Transverse Skin Crease versus Vertical Midline Incision versus Laparoscopy for Right Hemicolectomy: A Systematic Review—Current Status of Right Hemicolectomy

Table 5

Length of the specimen (LS), tumor size (TS) (cm), and number of harvested lymph nodes (𝑁).

Study	Outcome (𝑝)	ORHM^1	ORHT^2	LRH^3	TLRH^4
Stipa et al. [33]	LS; TS	NR^5	NR
	𝑁	NR	NR
Lindgren et al. [34]	LS; TS	NR	NR
	𝑁	NR	NR
Brown et al. [35]	LS & TS	NR	NR
	𝑁 (NS)	10 (3–21)^6	11 (6–19)
Lohsiriwat et al. [36]	TS		6.1±2.6^7	5.7±2.7
	𝑁		18.8±10.8 (7–47)^7	29.2±18.1 (5−66)
Tan et al. [37]	TS: ORH^8 versus LRH (0.06)	ORH: ∅ 4.35^9; TS length 4.35^9		Ø 3.9; TS length 4.2
	𝑁: ORH versus LRH (0.174)	ORH 15^9		18
Veenhof et al. [38]	LS (0.09)		LS6 22 (17–26)^10		LS 26 (22–32)
	TS (0.13)		TS 4 (3.4–5)^10		TS 5 (3.3–6)
	𝑁 (0.49)		14 (8–19)^10		15 (12–19)
Tanis et al. [39]	LS: ORHM versus LRH (0.06)	LS 26 (17–44)^6	LS 25 (19–43)	LS 22 (8–40)
	𝑁: ORHM versus LRH (0.63)	13.5 (2–38)^6	13 (5–36)	15 (1–28)

1Open right hemicolectomy median incision.
2Open right hemicolectomy transverse incision.
3LRH laparoscopic assisted right hemicolectomy.
4TLRH totally laparoscopic right hemicolectomy.
5Not reported.
6Median (range).
7Mean ± SD (standard deviation).
8Open right hemicolectomy.
9Mean.
10Median (IQR: interquartile range).