Skip to main content

Table 1 Basic characteristics and risk of bias

From: The influence of minimally invasive esophagectomy versus open esophagectomy on postoperative pulmonary function in esophageal cancer patients: a meta-analysis

Authors (year)

country

No. of cases

Sex ratio

Average age

Pathological characteristic adenocarcinoma/squamous cell carcinoma/other

TNM staging

Surgical procedure

Postoperative pulmonary function indicators

Preoperative pulmonary function indicators

NOS

M

O

M/F

M

O

Li et al. [7]

China

34

35

48/21

NA

NA

0/69/0

I–IIB

MIE

OE

NA

7

Wang [6]

China

43

35

46/32

64.89 ± 3.09

65.17 ± 2.95

48/20/10

I–III

MIE

OE

7

Han et al. [10]

China

32

33

45/20

66.8 ± 4.5

66.2 ± 4.3

NA

I–IIB

MIE

OE

7

Shi et al. [11]

China

30

30

34/26

61.2 ± 5.3

60.9 ± 5.7

40/18/2

I–III

MIE

OE

7

Gao [12]

China

34

34

48/20

54.92 ± 6.14

55.84 ± 6.32

NA

I–IIB

MIE

OE

7

Wu et al. [13]

China

39

31

34/36

53.52 ± 8.63

52.44 ± 8.33

10/60/0

I–III

MIE

OE

7

Li [14]

China

30

30

37/23

60.13 ± 1.34

60.24 ± 1.17

0/60/0

NA

MIE

OE

7

Taguchi [15]

Japan

22

29

44/7

61.6 ± 9.3

61.7 ± 6.4

0/51/0

0–III

MIE

OE

6

  1. M: Minimally invasive esophagectomy; O: Open esophagectomy; NA: not available. %VC; FVC; FEV1; MVV