Table S1. Comparative studies.
| First author | Year | Country | Approach | Number of patients | Morbidity rate (%) | Mortality rate (%) | Blood loss (mg) | Operation time (minutes) | Number of retrieved lymph nodes | Hospital stay (days) | Follow-up period (months) | 5-year OS (%) | 5-year DFS (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Song (12) | 2009 | Korea | LDG (early) vs. RDG | 20 vs. 20 | 5 vs. 5 | 0 vs. 0 | – | 290 vs. 203** | 32 vs. 35** | 8 vs. 6** | – | – | – |
| LDG (later) vs. RDG | 20 vs. 20 | 10 vs. 5 | 0 vs. 0 | 40 vs. 94** | 134 vs. 203** | 43 vs. 35** | 6 vs. 6** | – | – | – | |||
| Kim (63) | 2010 | Korea | ODG vs. LDG vs. RDG | 12 vs. 11 vs. 16 | 17 vs. 9 vs. 13 | 0 vs. 0 vs. 0 | 79 vs. 45 vs. 30** | 127 vs. 204 vs. 259** | 43 vs. 37 vs. 41** | 7 vs. 7 vs. 5** | – | – | – |
| Caruso (64) | 2011 | Italy | OG vs. RG | 120 vs. 29 | 43 vs. 41 | 3.3 vs. 0 | 386 vs. 198** | 222 vs. 290** | 32 vs. 28** | 13 vs. 10** | – | – | – |
| Woo (65) | 2011 | Korea | LG vs. RG | 591 vs. 236 | 14 vs. 11 | 0.3 vs. 0.4 | 148 vs. 92** | 171 vs. 220** | 14 vs. 15** | 7 vs. 8** | – | – | – |
| Eom (54) | 2012 | Korea | LDG vs. RDG | 62 vs. 30 | 7 vs. 13 | 0 vs. 0 | 88 vs. 153** | 189 vs. 229** | 33 vs. 30** | 8 vs. 8** | – | – | – |
| Huang (66) | 2012 | Korea | OG vs. LG vs. RG | 586 vs. 64 vs. 39 | 15 vs. 16 vs. 15 | 1.4 vs. 1.6 vs. 2.6 | 400 vs. 100 vs. 50** | 320 vs. 350 vs. 430** | 26 vs. 34 vs. 32** | 12 vs. 11 vs. 7** | – | – | – |
| Kim (36) | 2012 | Korea | OG vs. LG vs. RG | 4542 vs. 861 vs. 436 | 11 vs. 9 vs. 10 | 0.5 vs. 0.3 vs. 0.5 | 192 vs. 112 vs. 85** | 158 vs. 176 vs. 226** | 41 vs. 38 vs. 40** | 10 vs. 8 vs. 8** | – | – | – |
| Park (55) | 2012 | Korea | LDG vs. RDG | 120 vs. 30 | 8 vs. 17 | 0 vs. 0 | 60 vs. 75* | 140 vs. 218* | 34 vs. 35** | 7 vs. 7** | – | – | – |
| Uyama (50) | 2012 | Japan | LDG vs. RDG | 25 vs. 225 | 11 vs. 17 | 0 vs. 0 | 81 vs. 52** | 345 vs. 361** | – | 17 vs. 12** | – | – | – |
| Yoon (67) | 2012 | Korea | LTG vs. RTG | 65 vs. 36 | 15 vs. 17 | 0 vs. 0 | – | 210 vs. 306** | 39 vs. 43** | 10 vs. 9** | – | – | – |
| Hyun (68) | 2013 | Korea | LG vs. RG | 83 vs. 38 | 39 vs. 47 | 0 vs. 0 | 131 vs. 131** | 220 vs. 234** | 33 vs. 33** | 12 vs. 11** | – | – | – |
| Huang (48) | 2014 | Taiwan | LG vs. RG | 73 vs. 35 | 8 vs. 13 | 1.4 vs. 1.4 | 116 vs. 80** | 330 vs. 358** | 18 vs. 31** | 13 vs. 11** | – | – | – |
| Junfeng (69) | 2014 | America | LG vs. RG | 394 vs. 120 | 4 vs. 6 | – | 138 vs. 118** | 221 vs. 235** | 33 vs. 35** | 8 vs. 8** | 19 vs. 15* | 69.9 vs. 67.8 (3-year) | – |
