Table 1.

Adequacy of reporting of studies based on criteria proposed by Rangel et al. [29].

Criteria of Rangel et al. [29]	Rittmeister [3]	Hattrup [16]	Ekelund [30]	Holcomb [31]	John [32]	Woodruff [33]	Young [34]
Description of participating surgeons/institutions:
Can number of centres be determined?	No	✓	No	No	✓	✓	No
Can practice type be determined?	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓
Can number of surgeons be determined?	✓	✓	✓	No	No	✓	✓
Can author’s prior experience with procedure be determined?	No	No	No	No	No	No	No
Is timeline of when cases performed documented?	No	No	✓	✓	No	✓	✓
Description and definition of cases:
Was population from which cases selected described?	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	No	✓
Are diagnostic criteria clearly documented?	✓	No	No	✓	✓	No	✓
Are eligibility criteria clearly documented?	✓	No	No	✓	✓	No	✓
Description of the intervention:
Is surgical technique adequately described?	✓	✓	✓	No	✓	✓	✓
Any attempt to standardise operative technique mentioned?	✓	No	No	✓	✓	✓	✓
Any attempt to standardise peri-operative care mentioned?	✓	No	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓
Analysis of outcome data:
Is mean and range of demographic data reported?	No	✓	✓	No	No	✓	✓
Are outcomes presented with appropriate measures of variability?	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓
Are diagnostic methods for defining outcome described?	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓
Do authors address whether there is missing data?	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓
Is number and nature of complications addressed?	✓	✓	No	✓	No	✓	✓
Total number of criteria satisfied	12/16	10/16	10/16	11/16	11/16	12/16	14/16