Bursectomy for advanced gastric cancer: an update meta-analysis

Table 1 Characteristics of the included studies

Author, year	Evidence level	Country	Study period	Study design	TNM stage	Patients		Full text/abstract	Median follow-up (months)	Quality scores	Outcomes
Author, year		Country	Study period	Study design		Bursectomy (+)	Bursectomy (−)		Median follow-up (months)	Quality scores	Outcomes
Imamura 2011, [7]^a	2b	Japan	2002–2007	RCT	cT2–3	104	106	Full text	NA	RCT	3,4,5,7,8
Eom, 2013 [17]	3b	Korea	2001–2006	R	cT3–4	107	363	Full text	60	7	1,2,3,4,6,7,8
Kochi,2014 [18]	3b	Japan	2004–2010	R	cIA–IIIC	121	133	Full text	60	7	1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8
Kung, 2014 [19]	3b	Sweden	2006–2012	R	All stages	83	8	Full text	NA	5	7^b
Hirao, 2015 [8]^a	2b	Japan	2002–2007	RCT	cT2–3	104	106	Full text	80	RCT	1,2
Zhang,2015 [20]	3b	China	2012–2013	R	pT2–4	159	247	Full text	20	6	1,3,4,5,6,7,8
Masanori, 2017 [9]^c	1b	Japan	2010–2015	RCT	cT3–4	602	602	Abstract	NA	RCT	1,7,8

R retrospective study, RCT randomised controlled trial, NA not available, 1 overall survival, 2 disease-free survival, 3 harvested lymph node, 4 operating time, 5 blood loss, 6 hospital stay, 7 operative morbidity, 8 operative mortality
^aThe study by Imamura et al. and the study by Hirao et al. were on the same patient cohort. The former reported surgical outcomes, while the latter reported long-term survival outcomes
^bThis study aimed to explore the risk of postoperative pancreatic fistula after D2 gastrectomy, including bursectomy, for gastric cancer
^cThis study reports the primary results of a phase III trial evaluating bursectomy for patients with subserosal/serosal gastric cancer (JCOG1001), which was delivered in the form of an oral presentation at the 2017 American Society of Clinical Oncology Gastrointestinal Cancers Symposium (ASCO-GI)

ISSN: 1477-7819