ObjectiveTo systematically evaluate the methodological quality of traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) guidelines and expert consensuses for the diagnosis and treatment of coronary heart diseases (CHD).MethodsDatabases including PubMed, CNKI, CBM, WanFang Data and the official websites of the China Association of Traditional Chinese Medicine, and the Chinese Association of Integrated Traditional and Western Medicine were electronically searched to collect guidelines (or expert consensus) of TCM for CHD from January 1st, 2010 to January 1st, 2021. Methodological evaluation of the included guidelines was conducted by 3 researchers independently using the AGREE Ⅱ instrument.ResultsA total of 16 guidelines were included. The AGREE Ⅱ scores for each domain were: clarity and presentation (63.89%), followed by scope and purpose (55.90%), stakeholder involvement (42.13%), the rigor of development (41.42%), editorial independence (32.12%), and applicability (21.99%). Nine guidelines were rated as level B (recommended after being revised), and 7 were rated as level C (not recommended).ConclusionsGuidelines and expert consensuses of TCM for CHD provide a standard for clinical practice, however, the methodological quality remains to be improved. It is suggested that future guidelines be formulated in accordance with international standards and using the methods of evidence-based medicine to improve the quality of guidelines further and promote international acceptability.