|
| Eligible studies | Age | Sample size (T/C) | Intervention measures | Course/year | Outcome index |
| T | C |
|
| Hongying MO 2015 [18] | T: 73.32 ± 7.94 C: 71.44 ± 8.23 | 100 (50/50) | Conventional therapy + ZTC | Conventional therapy | Nil | ① |
| Hongying MO 2016 [19] | T: 52.78 ± 2.56 C: 53.69 ± 3.23 | 60 (30/30) | Conventional therapy + atorvastatin + ZTC | Conventional therapy + atorvastatin | T: 7.89 ± 1.80 C: 7.52 ± 1.63 | ①③ |
| Hongying MO 2019 [20] | — | 122 (61/61) | Conventional therapy + ZTC | Conventional therapy | Nil | ③⑧ |
| Deshen He 2015 [21] | T: 45–79 C: 47–78 | 116 (58/58) | Conventional therapy + aspirin, atorvastatin calcium, citicoline + ZTC | Conventional therapy + aspirin, atorvastatin calcium, citicoline | T: 0.03–0.58 C: 0.03–0.58 | ①② |
| Qun Zhang 2015 [22] | T: 41–80 C: 43–78 | 350 (184/166) | Conventional therapy + ZTC | Conventional therapy + Xiaoshuan Tongluo tablets | Nil | ①②④⑤ |
| Yi Chun Mao 2017 [23] | T: 61.4 ± 8.7 C: 65.2 ± 8.8 | 78 (39/39) | Conventional therapy + ZTC | Conventional therapy | T: 0.03–0.25 C: 0.04–0.42 | ①② |
| Yonggang Wang 2015 [24] | T: 62.72 ± 12.41 C: 63.33 ± 11.71 | 156 (78/78) | Conventional therapy + three-stage rehabilitation of stroke + ZTC | Conventional therapy + three-stage rehabilitation of stroke | T: 0.15 ± 0.1 C: 0.14 ± 0.08 | ①②③⑤⑥ |
| Yonggang Wang 2017 [25] | T: 74.7 ± 9.2 C: 73.1 ± 9.6 | 112 (56/56) | Conventional therapy + three-stage rehabilitation of stroke + ZTC | Conventional therapy + three-stage rehabilitation of stroke | T: 8.9 ± 3.4 C: 9.3 ± 3.7 | ②③⑤⑦ |
| Peng Lei 2007 [26] | T: 60.88 ± 9.03 C: 67.18 ± 35.69 | 88 (66/22) | Conventional therapy + ZTC | Conventional therapy + Naoan capsule | T: 1.2 ± 0.6 C: 1.3 ± 0.69 | ①②④⑤ |
| Qianfeng Ma 2015 [27] | T: 61.2 ± 8.9 C: 63.4 ± 8.2 | 96 (48/48) | Conventional therapy + atorvastatin + ZTC | Conventional therapy + atorvastatin | T: 5.6 ± 1.8 C: 6.7 ± 1.9 | ①②③ |
|
