Conclusions Piracetam plays a limited role in the rehabilitation of overall language impairment and only benefits written language ability at the end of trials .
Its effect on overall linguistic level and written language tends to emerge within a short period and declines thereafter
Background Aphasia is a common symptom in post-stroke patients .
Piracetam is a commonly used nootropic agent that promises various benefits to brain function , including language improvement .
Objective We performed a systematic review and meta- analysis to assess whether piracetam facilitates the rehabilitation of language performance in post-stroke patients .
Effect of Piracetam on Recovery and Rehabilitation After Stroke: A Double‐Blind, Placebo‐Controlled Study
Summary : The nootropic agent piracetam has been shown to improve learning and memory , and it may , by this means , facilitate recovery and rehabilitation after a stroke . We report the results of a pilot study exploring its effects in patients undergoing rehabilitation after acute cerebral infa rct ion in the carotid artery territory . We compared piracetam and placebo , each given for 12 weeks , in a multicenter , double-blind , r and omized trial of parallel-group design ; testing was performed at baseline ( 6–9 weeks poststroke ) , weeks 5 and 12 , and , in fewer patients , 12 weeks after termination of treatment . St and ardized tests of activities of daily living ( Barthel Index , Kuriansky Test ) , aphasia ( Aachen Aphasia Test ) , and perception ( Rivermead Perception Assessment Battery ) were the primary efficacy variables . Of 158 patients , 137 ( 81 males , 56 females ) were studied after treatment and 88 at 24-week follow-up . Thirty patients on piracetam ( 45 % ) and 37 on placebo ( 53 % ) were aphasic on entry . Both groups , including the subgroups with aphasia , were well matched at baseline for demographic data , stroke sequelae , type and severity of aphasia , and prognostic parameters . Multivariate analysis of Aachen Aphasia subtest scores showed a significant overall improvement relative to baseline in favor of piracetam ( p = 0.02 ) at 12 weeks . This was not seen at 24 weeks when , however , fewer patients were available for evaluation so that we could neither confirm nor deny whether improvement was maintained after cessation of piracetam . We were unable to demonstrate an effect on tests of activities of daily living and could neither confirm nor exclude an effect on perceptual deficit . We have shown an improvement in aphasia in patients undergoing rehabilitation after a stroke after 12 weeks ' treatment with piracetam that requires confirmation in further studies
Conclusions Piracetam plays a limited role in the rehabilitation of overall language impairment and only benefits written language ability at the end of trials .
Its effect on overall linguistic level and written language tends to emerge within a short period and declines thereafter
Background Aphasia is a common symptom in post-stroke patients .
Piracetam is a commonly used nootropic agent that promises various benefits to brain function , including language improvement .
Objective We performed a systematic review and meta- analysis to assess whether piracetam facilitates the rehabilitation of language performance in post-stroke patients .