| Kim (49) | 2014 | Korea | LDG vs. RDG | 481 vs. 172 | 4 vs. 5 | 0.6 vs. 0 | 135 vs. 60** | 167 vs. 206** | 37 vs. 37** | 7 vs. 7** | – | – | – |
| Noshiro (70) | 2014 | Japan | LDG vs. RDG | 460 vs. 21 | 10 vs. 10 | 0 vs. 0 | 115 vs. 96** | 315 vs. 439** | 40 vs. 44** | 13 vs. 8** | – | – | – |
| Son (39) | 2014 | Korea | LTG vs. RTG | 58 vs. 51 | 22 vs. 16 | 0 vs. 2.0 | 211 vs. 153** | 210 vs. 264** | 43 vs. 47** | 8 vs. 9** | 70* | 91.1 vs. 89.5 | 90.2 vs. 91.2 |
| Han (37) | 2015 | Korea | LPPG vs. RPPG | 69 vs. 68 | 22 vs. 19 | 0 vs. 0 | – | 194 vs. 258** | 37 vs. 33** | 9 vs. 9** | 19 vs. 23* | – | – |
| Lee (40) | 2015 | Korea | LDG vs. RDG | 267 vs. 133 | 13 vs. 11 | – | 87 vs. 47** | 171 vs. 218** | 40 vs. 41** | 7 vs. 6** | 75* | N.S. | |
| Seo (41) | 2015 | Korea | LDG vs. RDG | 40 vs. 40 | 30 vs. 28 | – | 227 vs. 76** | 224 vs. 243** | – | 7 vs. 7** | – | – | – |
| Park (38) | 2015 | Korea | LG vs. RG | 622 vs. 148 | 8 vs. 8 | 0.5 vs. 0 | 146 vs. 171** | 189 vs. 255** | – | – | – | – | – |
| Suda (71) | 2015 | Japan | LG vs. RG | 438 vs. 88 | 11 vs. 2 | 0.2 vs. 1.1 | 34 vs. 48* | 361 vs. 381* | 38 vs. 40* | 15 vs. 14* | – | – | – |
| Cianchi (72) | 2016 | Italy | LDG vs. RDG | 41 vs. 30 | 12 vs. 13 | 4.9 vs. 3.3 | 119 vs. 100** | 262 vs. 323** | 30 vs. 39** | 8 vs. 10** | – | – | – |
| Kim (73) | 2016 | Korea | LDG vs. RDG | 288 vs. 87 | 9 vs. 6 | 0.3 vs. 1.1 | – | 230 vs. 248** | 34 vs. 37** | 7 vs. 7** | – | – | – |
| Nakauchi (53) | 2016 | Japan | LG vs. RG | 437 vs. 84 | 12 vs. 2 | – | 33 vs. 44* | 361 vs. 378* | 38 vs. 40* | 15 vs. 14* | 42 vs. 41* | 88.8 vs. 86.9 (3-year) | 86.3 vs. 86.9 (3-year) |
| Okumura (42) | 2016 | Korea | OG vs. RG | 132 vs. 49 | 18 vs. 14 | 0 vs. 0 | 157 vs. 85** | 174 vs. 227** | 33 vs. 37** | 6 vs. 5* | 58* | N.S. | – |
| Procopiuc (74) | 2016 | Romania | OG vs. RG | 29 vs. 18 | 28 vs. 22 | 0 vs. 0 | 564 vs. 208** | 243 vs. 320** | 25 vs. 22** | 11 vs. 8** | 32 vs. 25* | N.S. | – |
| Shen (75) | 2016 | China | LG vs. RG | 330 vs. 93 | 10 vs. 10 | – | 213 vs. 177** | 226 vs. 257** | 31 vs. 33** | 11 vs. 9** | – | – | – |
| Yang (76) | 2017 | Korea | OG vs. LG vs. RG | 241 vs. 511 vs. 173 | 25 vs. 12 vs. 5 | 0.8 vs. 0.4 vs. 0 | 149 vs. 66 vs. 53** | 193 vs. 174 vs. 202** | 45 vs. 36 vs. 41** | 11 vs. 8 vs. 6** | – | – | – |
*, median; **, mean. Bold font with underline indicates P<0.05. LDG, laparoscopic distal gastrectomy; LG, laparoscopic gastrectomy; LTG, laparoscopic total gastrectomy; LPPG, laparoscopic pylorus preserving gastrectomy; RDG, robotic distal gastrectomy; RG, robotic gastrectomy; RTG, robotic total gastrectomy; RPPG, robotic pylorus preserving gastrectomy; ODG, open distal gastrectomy; OG, open gastrectomy.