ReviewCureus2025
Safety and Efficacy of Cerebrolysin for Neurorecovery After Acute Ischemic Stroke: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of 14 Randomized Controlled Trials.
Review in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cerebrolysin, a neurotrophic compound, has been investigated as a neurorestorative therapy in acute ischemic stroke, although findings are inconsistent due to limitations in study inclusion and outcome reporting. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated the efficacy and safety of Cerebrolysin in improving neurological and functional outcomes following acute ischemic stroke. Fourteen randomized controlled trials (N = 2,884 patients) comparing Cerebrolysin to placebo were included. The primary outcome was change in the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) score from baseline to follow-up, while secondary outcomes included functional independence (modified Rankin Scale (mRS) 0-2), serious adverse events (SAEs), mortality, and hemorrhagic transformation. Risk of bias was assessed using the revised Cochrane Risk of Bias (RoB 2.0) tool, and certainty of evidence was evaluated using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) framework. Pooled analysis showed that Cerebrolysin significantly improved neurological recovery (mean difference in NIHSS change: +1.39; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.53-2.25; p = 0.020). Functional independence showed a non-significant trend in favor of Cerebrolysin (risk ratio (RR) = 1.31; 95% CI: 0.90-1.91; p > 0.05). No significant differences were observed in SAEs (RR = 1.08; 95% CI: 0.84-1.40), mortality (RR = 0.86; 95% CI: 0.68-1.09), or hemorrhagic transformation (RR = 0.55; 95% CI: 0.32-0.92). These findings suggest that Cerebrolysin significantly enhances early neurological recovery after ischemic stroke, with a comparable safety profile. Further high-quality trials are warranted to confirm its impact on long-term functional outcomes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.