Skip to main content

Table 1 Summary of studies included in the meta-analysis

From: Meta-analysis comparing laparoscopic versus open resection for gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumors larger than 5 cm

Reference

Year of study

Country

Study design

group

sample size

Mean/median size (cm)

Median FU(range, mo)

Quality score

Kim [25]

2012 (1998–2011)

Korea

Retro

LAP

24

6.1

62.6(8.9–164.4)

17.5

    

OPEN

14

7.2

58.3(18.8–123.2)

 

Lin [17]

2014 (2007–2012)

China

Retro

LAP

23

7.2

34.0(6–78)

18

    

OPEN

23

7.3

 

Hsiao [26]

2014 (2002–2012)

Taiwan

Retro

LAP

18

6.3

37.2(16.8–133.2)

17

    

OPEN

21

6

67.2(12.0–133.2)

 

Takahashi [27]

2015 (1995–2011)

Japan

Retro

LAP

15

5.5

57(7–120)

16.5

    

OPEN

12

7.5

69(13–154)

 

Piessen [28]

2015 (2001–2013)

France

Retro

LAP

90

NA

NA

17.5

    

OPEN

93

 

Chun [29]

2016(2002–2015)

Singapore

Retro

LAP

23

6

20.5(0–163)

17

    

OPEN

36

6

78(2–151)

 

Our own study

2015(2008–2015)

China

Retro

LAP

13

6

48(26–78)

17.5

    

OPEN

13

6

42(11–83)

 
  1. Retro retrospective observational study, LAP laparoscopic resection, OPEN open resection, FU follow up, mo months, NA not available