Skip to main content

Table 1 Main characteristics of 11 studies of LRH and RH

From: Laparoscopy versus laparotomy for the management of early stage cervical cancer

References Design Approach Number Age (years) BMI (Kg/m2) Tumor diameter (cm) Stage
Ia1 (LVSI) Ia2 Ib1 Ib2 IIa
Bogani et al. [31] Propensity-matched cohort Laparoscopic 65 48.9 ± 13.5 25.1 ± 5.2 - - - - - -
Open 65 50.9 ± 14 25.9 ± 6.1 - - - - - -
Chen et al. [20] Retrospective cohort Laparoscopic 32 51.2 ± 11.9 23.2 ± 3.4 - - - - - -
Open 44 51.9 ± 11.3 24.9 ± 4.6 - - - - - -
Ditto et al. [25] Propensity-matched cohort Laparoscopic 60 46 ± 12.5 24.3 ± 2.9 - - 13 47 - -
Open 60 45.5 ± 15.75 24.0 ± 4.3 - - 10 50 - -
Frumovitz et al. [26] Retrospective cohort Laparoscopic 35 40.8 ± 8.75 28.1 ± 5.6 - 2 5 28 0 -
Open 54 42.5 ± 10.25 28.2 ± 7.25 - 3 8 42 1 -
Ghezzi et al. [27] cohort Laparoscopic 50 47 ± 13.5 23 ± 4.4 2.6 ± 0.9 - 7 30 6 7
Open 48 53 ± 11.8 25 ± 6.0 3.0 ± 1.0 - 2 26 13 7
Lee et al. [21] Retrospectivecohort Laparoscopic 24 48.4 ± 7.25 23.4 ± 3.55 - - 5 13 2 4
Open 48 50.2 ± 8.25 23.9 ± 4.7 - - 10 26 4 8
Li et al. [22] Retrospectivecohort Laparoscopic 90 42 ± 9 - 2.8 ± 1.4 -   60 12 18
Open 35 44 ± 11 - 2.6 ± 1.5 -   14 8 13
Lim et al. [23] Prospectivecohort Laparoscopic 18 47.8 ± 8.8 23.9 ± 4.4 2.9 ± 1.5 - 2 13 3 0
Open 30 47.0 ± 8.5 22.4 ± 4 3 ± 1.2 - 1 23 4 2
Malzoni et al. [28] Retrospectivecohort Laparoscopic 65 40.5 ± 7.7 26.0 ± 4   5 21 39 - -
Open 62 42.7 ± 8.6 29.0 ± 4   3 11 48 - -
Nam et al. [24] Retrospectivematched cohort Laparoscopic 263 46.4 23.2 1.8 ± 0.55 - 36 197 25 5
Open 263 46.5 23.9 1.8 ± 0.75 - 40 194 21 8
Toptas et al. [29] Retrospectivecohort Laparoscopic 22 - - 2.1 ± 1.5 - 9 13 - -
Open 46 - - 2.6 ± 1.07 - 7 39   -
Zakashansky et al. [30] Retrospectivematched cohort Laparoscopic 30 48.3 ± 12.25 - - 1 8 17 2 2
Open 30 46.6 ± 11.75 - - 1 6 19 2 2