Evaluation of the Impact of Three-Dimensional Vision on Laparoscopic Performance

Lusch, Achim; Bucur, Philip; Menhadji, Ashleigh; Okhunov, Zhamshid; Liss, Michael A.; Pérez-Lanzac, A.; McDougall, Elspeth M.; Landman, Jaime

doi:10.1089/end.2013.0344

Cited by 88 publications

(51 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…However, laparoscopic surgery is more difficult to learn and requires different psychomotor skills than open laparotomy. In fact, the surgeons have to work in a three-dimensional space, but are guided by twodimensional images [6]. The development of high definition cameras does not eliminate the major limitation of two-dimensional (2D) laparoscopy: lack of depth perception and lose of spatial orientation with potential increasing the strain for the surgeon, the risk of errors and the operative time.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Three-dimensional (3D) versus two-dimensional (2D) laparoscopic adrenalectomy: A case-control study

Agrusa

Buono

Chianetta

et al. 2016

International Journal of Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a b s t r a c tIntroduction: Laparoscopic adrenalectomy is today considered the gold standard of treatment for adrenal tumors. The development of high definition cameras does not eliminate the major limitation of twodimensional (2D) laparoscopy: lack of depth perception and loss of spatial orientation. Treedimensional (3D) HD laparoscopy was developed as an alternative to conventional 2D laparoscopy. Methods: We report our experience with use of 3D vision system for laparoscopic adrenalectomy. Between January 2009 and March 2015 we performed a total of 52 laparoscopic adrenalectomies. In this case-control study we considered 13 laparoscopic adrenalectomies performed with three-dimensional (3D) vision system as case group. The last 26 procedures made with two-dimensional (2D) HD laparoscopic system represented the control group. We considered primary end-points: operative time, intraoperative complications and conversion rate. We evaluated also quality of depth perception and surgical strain. Results: Although the operative time for the entire surgical procedure was shorter in 3D group, there were no significant differences. The surgeon experienced better depth perception with 3D system and subjectively reported less strain using 3D vision system. Residents and medical students confirmed these data on surgical outcome. Conclusion: 3D system vision does not seem to influence the operative time of laparoscopic adrenalectomy performed by experienced surgeon because the surgical technique request simple tasks. We obtain the better visualization in depth perception with effect on surgical precision. Comparative studies are necessary to verify if 3D can reduce perioperative complication with similar operative time.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Three-dimensional (3D) versus two-dimensional (2D) laparoscopic adrenalectomy: A case-control study

Agrusa

Buono

Chianetta

et al. 2016

International Journal of Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As a result, few studies have been reported suggesting overall a better surgical performance when using 3D systems during laparoscopic (nonrobotic) tasks in a preclinical setting (Table 3). [5][6][7][10][11][12][13][14] Findings from our study suggest that the use of 3D technology facilitates laparoscopic surgical performance of naïve surgeons during kidney procedures in a porcine model. Notably, this is the first study reported in urology using this type of preclinical in vivo model.…”

Section: Commentmentioning

confidence: 73%

Three-dimensional Technology Facilitates Surgical Performance of Novice Laparoscopy Surgeons: A Quantitative Assessment on a Porcine Kidney Model

