Shuxuetong injection for ischemic stroke: an overview of systematic reviews using different methodological quality assessment tools

Background: Shuxuetong injection possesses blood-activating and stasis-resolving effects with meridian-dredging functions. A growing body of evidence on Shuxuetong injection for the treatment of ischemic stroke has been published; however, no study has comprehensively assessed the methodological quality or clinical conclusions of that evidence. We conducted an overview of systematic reviews (SRs) on Shuxuetong injection for ischemic stroke to synthesize and critically assess the data, conclusions, and methodological quality of the included SRs, aiming to provide reliable evidence-based recommendations for clinical decision-making. Methods: Following a pre-registered protocol on PROSPERO, we conducted systematic searches across eight Chinese and English databases from inception to 25 January 2025. Two reviewers independently screened the SRs according to the eligibility criteria, and any disagreements were resolved through discussion to reach a consensus. Data were extracted for qualitative synthesis. The overlap in primary studies was quantitatively assessed. Methodological quality, reporting completeness, risk of bias, and certainty of evidence were evaluated using AMSTAR-2, PRISMA 2020, ROBIS, and GRADE tools. Results: This overview included 16 SRs. The overlap in primary studies was minimal. Likewise, subgroup analyses comparing conventional therapy (CT) versus Chinese medicine injection combined with CT also indicated low overlap. Methodological evaluation using AMSTAR-2 showed that all included reviews had critically low confidence. Based on PRISMA 2020 (score range: 24.5-31), 13 reviews were graded as meeting moderate-quality criteria and 3 as low quality, with no review rated as high quality. ROBIS assessment revealed a high risk of bias across all included reviews. GRADE evaluations of 125 outcomes showed moderate certainty for 7, low certainty for 21, and very low certainty for 97. Conclusion: Shuxuetong injection demonstrated variable efficacy in improving neurological deficits and activities of daily living, as well as in normalizing hemorheological and other laboratory parameters, with no significant increase in adverse events, indicating a favorable safety profile. However, the credibility of these findings is undermined by the predominantly low or very low quality of the included SRs, as assessed by methodological quality assessment tools. Our findings suggest that the design of future reviews should be rigorously improved in accordance with established methodological criteria to increase confidence in the conclusions. Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD42025638286, identifier CRD42025638286.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Frontiers in Pharmacology
Published
2026-04-13
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3389/fphar.2026.1723582
Primary Topic
Acute Ischemic Stroke Management
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Shuxuetong injection for ischemic stroke: an overview of systematic reviews using different methodological quality assessment tools

Ying Gao, Lu Tang, Xinxing Lai, Meilin Miao et al.
Frontiers in Pharmacology
Acute Ischemic Stroke Management
article

Shuxuetong injection for ischemic stroke: an overview of systematic reviews using different methodological quality assessment tools

Ying Gao, Lu Tang, Xinxing Lai, Meilin Miao, Yifan Zhu, Yilan Zheng
article en

Abstract

Background: Shuxuetong injection possesses blood-activating and stasis-resolving effects with meridian-dredging functions. A growing body of evidence on Shuxuetong injection for the treatment of ischemic stroke has been published; however, no study has comprehensively assessed the methodological quality or clinical conclusions of that evidence. We conducted an overview of systematic reviews (SRs) on Shuxuetong injection for ischemic stroke to synthesize and critically assess the data, conclusions, and methodological quality of the included SRs, aiming to provide reliable evidence-based recommendations for clinical decision-making. Methods: Following a pre-registered protocol on PROSPERO, we conducted systematic searches across eight Chinese and English databases from inception to 25 January 2025. Two reviewers independently screened the SRs according to the eligibility criteria, and any disagreements were resolved through discussion to reach a consensus. Data were extracted for qualitative synthesis. The overlap in primary studies was quantitatively assessed. Methodological quality, reporting completeness, risk of bias, and certainty of evidence were evaluated using AMSTAR-2, PRISMA 2020, ROBIS, and GRADE tools. Results: This overview included 16 SRs. The overlap in primary studies was minimal. Likewise, subgroup analyses comparing conventional therapy (CT) versus Chinese medicine injection combined with CT also indicated low overlap. Methodological evaluation using AMSTAR-2 showed that all included reviews had critically low confidence. Based on PRISMA 2020 (score range: 24.5-31), 13 reviews were graded as meeting moderate-quality criteria and 3 as low quality, with no review rated as high quality. ROBIS assessment revealed a high risk of bias across all included reviews. GRADE evaluations of 125 outcomes showed moderate certainty for 7, low certainty for 21, and very low certainty for 97. Conclusion: Shuxuetong injection demonstrated variable efficacy in improving neurological deficits and activities of daily living, as well as in normalizing hemorheological and other laboratory parameters, with no significant increase in adverse events, indicating a favorable safety profile. However, the credibility of these findings is undermined by the predominantly low or very low quality of the included SRs, as assessed by methodological quality assessment tools. Our findings suggest that the design of future reviews should be rigorously improved in accordance with established methodological criteria to increase confidence in the conclusions. Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD42025638286, identifier CRD42025638286.

Frontiers in PharmacologyVol. 17
Beijing University of Chinese Medicine (CN), Chinese Institute for Brain Research (CN), Dongzhimen Hospital Affiliated to Beijing University of Chinese Medicine (CN)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 27%
Acute Ischemic Stroke Management
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.