Table 1.

Studies included in the meta-analysis for assessment of outcomes for PN versus RN for cT1b and higher renal tumours.

Study	Study period	Study design	Study origin	T stage	PN/RN cases (n)	PN/RN median FU (month)	Surgical technique	SQ
Lee et al., 2017 [32]	1994–2014	RTP, MI, PM	South Korea	T1b and T2	317/841	46	NS	8
Roos et al., 2011 and 2012 [19,20]a	1988–2007	RTP, SC, PM	Germany	T1b and T2	101/146	52.8/79.2	Open	7
Antonelli et al., 2012 [25]	1995–2007	RTP, MI,	Italy	T1b	198/1426	47	Open	6
Cai et al., 2018 [26]	2005–2012	RTP, SC	China	T1b	39/160	67/70	Lap	8
Dash et al., 2006 [27]	1998–2004	RTP, SC	USA	T1b	45/151	21	Open	7
Jang et al., 2016 [30]	1999–2011	RTP, MI, PM	Korea	T1b	100/100	42.6/48.1	Open	8
Milonas et al., 2013 [33]	1998–2009	RTP, SC	Lithuania	T1b	34/317	74.76/77.28b	Open	7
Thompson et al., 2009 [34]	1989–2006	RTP, MI	USA	T1b	286/873	57.6	Open/lap	6
Weight et al., 2010 [22]	1999–2006	RTP, SC	USA	T1b	524/480	50/46	Open/lap	6
Deklaj et al., 2010 [28]	2002–2008	RTP, SC	USA	T1b	33/52	15/21	Lap	7
Weight et al., 2010 [21]	1999–2006	RTP, SC	USA	T1b	212/298	49/41	Open/lap	6
Iizuka et al., 2012 [29]	1979–2011	RTP, SC	Japan	T1b	67/195	22.4/71.1	Open	7
Kim et al., 2010 [31]	1995–2004	RTP, SC	Korea	T1b	18/52	78.2/66.5b	Open	7

PN, partial nephrectomy; RN, radical nephrectomy; FU, follow-up; SQ, study quality according to the Newcastle–Ottawa Scale; RTP, retrospective; SC, single-centre; MI, multi-institutional; PM, pair-matched; NS, not specified; lap, laparoscopic.

^aThese groups reported two separate analyses for the same dataset.

^bMean.