Search

Three-dimensional (3D) laparoscopy has advantages over two-dimensional (2D) in gastric cancer (GC) surgery, but there is still no comparative study of 3D versus 2D for delta-shaped anastomosis (DA). The objective of this study was to investigate the short-term and long-term efficacy and safety of 3D laparoscopy in distal gastrectomy with DA. We retrospectively analyzed the clinical data of 134 patients treated with 3D (n = 70) and 2D (n = 64) laparoscopic D2 lymphadenectomy for distal GC at the Shaoxing People's Hospital from 07/2016 to 03/2022. The effects on baseline, pathology, perioperative data (operative time, anastomosis time, operation blood loss, diameter, splenic injury, number of lymph nodes, time to first flatus, time to liquid diet, postoperative hospital days, and inpatient costs), complications, and 5-year follow-up were analyzed. The difference between the baseline (general information and postoperative pathology) of the two groups was not statistically significant (P > 0.05). The 3D group was associated with a shorter anastomosis time (15.76 min vs 17.89 min, P < 0.0001) but a similar operative time (175.70 vs 182.80 min, P = 0.1664). Shorter time to liquid diet (2.09 vs 2.47 days, P < 0.0001) and postoperative hospital days (7.56 vs 8.75 days, P < 0.0001) of 3D group were observed. The complications, 5-year follow-up overall survival and disease-free survival rates between the groups were not statistically significant. 3D laparoscopy is safe and effective with a faster procedure and recovery time. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Three-dimensional (3D) laparoscopy has several advantages in gastrointestinal surgery. This systematic review determined whether similar benefits exist for bariatric surgical procedures by systematically searching the MEDLINE, Embase, and Scopus databases. Six studies including 629 patients who underwent 2D (386) and 3D (243) laparoscopic bariatric surgeries were selected. Operative time was significantly shorter in patients undergoing 3D laparoscopic gastric bypass (pooled standardized mean difference [SMD] 1.19, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.22-0.15). Similarly, a shorter hospital stay was detected both during sleeve gastrectomy (SMD 0.42, 95% CI 0.70-0.13) and gastric bypass (SMD 0.39, 95% CI 0.64-0.14) with 3D laparoscopy. The study showed the potential benefit of 3D imaging in preventing intra- and postoperative complications. Despite the limited evidence, surgeons may benefit from 3D laparoscopy during bariatric surgery. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

ObjectiveComparing the specific advantages and surgical outcomes of each step in radical prostatectomy under 3D vs. 2D laparoscopy.MethodsFrom October 2019 to January 2023, our urology department treated 63 cases of prostate cancer, using an odd-even arrangement method to divide into two groups. This is a non-randomized prospective study, with 33 odd-numbered cases in the 3D group and 30 even-numbered cases in the 2D group. The surgery was divided into four steps: (1) establishing an extraperitoneal pneumoperitoneum (2) pelvic lymph node dissection (3)excising the prostate (4)bladder-urethral anastomosis, comparing the two groups in terms of surgical time, blood loss, and relevant postoperative indicators for each step.ResultsAll 63 surgeries were successfully completed without any conversions. Comparing 3D and 2D laparoscopy groups, there were statistically significant differences in total surgery time (123.5 ± 15.3 min vs. 145.6 ± 17.2 min, P 0.05). In terms of urinary incontinence rates, the 3D laparoscopy group was lower than the 2D group, and in terms of preserving erectile function, the 3D group was higher than the 2D group, with significant statistical differences (P 0.05).ConclusionCompared to traditional 2D laparoscopy, 3D laparoscopy can shorten the operation time and reduce bleeding in the steps of prostate excision and bladder-urethral anastomosis, but there was no significant difference in peri-operative outcomes.

