Cochrane · systematic review · CD011390
Laparoscopic versus open transhiatal oesophagectomy for oesophageal cancer
Gurusamy, KS, Pallari, E, Midya, S, et al. · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2016 · Cochrane Library
GutAMSTAR 2: not assessed
SoF tableOnly the outcomes this review put in its Summary of Findings table are listed (the Cochrane Handbook caps them at about seven per comparison). Its other analyses are not shown here.
Questions
12
current version
GRADE rated
12
No studies
0
Included studies
NR
No studies 0 · 0%Ungraded 0 · 0%Very low 12 · 100%Low 0 · 0%Moderate 0 · 0%High 0 · 0%
Ungraded means an effect was reported without a GRADE rating; it is not a gap. No studies means the review found nothing to answer the question. The six categories are a display order, not a score.
Questions and results
Laparoscopic versus open transhiatal oesophagectomy for oesophageal cancer: primary outcomes
Population: patients with oesophageal cancer
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Short‐term mortality (in hospital or within 3 months) Laparoscopic vs open transhiatal oesophagectomy | RR 0.44 [0.05, 4.09] | 5 studies · 326 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Long‐term mortality Laparoscopic vs open transhiatal oesophagectomy | HR 0.97 [0.81, 1.16] | 2 studies · 193 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Serious adverse events (proportion) Laparoscopic vs open transhiatal oesophagectomy | RR 0.49 [0.24, 0.99] | 3 studies · 213 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Anastomotic stenosis Laparoscopic vs open transhiatal oesophagectomy | RR 1.37 [0.33, 5.7] | 1 study · 73 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Laparoscopic versus open transhiatal oesophagectomy for oesophageal cancer: secondary outcomes
Population: patients with oesophageal cancer
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Short‐term recurrence (within 6 months) Laparoscopic vs open transhiatal oesophagectomy | RR 0.88 [0.04, 18.47] | 1 study · 20 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Long‐term recurrence Laparoscopic vs open transhiatal oesophagectomy | HR 1 [0.84, 1.18] | 2 studies · 173 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Adverse events (proportion) Laparoscopic vs open transhiatal oesophagectomy | RR 0.64 [0.48, 0.86] | 3 studies · 213 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Blood transfusion (proportion) Laparoscopic vs open transhiatal oesophagectomy | RR 0.08 [0, 1.35] | 1 study · 73 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Blood transfusion (quantity) Laparoscopic vs open transhiatal oesophagectomy | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 93 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Length of hospital stay Laparoscopic vs open transhiatal oesophagectomy | no estimate extracted | 3 studies · 266 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Positive resection margins Laparoscopic vs open transhiatal oesophagectomy | RR 0.65 [0.37, 1.12] | 3 studies · 213 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Number of harvested lymph nodes Laparoscopic vs open transhiatal oesophagectomy | no estimate extracted | 5 studies · 326 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |