A randomized, controlled trial comparing the clinical outcomes of 3D versus 2D laparoscopic hysterectomy.

Abstract

Introduction:There have been a few clinical studies on the use of three-dimensional (3D) laparoscopy with different results. Aim: To compare the surgical outcomes of 3D versus two-dimensional (2D) laparoscopic hysterectomy for benign or premalignant gynecologic diseases. Material and methods: In this double-blind trial, 68 patients were randomly assigned to either the 3D or 2D groups at a 1 : 1 ratio. The only difference between the two groups was the laparoscopic vision system used. The primary outcome was operative blood loss and operative time. The other surgical outcomes including failure of the intended surgery, length of hospital stay, and operative complications were also assessed. Results: The baseline characteristics did not statistically significantly differ between the groups. The mean operative blood loss was not significantly different between the 3D group (74.4 ±51.6 ml) and the 2D group (79.2 ±55.4 ml) (p = 0.743). The operative time was similar in both groups (84.5 ±20.5 min vs. 87.8 ±24.4 min, p = 0.452). Moreover, no differences were observed between the groups in other surgical outcomes. Conclusions: The 3D imaging system had no surgical advantage in laparoscopic hysterectomy for benign or premalignant gynecologic diseases. However, 3D laparoscopy did not have any negative effects on surgical outcomes and did not increase the surgical risk.

Intraoperative and Postoperative Complications of Three Dimensional (3D) Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy

“…Additionally, anesthesia can affect the body's temperature regulation, leading to an increase in body temperature. Infections are also a significant cause of postoperative fever 13,14 . In this study postoperative fever was observed in 5(6.40%) cases.…”

Expanding Robotic-Assisted Surgery in Gynecology Using the Potential of an Advanced Robotic System

“…These drawbacks lie in the loss of depth perception when using a 2D endoscope, an unstable video camera when it is held manually, limited dexterity, counterintuitive and limited movement of LAP surgical instruments (due to the enforced fixation by the trocars and no deflection at the tip), the fulcrum effect, and very poor ergonomics for the surgeon and their assistants over extensive operation time [44,45]. Innovation in endoscopic systems such as high-resolution 3D cameras enabling better exposure and anatomical mapping of the operating space has recently further improved surgical performance during LAP [46][47][48]. Surgeons can now navigate anatomical structures with greater clarity, leading to improved outcomes and reduced operation times.…”

The Era of 4K Three-dimensional Imaging is Coming

“…[ 9 ] As early laparoscopic techniques relied on conventional two-dimensional (2D) imaging with limited depth perception, surgeons have to acquire different psychomotor skills as well as visuospatial competencies to work in a 3D abdominal space reflected in 2D images. [ 1 9 10 11 ] Attempts to address these concerns and to overcome the major drawback in the traditional 2D imaging system led to the development of 3D laparoscopy. [ 1 10 ]…”

“…[ 1 9 10 11 ] Attempts to address these concerns and to overcome the major drawback in the traditional 2D imaging system led to the development of 3D laparoscopy. [ 1 10 ]…”

“…It provided stronger monocular depth perception cues and seemed to have better surgical performance than the 2D HD representation. It was considered an alternative to the 3D system,[ 10 12 ] although a meta-analysis done by Singla et al . in 2021 concluded that 3D technology is likely to result in a shorter operative time and better efficiency of movement as compared to the 4K technology by the virtue of its better depth perception.…”