Skip to main content

Table 1 Overview of collected studies

From: Oncologic and perioperative outcomes of laparoscopic versus open radical nephrectomy for the treatment of renal tumor (> 7 cm): a systematic review and pooled analysis of comparative outcomes

First author, year

Country

Design

Surgical method

No. of patients

Comparability

Tumor mean size (cm)

No. of IVC thrombus

Outcomes variables

Mean follow-up (months)

Study quality (score)

Lee et al. (2018) [25]

Korea

Retrospective

ORN/LRN

578/257

1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7

9/8

0

1, 2, 3, 11

51.2/51.2

8

Nian et al. (2022) [26]

China

Retrospective

ORN/LRN

37/37

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7

11.7/11.3

0

1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11

43/45.7

8

Hemal et al. (2007) [20]

India

Prospective

ORN/LRN

71/41

1, 2, 3, 4

10.1/9.9

NA

1, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11

57.2/51.4

9

Hattori et al. (2009) [4]

Japan

Retrospective

ORN/LRN

79/52

1, 2, 4, 6, 7

8.9/8.8

0

4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 11

51/41

7

Jeon et al. (2011) [5]

Korea

Retrospective

ORN/LRN

167/88

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7

9.8/9.2

0

1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 11

25.8/19

7

Steinberg et al. (2004) [27]

US

Retrospective

ORN/LRN

34/65

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6

9.9/9.2

0

6, 7, 9, 10, 11

NA

7

Chiba et al. (2016) [17]

Japan

Retrospective

ORN/LRN

42/37

1, 2, 3, 4

9.4/8.6

NA

4, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11

NA

7

Fang et al. (2013) [18]

China

Retrospective

ORN/LRN

317/71

1, 2, 3, 4, 6

9.5/8.8

0

6, 7, 9, 10, 11

NA

7

Huang et al. (2015) [19]

China

Retrospective

ORN/LRN

31/15

1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7

13.2/12.1

0

1, 3, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11

43.2/45.6

8

Zhu et al. (2016) [28]

China

Retrospective

ORN/LRN

68/84

1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7

10.3/8.8

NA

4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 11

58.2/56.3

9

Kwon et al. (2011) [23]

Korea

Retrospective

ORN/LRN

35/33

1, 2, 3, 4, 7

9/8.2

NA

2, 4, 6, 9, 11

65.6/60

8

Fujita et al. (2014) [29]

Japan

Retrospective

ORN/LRN

124/83

1, 2, 4, 6, 7

9.3/8.7

NA

2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 11

109/71

6

Zhen et al. (2010) [21]

China

Retrospective

ORN/LRN

36/36

1, 2, 4

8.8/8.5

NA

5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11

15/15

6

Khan et al. (2019) [22]

India

Prospective

ORN/LRN

30/30

1, 2, 4, 7

NA

0

5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11

17.5/17

8

Laird et al. (2015) [24]

UK

Prospective

ORN/LRN

25/25

1, 2, 4, 6, 7

10/8.7

NA

1, 2, 3, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11

54/56.4

8

Dillenburg et al. (2006) [6]

Germany

Prospective

ORN/LRN

25/23

1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7

9.3/8.9

0

5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11

13/12

9

Bensalah et al. (2009) [16]

France

Retrospective

ORN/LRN

135/44

1, 2, 7

NA

0

2

55/28

8

Bayrak et al. (2014) [15]

Turkey

Retrospective

ORN/LRN

140/33

1, 5, 6

9.9/9.5

0

5, 7, 8, 10

33/23

8

  1. Comparability: 1 = age, 2 = gender, 3 = BMI, 4 = tumor side, 5 = ASA≥3, 6 = pathological stage ≥pT3, 7 = Fuhrman grade≥3
  2. Outcomes variables:1 = OS, 2 = CSS, 3 = PFS, 4 = RFS, 5 = local recurrence, 6 = OT, 7 = LOS, 8 = EBL, 9 = blood transfusion 10 = intraoperative complications, 11 = postoperative complications
  3. Study quality: The score of each study was allocated from 0 to 9 according to the modified Newcastle–Ottawa Scale and showed in Study quality
  4. LRN Laparoscopic radical nephrectomy, ORN Open radical nephrectomy, IVC Inferior vena cava, NA Not available