Pouch size influences clinical outcome of pouch construction after total gastrectomy: A meta-analysis

Table 1 Characteristics of included studies

Study	Reconstruction	Study period	Group	Pouch size (cm)	Cases	Age (yr)	Gender (M/F)	Tumor stage	Follow-up (yr)
Tsujimoto et al[6]	Double-tract	2002-2007	Small pouch	9.2 ± 1.1	13	54.6 ± 10.0	7/6	IA IB II IIIA	5.0
			Large pouch	12.5 ± 1.5	14	61.7 ± 8.2	12/2	4 3  3 3
								6 1  3 4
Hoksch et al[8]	Pouch-JI	1995-1999	Small pouch	7	15	52 (25-72)	6/9	0 IA IB II IIIA IIIB IV	1.0
			Large pouch	15	13	61 (51-74)	6/7	0 2 2 8 2 1 0
								1 2 5 3 1 1 0
Tanaka et al[9]	Double-tract	1992-1995	Small pouch	15	12	57.2 ± 11.09	7/5	I II III IV	1.0
			Large pouch	20	9	62.1 ± 9.44	6/3	4 3 5 0
								4 1 4 0
Tanaka et al[10]	Double-tract	1992-1994	Small pouch	15	9	56.4 ± 15	3/6	I II III IV	1.0
			Large pouch	20	9	62.1 ± 9.44	6/3	2 3 4 0
								4 1 4 0
Schwarz et al[11]	Pouch-JI	1990-1993	Small pouch	10	12	59 ± 3.1	9/3	I + II III + IV	0.5
			Large pouch	20	12	62 ± 3.59	4/8	6 6
								8 4
Schwarz et al[11]	Pouch-RY	1990-1993	Small pouch	10	12	63 ± 3.47	9/3	I + II III + IV	0.5
			Large pouch	20	12	65 ± 3.74	4/8	5 7
								4 8

JI: Jejunal interposition reconstruction; RY: Roux-en-Y reconstruction.