Background: While laparoscopic gastrectomy is a prominent therapeutic approach for distal gastric cancer, the clinical benefits of 3D laparoscopy over 2D laparoscopy remain unclear. We aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of 3D laparoscopy and 2D laparoscopy for distal gastric cancer resection through a systematic review and meta-analysis. Methods: We searched PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases for studies published from inception through January 2023, according to the PRISMA guidelines. The MD or RR was used to compare 3D and 2D distal gastrectomy. Random-effects meta-analysis was estimated using the inverse variance and Mantel–Haenszel method for binary outcomes and the DerSimonian–Laird estimator for continuous outcomes. Results: After reviewing 559 studies, 6 manuscripts met the inclusion criteria. The analysis included 689 patients, with 348 (50.5%) in the 3D group and 341 (49.5%) in the 2D group. 3D laparoscopic gastrectomy reduces the operative time (WMD − 28.57 min, 95% CI − 50.70 to − 6.44, p = 0.011), intraoperative blood loss (WMD − 6.69 mL, 95% CI − 8.09 to − 5.29, p < 0.001), and postoperative hospital stay (WMD − 0.92 days, 95% CI − 1.43 to − 0.42, p < 0.001). There were no significant differences in time to first postoperative flatus (WMD − 0.22 days, 95% CI − 0.50 to 0.05, p = 0.110), postoperative complications (Relative Risk 0.56, 95% CI 0.22 to 1.41, p = 0.217), and the number of retrieved lymph nodes (WMD 1.25, 95% CI − 0.54 to 3.03, p = 0.172) between 3 and 2D laparoscopic distal gastrectomy. Conclusion: Our study highlights the potential advantages of 3D laparoscopy in distal gastrectomy, including shorter operative time, postoperative hospital stay, and decreased intraoperative blood loss. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background Vision is an essential element of laparoscopic surgery that defines the outcome of an operation in regards to time, mistakes and precision. A 3-dimensional (3D) perspective may improve vision during an operation. Therefore, this study was designed to compare 3D versus 2-dimensional (2D) perspectives using a pelvitrainer model. Methods Fifty candidates were divided into 3 categories based on different experience levels. The candidates were randomised into two groups, with each group performing the same 4 standardised tasks. Group A approached the tasks first with 3D high definition and in a second turn with 2D high definition. Group B carried out the tasks with the systems in reverse order. Task completion time and the number of mistakes made for each task were recorded. After completing the tasks, participants answered questions concerning the two systems. Results Group A was, on average, 20% faster at all four tasks and made approximately 18% fewer mistakes in two of the tasks in comparison to group B. The experts significantly benefited from the 3D system in terms of accuracy compared to non-experts and students. The students demonstrated a significantly greater benefit from the 3D system when performing non-linear, continuous movements. Loss of concentration occurred at the same rate for subjects using the 2D and 3D systems. Nausea and dizziness were reported only when working with the 3D system. 91% found the 3D system advantageous for accomplishing the tasks. Conclusions Irrespective of experience level, 3D laparoscopy shows advantages in saving time, increasing accuracy and reducing mistakes. These benefits were also accompanied by subjective advantages that were noted by the participants. However, the more complex the task, the less significant the benefit of the 3D system and some people feel handicapped by the eyewear.

Background and AimsPublished studies repeatedly demonstrate an advantage of three-dimensional (3D) laparoscopic surgery over two-dimensional (2D) systems but with quite heterogeneous results. This raises the question whether clinics must replace 2D technologies to ensure effective training of future surgeons.MethodsWe recruited 45 students with no experience in laparoscopic surgery and comparable characteristics in terms of vision and frequency of video game usage. The students were randomly allocated to 3D (n = 23) or 2D (n = 22) groups and performed 10 runs of a laparoscopic “peg transfer” task in the Luebeck Toolbox. A repeated-measures ANOVA for operation times and a generalized linear mixed model for error rates were calculated. The main effects of laparoscopic condition and run, as well as the interaction term between the two, were examined.ResultsNo statistically significant differences in operation times and error rates were observed between 2D and 3D groups (p = 0.10 and p = 0.72, respectively). The learning curve showed a significant reduction in operation time and error rates (both p's < 0.001). No significant interactions between group and run were detected (operation time: p = 0.342, error rates: p = 0.83). With respect to both endpoints studied, the learning curves reached their plateau at the 7th run.ConclusionThe result of our study with laparoscopic novices revealed no significant difference between 2D and 3D technology with respect to performance time and the error rate in a simple standardized test. In the future, surgeons may thus still be trained in both techniques.

