Abstract
BACKGROUND: No study has thoroughly compared the effectiveness of combined antiplatelet treatments (other than clopidogrel-aspirin) versus clopidogrel-aspirin or aspirin alone for early secondary prevention in acute ischaemic stroke. METHODS: We identified patients with acute, minor, non-cardiogenic ischaemic stroke treated with aspirin alone, clopidogrel-aspirin or other combination treatment. Propensity scores considering the inverse probability of treatment weighting were used to adjust for baseline imbalances. The primary outcome was the composite of all strokes (ischaemic or haemorrhagic), myocardial infarction and all-cause mortality at 3 months. RESULTS: Among 12 234 patients (male: 61.9%; age: 65.5±13 years) who met the eligibility criteria, aspirin, clopidogrel-aspirin and other combination treatments were administered in 52.2%, 42.9% and 4.9% of patients, respectively. In the crude analysis, the primary outcome event at 3 months occurred in 14.5% of the other combination group, 14.4% of the aspirin group and 13.0% of the clopidogrel-aspirin group. In the weighted Cox proportional hazards analysis, the 3-month primary outcome event occurred less frequently in the clopidogrel-aspirin group than in the other combination group (weighted HR: 0.82 (0.59-1.13)), while no association was found between the aspirin group (weighted HR: 1.04 (0.76-1.44)) or other combination group and the 3-month primary outcome. CONCLUSION: Other combined antiplatelet treatment, compared with aspirin alone or clopidogrel-aspirin, was not associated with reduced risks of primary composite vascular events or recurrent stroke during the first 3 months after stroke. Therefore, the results suggest that other combination treatments, particularly the cilostazol-based combination, may not be effective alternatives for clopidogrel-aspirin to prevent early vascular events in patients with acute minor stroke. Further exploration in clinical trials will be needed.