemia Haematologica, March 1, 2008; 93(3): 331 - 335. [Full Text] [PDF]