Background: Three-dimensional (3D) visual displays have been suggested to aid laparoscopic skills training by providing the depth cues not present in traditional two-dimensional (2D) displays. However, few studies have robustly investigated the impact of viewing mode (2D vs. 3D) on learning outcomes. Purpose: To examine how viewing mode (2D vs. 3D) impacts the acquisition and transferability of basic laparoscopic skills by comparing performance between transfer and control groups on a complete proficiency-based training program. Method: A counterbalanced between-subjects design was employed. Each participant was randomly allocated to one of four groups, comprising two transfer groups (trained in one viewing mode and tested in the alternate mode: the 2D → 3D and 3D → 2D groups) and two control groups (trained and tested in one viewing mode: the 2D → 2D and 3D → 3D groups). Participants completed proficiency-based training in six laparoscopic training tasks. Testing included two further repetitions of all tasks under test conditions. Objective performance measures included the total number of repetitions to reach proficiency, and total performance scores (i.e. time + error penalties across all repetitions) in training and testing. Results: The groups trained in 3D demonstrated superior training performance (i.e. less time + errors) and took fewer repetitions to reach proficiency than the groups trained in 2D. The groups tested in 3D also demonstrated superior test performance compared to those tested in 2D. However, training mode did not yield significant test differences between the groups tested in 2D (i.e. 2D → 2D vs. 3D → 2D), or between the groups tested in 3D (i.e. 3D → 3D vs. 2D → 3D). Conclusion: Novices demonstrate superior performance in laparoscopic skills training using a 3D viewing mode compared to 2D. However, this does not necessarily translate to superior performance in subsequent testing or enhanced learning overall. Rather, test performance appears to be dictated by the viewing mode used during testing, not that of prior training. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Laparoscopy is the standard technique for resecting adrenal tumors worldwide. The main drawbacks of conventional 2D laparoscopy are limited depth perception and tactile feedback. Currently available high-quality 3D laparoscopy systems might improve surgical outcomes for adrenalectomy. We compare the safety and efficacy of 3D versus 2D laparoscopy in the treatment of adrenal tumors. Methods: This case-control study analyzed prospectively collected data from patients with benign or malignant adrenal tumors treated laparoscopically at a single academic medical center between April 2003 and March 2020. We collected demographic, diagnostic, preoperative, and operative variables, and used multiple linear and logistic regression to analyze differences in various short-term outcomes between the two approaches while adjusting for potential confounders. Results: We included 150 patients: 128 with benign tumors and 22 with malignant tumors; 95 treated with 3D laparoscopy (case group); and 55 with 2D laparoscopy (control group). After adjustment for patient, surgical, and tumor characteristics, a 2D vision was associated with a longer operative time (β = 0.26, p = 0.002) and greater blood loss (β = 0.20, p = 0.047). There was no significant difference in rates of conversion to open surgery (odds ratio [OR] = 1.47 (95% CI 0.90–22.31); p = 0.549) or complications (3.6% vs. 2.1%; p = 0.624). Conclusions: With experienced surgeons, laparoscopic adrenalectomy was safer and more feasible with the 3D system than with the 2D system, resulting in less operative blood loss and shorter operative time with no differences in rates of conversion to open surgery or postoperative complications. For adrenal tumors, 3D laparoscopy offers advantages over 2D laparoscopy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: This study investigated the oncological and technical advantages of three-dimensional (3D) versus two-dimensional (2D) laparoscopic gastric cancer surgery. Materials and Methods: This study included 68 gastric cancer patients who had undergone laparoscopic distal gastrectomy at Korea University Ansan Hospital (3D group, n = 34; 2D group, n = 34). The surgical outcomes and duration of each phase were compared between the groups. Results: The total operative time with 3D laparoscopy was significantly shorter than with 2D laparoscopy (227.8 ± 39.0 versus 249.6 ± 45.3 minutes; P = .037). There were no significant differences between the groups in the number of gauze pads used, time to first postoperative flatus, and number of harvested lymph nodes (2.0 [1.0-2.0] versus 2.0 [1.0-2.0]; P = .692; 4.0 [4.0-4.0] versus 4.0 [4.0-4.0] days; P = .196; 40.8 ± 16.6 versus 44.0 ± 15.7; P = .412, respectively). The time from omentectomy to right gastric artery ligation and the duration of the reconstruction phase were shorter with 3D than with 2D laparoscopy (62.6 ± 14.5 versus 71.9 ± 18.8 minutes; P = .027; 32.3 ± 7.6 versus 47.7 ± 16.8 minutes; P < .001). Conclusion: In a procedure requiring spatial perception, the operative time was shortened by introducing 3D laparoscopy. Despite the anticipation of a better view for lymph node dissection, the 3D image showed no advantage. Further study may be required by novice surgeons. