Skip to main content

Table 1 Characteristics of included studies

From: Is laminoplasty or laminectomy the best strategy for C3 segment in French-door laminoplasty? A systematic review and meta-analysis

Author(years) Country Study type Number of samples TG/MG Gender (male) TG/MG AgeTG/MG Follow-up (months) TG/MG Outcomes 
Kudo et al. (2020) [6] Japan Retrospective 24/11 17/7 56.3±8.5
56.6±9.6
120
120
1,2,8
Takeuchi et al. (2005) [8] Japan Prospective 38/18 27/11 63 (26-90)
59 (46-76)
17 (12-27)
30 (12-42)
3,4,9
Long et al. (2006) [9] China Retrospective 36/24 16/20 51 (44-83)
48 (42-81)
12
12
1,2,3,4
Wang et al. (2013) [10] China Retrospective 126/46 75/51 58±20
56±18
52±33
52±33
1,2,3,4,5,7,9
Ding et al. (2009) [11] China Retrospective 25/13 14/11 65.7 (45-83)
59.0 (46-75)
18 (12-27)
25 (12-50)
3,4,6,7,9
Wang et al. (2015) [12] China Prospective 113/39 67/46 58±20
56±18
52±33
52±33
1,2,3,4,5,7,9
Takeuchi et al. (2007) [13] Japan Retrospective 80/31 52/28 59.2±11.5
58.9±11.0
19.4±6.0
29.9±11.6
3,4,7
Nakajima et al. (2020) [14] Japan Retrospective 106/46 39/67 72.2±9.9
69.1±12.3
12
12
1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8
  1. Outcomes: 1. Operating time; 2. Blood loss; 3. Preoperative JOA score; 4 .Postoperative JOA score ;5. Recovery rate; 6. Cervical lordosis; 7. Intervertebral Range of Motion; 8. The presence of interlaminar bony fusion at C2–C3. MG : modified French-door laminoplasty group;  TG: traditional French-door group