Table 3.
Study population characteristics.
| No | First Author | Sex, Male n (%) | Age, in years | Histology | T-Stage *, n (%) | N-Stage *, n (%) | Location of the Tumor, n (%) | Surgical Approach | Number of Dissected Lymph Nodes per Patient | Percentage of Patients with Lymph Node Metastases | Overall Percentage of Positive Lymph Nodes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | S. Sharma [22] | 62 (89) | mean 58.5 | SCC | pT1 11 (16) pT2 12 (17) pT3 46 (65) pT5 1 (2) |
pN0 20 (29) pN1 50 (71) |
UTE 10 (14) MTE 37 (53) LTE 23 (33) |
Open procedures | mean 82 | 71% (50/70) |
4% (208/5720) |
| 2 | C. van de Ven [23] | NR | NR | AC | cT3 | NR | LTE 17 (46) GEJ 20 (54) |
Open procedures | mean 60, SD 17 |
NR | 14% (323/2240) |
| 3 | H. Igaki [24] | 85 (97) | mean 62 [range 42–86] |
SCC | pT1 27 (28) pT2 16 (16) pT3 53 (56) |
pN0 36 (38) pN1 60 (62) |
LTE | Open procedures | NR | 66% (63/96) |
NR |
| 4 | S.M. Dresner [25] | 91 (88) | mean 63 [range 30–78] |
AC | NR | NR | GEJ | Open procedures | median 22 [range 11–57] |
70% (73/104) | 21% (508/2476) |
| 5 | J. Chen [26] | 1351 (73) | median 55 [range 27–54] |
SCC | cT1 109 (6) cT2 348 (19) cT3 1215 (65) cT4 178 (10) |
NR | UTE 289 (16) MTE 1381 (74) LTE 180 (10) |
Open procedures | mean 26 [range 15–71] |
58% (1081/1850) |
9% (4350/47470) |
| 6 | Y. Tachimori [27] | 314 (88) | mean 63 [range 41–80] |
SCC | pT1 127 (36) pT2 40 (11) pT3 183 (51) pT4 6 (2) |
pN0 110 (31) pN1 116 (33) pN2 81 (23) pN3 49 (13) |
UTE 55 (15) MTE 173 (49) LTE 128 (36) |
Open procedures | NR | NR | NR |
| 6 | C. Castoro [7] | 327 (81) | median 63 [IQR 56–70] | SCC 116 (47) AC 132 (53) |
cT1 5 (2) cT2 42 (17) cT3 201 (81) |
cN0 107 (43) cN1 141 (57) |
UTE (all SCC) 25 (10) MTE (all SCC) 50 (20) LTE (AC 15, SCC 41) 56 (23) GEJ (all AC) 117 (47) |
Open procedures | AC median 19.5 [IQR 15–27] SCC median 16 [IQR 12–21] |
AC 54% (63/116) SCC 67% (88/132) |
NR |
| 8 | H. Li [28] | 163 (82) | mean 57, SD 9 |
SCC | pT1 18 (9) pT2 45 (23) pT3 114 (56) pT4 23 (12) |
NR | UTE 31 (15) MTE 137 (69) LTE 32 (16) |
Open procedures | NR | NR | NR |
| 9 | S. Kosugi [29] | 78 (91) | mean 60, SD 7 |
SCC | pT1a 7 (8) pT1b 75 (87) pT2 4 (5) |
pN0 48 (56) pN1 31 (36) pN2 6 (7) pN3 1 (1) |
UTE 17 (20) MTE 59 (69) LTE 10 (11) |
Open procedures | NR | 47% (40/86) |
NR |
| 10 | J. Cheng [30] | 1474 (78) | < 40: 1% 41–59: 48% ≥60: 51% |
SCC | cTis 10 (1) cT1 103 (5) cT2 345 (18) cT4 1173 (62) cT4 262 (14) |
NR | UTE 82 (4) MTE 1266 (67) LTE 545 (29) |
Open procedures | mean 13 | 46% (865/1893) |
NR |
| 11 | Z. Lin [31] | 59 (23) | median 61 [IQR 52–67] |
SCC | pT1 30 (11) pT2 44 (17) pT3 164 (63) pT4 22 (9) |
pN0 119 (46) pN1 67 (25) pN2 54 (21) pN3 20 (8) |
UTE 28 (11) MTE 173 (67) LTE 59 (22) |
Open procedures | median 35 [IQR 25–46] |
54% (141/260) |
15% (316/2097) |
| 12 | Y. Dong [32] | 2536 (72) | median 61 | SCC | pT1 435 (14) pT2 935 (25) pT3 1992 (55) pT4 225 (6) |
pN0 2223 (62) pN1 1233 (34) pN2 98 (3) pN3 33 (1) |
UTE 189 (5) MTE 1837 (51) LTE 1561 (44) |
Hybrid procedures | mean 20 [range 16–50] |
38% (1.364/3587) |
4% (2870/71740) |
| 13 | X. Duan [33] | 128 (95) | mean 63, SD 9 |
AC | pT1-2 17 (13) pT3-4 119 (87) |
pN0 44 (32) pN1 64 (47) pN2 21 (15) pN3 7 (6) |
GEJ | Open procedures | mean 15 | 68% (92/136) |
21% (431/2083) |
| 14 | S. Park [34] | 26 (90) | mean 63, SD 7 |
SCC | cT1 | cN0 25 (86) cN1 4 (14) |
MTE 17 (59) LTE 12 (41) |
Robot-assisted procedures | mean 55, SD 17 |
86% (25/29) |
NR |
Studies are shown in chronological order; SCC = squamous cell carcinoma; AC = adenocarcinoma; GEJ = gastroesophageal junction; CE = Cervical esophagus; UTE = Upper thoracic esophagus; MTE = middle thoracic esophagus; LTE = lower thoracic esophagus; NR = not reported; SD = standard deviation; IQR = interquartile range; * either pathological or clinical T and N-stage, based on what is reported in the paper.