Table 2.
Characteristics of cohort studies on the comparison between endoscopic resection and laparoscopic and endoscopic cooperative surgery
| Author | Year | Country | Design | Gender (n) | Age (years) | Tumor diameter (cm) | ER (n) | LECS (n) | Comparison | Quality ∗ |
| Balde et al[38] | 2017 | China | Retrospective cohort | M/F: 28/32 | Mean 49.0 | <2.0 | 30 | 30 | Operation timeBlood lossLOHSHospitalization costPositive margins | 9 |
| Yin et al[20] | 2018 | China | Retrospective cohort | M/F: 42/49 | Mean 57.6 | <5.0 | 46 | 15 | Operation timeLOHSBlood lossPositive marginsComplicationsRecurrence | 7 |
| Ojima et al[32] | 2018 | Japan | Retrospective cohort | M/F: 19/27 | ER: 64LECS:73 | ER: 2.3LECS: 2.5 | 25 | 21 | Operation timeBlood lossComplicationsRecurrence | 8 |
∗
‘star system’ of the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. ER: Endoscopic resection; F: Female; LECS: Laparoscopic and endoscopic cooperative surgery; LOHS: Length of hospital stay; M: Male.