Prospective randomized comparison of three‐dimensional (3D) versus conventional laparoscopy in total colectomy for ulcerative colitis

Abstract

Background3D laparoscopy has been proposed with the aim of improving the depth perception and overall operative performance. To aim of this study is to compare 3D laparoscopy with conventional 2D laparoscopy in terms of operative time and visual parameters.MethodsThis is a prospective, randomized, single‐center trial designed to determine 10% reduction in the mean operative time. Ulcerative colitis patients >18 years of age who underwent laparoscopic total abdominal colectomy with end ileostomy between 2015 and 2020 were included. Patients were randomized into 3D and 2D laparoscopy groups. Duration of operation and surgeons' evaluation of the visualization system were the primary outcomes.ResultsFifty‐three subjects (26 in 2D, 27 in 3D group) were included in the analysis, with 56% being male. Mean age and body mass index were 40 (16.3) years and 23.5 (4.7) kg/m2, respectively. Twenty‐five subjects underwent single port laparoscopic surgery, of whom 13 were in 3D and 12 in 2D group. Mean operative time was 75.3 (30.8) versus 82.7 (38.6) minutes (P = 0.4) for 3D and 2D groups, respectively. Operative times spent for individual steps were comparable. Post‐operative minor complications (8 in 3D versus 8 in 2D, P = 1) and median number of times for scope maintenance were also similar between the groups. 69% of the visual evaluation survey results favoured 3D over 2D (P = 0.014).ConclusionThree‐dimensional laparoscopy for total colectomy in ulcerative colitis patients is safe and feasible option providing better visualization with no difference in operative time.