Abstract:People with diabetes mellitus are at higher risk of ischemic stroke and worse outcomes thereafter. However, whether it is better to prescribe intensive glucose‐lowering treatment compared with conventional treatment in people with diabetes to prevent recurrent stroke is debated. It is also crucial to consider whether specific antidiabetic agents are more efficacious and safer than others for prevention of stroke. In this review, we provide an overview of the efficacy of intensive and conventional glucose‐lowering treatment in the management after stroke. Our conclusion is that overall evidence for a beneficial effect of intensive glycemic control on risk of stroke is limited. We also discuss evidence from recent large clinical trials of thiazolidinedione and new antidiabetic medications, including dipeptidyl peptidase‐4 inhibitors, glucagon‐like peptide‐1 receptor (GLP‐1R) agonists, and sodium–glucose cotransporter‐2 inhibitors. On the basis of the findings of these trials, our conclusion is that pioglitazone and the GLP‐1R agonist class (other than short‐acting lixisenatide or oral semaglutide) are likely to lessen the occurrence of cerebrovascular disease (by mechanisms not dependent on glucose‐lowering per se), whereas there is no consistent evidence for other drug classes.This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Diabetes drugs and stroke risk: Intensive versus conventional glucose‐lowering strategies, and implications of recent cardiovascular outcome trials