To assess the efficacy and safety of topical cyclosporine versus placebo in the treatment of allergic conjunctivitis.Systematic review and meta-analysis.Seven qualified studies incorporating 306 eyes of 153 patients were analyzed.Searches of randomized controlled trials were conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform.We assessed the methodologic quality of individual included trials and performed meta-analyses using the random effects model if P<0.1 in the test for heterogeneity, or otherwise used the fixed effects model. We assessed scores of composite signs and symptoms, reduction in steroid eye drop use in steroid-dependent patients, and safety outcomes (i.e., stinging or burning sensation).At 2 weeks of follow-up or longer, evidence suggests a statistically significant improvement in the composite signs (standardized mean difference [SMD], -1.21; 95% confidence interval [CI], -1.80 to -0.62; I(2) = 71%) and symptoms (SMD, -0.84; 95% CI, -1.51 to -0.16; I(2) = 80%) after topical cyclosporine treatment for allergic conjunctivitis regardless of the dosage of treatment. There was a significant reduction (mean difference, -61.16; 95% CI, -101.61 to -20.72; I(2) = 58%) in the use of steroid eye drops in patients with steroid-dependent allergic conjunctivitis. Stinging or burning sensation (odds ratio, 2.56; 95% CI, 0.19-35.06; I(2) = 73%) was common in both the cyclosporine and placebo groups.This systematic review and meta-analysis suggests topical cyclosporine could be an effective and safe treatment method for allergic conjunctivitis. Further randomized controlled trials with larger sample sizes and standardized outcome measurements, follow-up periods, and cyclosporine concentrations are warranted to determine the short- and long-term efficacy and safety and the minimal effective dosage of topical cyclosporine for allergic conjunctivitis.