Cicione

Autorino

Laguna

et al. 2015

Urology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Thus, laparoscopic hysterectomy was less preferred over the years. Previous studies did not reveal any significant benefits of laparoscopic hysterectomy when compared with VH; [7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25] however, most of these studies are outdated and as the TLH experience increases among gynecologists, the superiority of VH when compared with laparoscopic hysterectomy is slowly changing over time. [26] In a small sample size study conducted in Germany in 2007, it was observed that TLH takes longer compared with VH; however, it reduces the postoperative hospitalization duration and analgesic usage.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…[9,10] Therefore, surgeons lose perceptions of depth and spatial orientations and thus experience higher visual and cognitive loads. [11][12][13] To overcome few of the challenges associated with laparoscopy, 3D imaging was developed as an alternative to conventional 2D imaging. [13][14][15][16][17] Although 3D technology was introduced in the early 1990s, it is yet to be implemented as a standard procedure in hospitals.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…[18,19] Because of the previously experienced side effects while using 3D vision systems, i.e., a degraded viewing condition from poor image resolution, the requirement to wear uncomfortable glasses, and the system's high costs compared with 2D equipment, this technology may be less preferred. [10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20] The most important limitation of conventional laparoscopy is the lack of a sense of depth because of a 2D flat view of the surgical field. Surgeons are forced to rely on monocular vision to understand the 3D sense of open surgery; however, even the most experienced surgeons may face difficulties while performing complex surgical tasks such as tissue dissection and suturing under only 2D visualization.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Vaginal Hysterectomy Versus Two-dimensional and Three-Dimensional Total Laparoscopic Hysterectomy in Women With Benign Uterine Diseases

Bayramoglu

Tepe

2017

EJMO

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

H ysterectomy is the oldest and commonly performed gynecological procedure. [1] It is the second most frequent gynecological operation after the cesarean section. [2,3] Importantly, uterus removal (excluding malignancies) is performed because of fibroids, bleeding irregularities, endometrial hyperplasia or cervical dysplasia, endometriosis, and prolapse. [1] Hysterectomies have been traditionally performed by laparotomy or vaginally. However, with recent advances in technology, laparoscopic equipment, and training, hysterectomies are being increasingly performed by laparoscopy.[4] As a consequence, a reduction of 38% in abdominal hysterectomy was observed in Western countries, with an increase in laparoscopic and vaginal surgeries. [2,5] With the worldwide increase of laparoscopic procedures, it is necessary for gynecological surgeons to publish and share their techniques, successes, complications, and recommendations to avoid possible adverse outcomes. [4] In cases whereObjectives: This study aimed to compare the outcomes of vaginal hysterectomy (VH) and two-and three-dimensional total laparoscopic hysterectomy (2D TLH, 3D TLH) in women with benign uterine diseases. Methods: A retrospective, randomized study was conducted at the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Bagcilar Training and Research Hospital between 2010 and 2012. Overall, 99 women underwent VH, 68 underwent 2D TLH, and 41 underwent 3D TLH. Patients' ages, parities, uterine weights, pre-and postoperative hemoglobin (Hb) and hematocrit (Htc) values, operating times, complication rates, and hospitalization duration were compared. Results: A statistically significant difference was found among the groups in terms of patients' ages, parities, uterine weights, operating times, and hospitalization duration (p<0.05). Patients who underwent 3D TLH were younger and had lesser parities, greater uterine weights, and shorter operating times. The hospitalization duration was similar between the 2D and 3D TLH groups (average, 2 days; min, 1 day; and max, 8-10 days); however, it was shorter than the VH group (average, 3 days; min, 3 days; and max, 8 days). No statistically significant difference was observed among the groups in terms of the pre-and postoperative Hb/Htc values and complication rates (p>0.05). Conclusion: VH still remains the preferred procedure for patients with uterine prolapse and patients who require pelvic repair. 3D TLH offers quick operation with less complication rates and morbidity and reduces the hospitalization duration. Because of more favorable outcomes, we presume that 3D TLH may replace 2D TLH in the near future.

show abstract

Evaluation of the Impact of Three-Dimensional Vision on Laparoscopic Performance

Cited by 88 publications

References 12 publications

Three-dimensional (3D) versus two-dimensional (2D) laparoscopic adrenalectomy: A case-control study

Three-dimensional (3D) versus two-dimensional (2D) laparoscopic adrenalectomy: A case-control study

Three-dimensional Technology Facilitates Surgical Performance of Novice Laparoscopy Surgeons: A Quantitative Assessment on a Porcine Kidney Model

Vaginal Hysterectomy Versus Two-dimensional and Three-Dimensional Total Laparoscopic Hysterectomy in Women With Benign Uterine Diseases

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About