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