Objective To systematically compare propofol and isoflurane for myocardial protection in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG).Methods Electronic databases were searched for randomized controlled clinical trials comparing propofol and isoflurane for myocardial protection in patients undergoing CABG.Data which were extracted independently by two reviewers included the general data of patients,premedication,induction of anesthesia and anesthetics applied during maintenance of anesthesia,level of cardiac troponin I (cTnI) before operation and at 6,12,24 and 48 h after operation,requirement for positive inotropic agents during operation,and development of myocardial infarction within 24 h after operation.Meta-analysis was conducted using Review Manager 5.0.2.Results Sixteen randomized controlled clinical trials involving 794 patients were included in this meta-analysis.The patients were divided into 2 groups:propofol group (n =405) and isoflurane group (n =389).There were no significant differences between the two groups in the plasma concentration of cTnI after operation,incidence of myocardial infarction within 24 h after operation,and requirement for positive inotropic agents during operation (P ＞ 0.05).Conclusion There is no significant difference between propofol and isoflurane for myocardial protection in the patients undergoing CABG.