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