Aims: To investigate the efficacy and safety of Cerebrolysin and Cerebrolysin plus nootropics in the routine treatment of patients with acute ischemic stroke (AIS).

Background: Acute ischemic stroke (AIS) is a leading cause of disability with unmet treatment needs lacking effective drug therapy. Multimodal drugs modulating stroke pathophysiology as Cerebrolysin constitute a good therapeutic option.

Objective: In this study, we assessed the effects of Cerebrolysin and Cerebrolysin plus nootropics, in comparison with other nootropic drugs alone, on functional, neurological and cognitive recovery of patients with AIS in Vietnam.

Methods: This non-interventional, controlled, open-label, prospective and multicenter study included 398 AIS patients (234 males) treated with Cerebrolysin (n=190; 20 i.v. infusions of 10 ml), other nootropics (comparator group; n=86), or a combination of both (n=122). The study primary endpoint was a modified Ranking Scale (mRS) score on day 90. Secondary endpoints included study-period change in NIHSS score; percentage of well-recovered (mRS 0-2) patients, the proportion of good NIHSS response (≥6 points) cases, and MoCA scores at day 90; and safety indicators.

Results: Compared with other nootropics, both Cerebrolysin and combined therapy induced significant improvements (p<0.001) in: Functional recovery (mRS scores); percentage of well-recovered patients (Cerebrolysin: 81.6%; combination: 93.4%; comparator: 43.0%); neurological recovery (study-period NIHSS change); proportion of good NIHSS responders (Cerebrolysin: 77.5%; combination: 92.5%; comparator: 47.6%); and MoCA scores (Cerebrolysin: 23.3±4.8; combination: 23.7±4.1; comparator: 15.9±7.7). Compared to Cerebrolysin, combined therapy improved (p<0.01) mRS outcomes and NIHSS change, but not MoCA scores, in moderate-severe stroke (NIHSS>11) cases only. No drug-related adverse events were reported.

Conclusion: Cerebrolysin alone or combined with other nootropics was effective and safe in routine AIS treatment, during both acute and recovery phases, which supports its use in daily clinical practice. Other. According to the results of this multicenter study, the importance of reducing differences in the treatment regimens of AIS in Vietnam should be further emphasized.