Background
Methods
Search strategy
In- and exclusion criteria
Selection process
Quality assessment and scoring
Outcomes of interest
Quantitative analysis
Results
Literature search
Study (author, YoP) | Design | Malignant | Benign | Patients (n) | Age | BMI (kg/m2) | ASA classification | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IA | EA | IA | EA | IA | EA | IA | EA | ||||
Anania, 2012 | Retrospective CCS | + | − | 39 | 33 | 74.5 (53–89)b
| 74 (45–96)b
| 26.3 (20–37)b
| 28.1 (19.9–37)b
| NR | NR |
Chaves, 2011 | Retrospective CCS | + | + | 35 | 25 | 62.6 (13.4)a
| 58.9 (12.9)a
| 25.9 (3.1)a
| 26.7 (3.9)a
| 17/18c
| 15/10c
|
Fabozzi, 2010 | Retrospective CCS | + | − | 50 | 50 | 62.1 (8.3)a
| 59.4 (9.5)a
| 21.4 (2.3)a
| 22.1 (1.6)a
| 2 (1–2)b
| 2 (1–2)b
|
Lee, 2013 | Retrospective CCS | + | + | 51 | 35 | 70 (43–90)b
| 66 (48–93)b
| 25.7 (18–46.5)b
| 25.4 (18.3–45.3)b
| 3 (2–4)b
| 3 (1–3)b
|
Magistro, 2013 | Prospective CCS | + | + | 40 | 40 | 70.9 (13.4)a
| 71.2 (10.5)a
| 24.8 (2.8)a
| 23.9 (4.4)a
| 2 (1–3)b
| 2 (1–3)b
|
Marchesi, 2013 | Retrospective CCS | + | + | 28 | 27 | 66.2a
| 67.7a
| 26.1a
| 26.2a
| 19/9c
| 17/10c
|
Milone, 2015 | Retrospective CCS | + | + | 286 | 226 | 67.7 (12.6)a
| 65.6 (11.4)a
| 25.2 (3.8)a
| 25.4 (3.8)a
| 2 (1–4)b
| 2 (1–4)b
|
Roscio, 2012 | Retrospective CCS | + | − | 42 | 30 | 63.5 (10.3)a
| 63.7 (10.3)a
| 26.0 (4.0)a
| 26.3 (3.8)a
| 2 (1–3)b
| 2 (1–3)b
|
Scatizzi, 2010 | Retrospective CCS | + | − | 40 | 40 | 70 (47–87)b
| 68.5 (41–85)b
| 28a
| 27b
| 2 (1–3)b
| 2 (1–3)b
|
Shapiro, 2015 | Retrospective CCS | + | − | 91 | 100 | 72 (45–90)b
| 72 (49–90)b
| 27.8 (4.6)a
| 26.9 (4.3)a
| 3 (1–4)b
| 3 (1–4)b
|
Trastulli, 2015 | Retrospective CCS | + | + | 40 | 94 | 71.5a
| 70.8a
| 26.6a
| 25.4a
| 2 (1–3)b
| 2 (1–3)b
|
Vergis, 2015 | Retrospective CCS | + | + | 21 | 29 | 65a
| 69a
| 27a
| 28a
| 2.65a
| 3.04a
|
Quality assessment: MINORS instrument
A clearly stated aim | Inclusion of consecutive patients | Prospective collection of data | Endpoints appropriate to the aim of the study | Unbiased assessment of the study endpoint | Follow-up period appropriate to the aim of the study | Loss to follow-up less than 5 % | Prospective calculation of the study size | An adequate control group | Contemporary groups | Baseline equivalence of groups | Adequate statistical analyses | Total | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Anania |
2
|
2
|
1
|
2
|
1
|
2
|
0
|
0
|
2
|
1
|
2
|
2
| 17 |
Chaves |
2
|
2
|
2
|
2
|
1
|
2
|
2
|
0
|
2
|
1
|
2
|
2
| 20 |
Fabozzi |
2
|
1
|
0
|
2
|
1
|
2
|
2
|
0
|
2
|
2
|
2
|
1
| 17 |
Lee |
2
|
2
|
0
|
2
|
1
|
1
|
2
|
0
|
2
|
2
|
2
|
2
| 18 |
Magistro |
2
|
2
|
2
|
2
|
1
|
2
|
0
|
0
|
2
|
2
|
2
|
2
| 19 |
Marchesi |
2
|
2
|
2
|
2
|
1
|
2
|
2
|
0
|
2
|
1
|
2
|
2
| 20 |
Milone |
2
|
2
|
2
|
2
|
1
|
2
|
1
|
0
|
2
| 2 |
2
|
2
| 20 |
Scatizzi |
2
|
2
|
2
|
2
|
1
|
2
|
2
|
0
|
2
|
2
|
2
|
2
| 21 |
Shapiro |
2
|
2
|
2
|
2
|
1
|
1
|
2
|
0
|
2
|
2
|
2
|
2
| 20 |
Roscio |
2
|
2
|
2
|
2
|
1
|
2
|
1
|
0
|
2
|
1
|
2
|
2
| 19 |
Trastulli |
2
|
2
|
2
|
2
|
1
|
2
|
1
|
0
|
2
|
1
|
1
|
0
| 16 |
Vergis |
2
|
2
|
1
|
2
|
1
|
2
|
2
|
0
|
2
|
1
|
2
|
2
| 19 |
Not reported | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 12 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 17 |
Reported, inadequate | 0 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 12 | 2 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 6 | 1 | 1 | 28 |
Reported, adequate | 12 | 11 | 8 | 12 | 0 | 12 | 7 | 0 | 12 | 3 | 11 | 10 | 98 |