Cap-assisted endoscopy for esophageal foreign bodies: A meta-analysis

Table 1 Characteristics of the included studies

Ref.	Study type	Location	# of patients	Male %	Mean age conventional endoscopy	Mean age cap-assisted endoscopy	Type of FBs
Ooi et al[12], 2021	RCT	Australia	342	70.5	53.6 ± 14.7	54.7 ± 15.2	Food bolus
Fang et al[4], 2020	Retrospective Cohort	China	448	55.4	62.4 ± 18.2	62.8 ± 16.7	Jujube pit, fish bones, poultry bones, food bolus, other sharp objects
Wahba et al[15], 2019	Prospective Cohort	Egypt	216	46.2	52.9	51.7	Food bolus
Ooi et al[16], 2018	Retrospective Cohort	Australia	199	69.8	60.8 ± 19.8	57.5 ± 20.2	Food bolus
Zhang et al[19], 2013	RCT	China	70	58.6	48.9 (23-74)	47.6 (19-73)	Fish bone, chicken bones
Zhang et al[14], 2010	Retrospective cohort	China	30	NA	NA	NA	Fish bone, jujube pit, food bolus, coin or metal

RCT: Randomised controlled trial; FB: Foreign body; NA: Not available.

Table 2 Quality assessment using cochrane risk of bias tool for non-randomized studies

Non-randomized studies
Ref.	Confounding	Selection of participants	Classification of interventions	Deviation from interventions	Missing outcome data	Measurement of outcome	Selection of reported results	Overall
Zhang et al[14], 2010	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	Low
Ooi et al[16], 2018	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	Low
Wahba et al[15], 2019	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	Low
Fang et al[4], 2020	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	Low

Risk of bias assessment: 0: No information; 1: Low; 2: Moderate; 3: Serious; 4: Critical.

Table 3 Quality assessment using cochrane risk of bias tool for randomized studies

Randomized controlled trials
Ref.	Random sequence generation	Allocation concealment	Blinding	Blinding outcome assessment	Incomplete outcome data	Selective reporting	Other bias
Zhang et al[19], 2013	Unclear	Unclear	Unclear	Unclear	Low	Low	Low
Ooi et al[12], 2021	Low	Low	High	Unclear	Low	Low	low

Risk of bias assessment: 0: No information; 1: Low; 2: Moderate; 3: Serious; 4: Critical.