ObjectiveTo systematically evaluate the influence of posterior mediastinal and retrosternal route on the incidence of complications in patients with esophageal carcinoma after esophagectomy. MethodsA systematic literature search for studies which were published on PubMed, EMbase, CBM, VIP was performed from database establishment to April 2014. We included randomized controlled trials and case control studies related to the influence of two routes on the incidence of complications of patients with esophagectomy. We assessed the methodology quality of included researches, and extracted data. RevMan 5.2 was used for meta-analysis. ResultsA total of 23 studies including 7 randomized controlled trials and 16 case control studies were included in this study. Meta-analysis showed that there was statistically significant difference in case control studies related to anastomotic leakage between two groups[OR=0.39, 95%CI (0.30, 0.50), P < 0.01]. However, no statistical difference in anastomotic stricture was observed between the two groups[randomized controlled trials:RR=0.80, 95%CI (0.49, 1.30), P=0.36; case control studies:OR=0.64, 95%CI (0.40, 1.03), P=0.07]. And there was no statistical difference in cardiac complications[randomized controlled trials:RR=0.70, 95%CI (0.46, 1.06), P=0.09; case control studies:OR=1.13, 95%CI (0.70, 1.81), P=0.62]. There was also no statistical difference in pulmonary complications[randomized controlled trials:RR=1.27, 95%CI(0.92, 1.75), P=0.14; case control studies:OR=0.91, 95%CI (0.66, 1.27), P=0.59]. Besides, there was also no statistical difference in postoperative mortality[randomized controlled trials:RR=0.47, 95%CI (0.19, 1.16), P=0.10; case control studies:OR=0.18, 95%CI (0.03, 1.01), P=0.05]. ConclusionFor patients with esophageal carcinoma undergoing esophagectomy and reconstruction, the incidence of anastomotic leakage was significantly lower with posterior mediastinal route than that of retrosternal route.