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Recently to improve depth perception, the performance of three-dimensional (3D) laparoscopic surgeries has increased. However, the effects of laparoscopic training using 3D are still unclear. This study aimed to clarify the effects of using a 3D monitor among novices in the early phase of training.Methods: Participants were 40 novices who had never performed laparoscopic surgery (20 medical students and 20 junior residents). Three laparoscopic phantom tasks (task 1: touching markers on a flat disk with a rod; task 2: straight rod transfer through a single loop; and task 3: curved rod transfer through two loops) in the training box were performed ten times, respectively. Performances were recorded by an optical position tracker. The participants were randomly divided into two groups: one group performed each task five times initially under a 2D system (2D start group), and the other group performed each task five times under a 3D system (3D start group). Both groups then performed the same task five times. After the trial, we evaluated the performance scores (operative time, path length of forceps, and technical errors) and the learning curves for both groups.Results: Scores for all tasks performed under the 3D system were significantly better than scores for tasks using the 2D system. Scores for each task in the 2D start group improved after switching to the 3D system. However, scores for each task in the 3D start group were worse after switching to the 2D system, especially scores related to technical errors.Conclusions: The stereoscopic vision improved laparoscopic surgical techniques of novices from the early phase of training. However, the performance of novices trained only by 3D worsened by changing to the 2D environment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Introduction of three-dimensional (3D) display might remove technical obstacles of laparoscopic surgery and improve laparoscopic skills. We analyzed the effect of 3D technology on operative performance during laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG) for gastric cancer and assessed its advantages over two-dimensional (2D) laparoscopy. Methods: This study included 30 consecutive surgeries of LTG with esophagojejunostomy by the overlap method performed (3D group, n = 15, 2D group, n = 15). The surgical outcomes were compared between the 3D and 2D groups. Further, we compared the performance time, the frequency of bleeding requiring hemostasis, and the frequency of remaking the surgical view by the assistant's forceps in each laparoscopic scene between the 3D and 2D groups. Results: All surgeries were completed without any complications. The total time of pure laparoscopic scenes was shorter in the 3D than 2D group (154.2 vs. 182.7 min, P = 0.026), and total blood loss was almost the same (10 vs. 20 g, P = 0.195). The operative time during lymphadenectomy in scenes 6 and 7 were significantly shorter in the 3D than the 2D group (scene 6, 13.5 vs. 17.5 min, P = 0.003, and scene 7, 12.4 vs. 18.4, P = 0.025) and esophagojejunostomy (30.3 vs. 39.4 min, P = 0.008). The frequency of tissue exposure by the assistant was significantly less in the 3D group than the 2D group in scenes 6 and 7 (scene 6, n = 3.0 vs. 4.0, P = 0.006, and scene 7, n = 3.0 vs. 4.0, P = 0.017). Conclusions: 3D display is useful due to improvement of surgical skill during difficult situations such as lymphadenectomy around the celiac artery, which requires handling in the tangential view, and reconstruction using the suturing technique in a narrow space. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: To address the issue whether three-dimensional (3D) offers real operative time advantages to the laparoscopic surgical procedure, we have designed a single-surgeon prospective randomized comparison of 3D versus two-dimensional (2D) imaging during two different bariatric procedures. Methods: Forty morbidly obese patients were randomized on the day of surgery by a random computer-generated allocation list to receive either a 3D high-definition (HD) display or 2D HD imaging system laparoscopic bariatric procedure by a single experienced surgeon. Forty operations were performed with either a 3D HD display or 2D HD imaging system. After the insertion of the access ports, both surgical procedures were divided in component tasks, and the execution times were compared. Results: The execution times for the entire procedure and the single tasks were not significantly different between the 2D and 3D groups during sleeve gastrectomy. The execution times for the entire procedure and the single tasks, except for the first one, were significantly different between the 2D and 3D groups during mini-gastric bypass ( p < 0.05). The surgeon experienced better depth perception with the 3D system and subjectively reported less strain using 3D vision system rather than the 2D system particularly during longer procedure. Conclusions: 3D imaging seems to decrease the performance time of more difficult bariatric procedures, which involve surgical tasks as suturing and intestinal measurement. Further comparative studies are necessary to address the issue if novice surgeons could benefit from reduced learning curve requested with 3D vision and to verify with greater numbers if 3D imaging can reduce complications. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Vision is an essential element of laparoscopic surgery that defines the outcome of an operation in regards to time, mistakes and precision. A 3-dimensional (3D) perspective may improve vision during an operation. Therefore, this study was designed to compare 3D versus 2-dimensional (2D) perspectives using a pelvitrainer model.Methods: Fifty candidates were divided into 3 categories based on different experience levels. The candidates were randomised into two groups, with each group performing the same 4 standardised tasks. Group A approached the tasks first with 3D high definition and in a second turn with 2D high definition. Group B carried out the tasks with the systems in reverse order. Task completion time and the number of mistakes made for each task were recorded. After completing the tasks, participants answered questions concerning the two systems.Results: Group A was, on average, 20% faster at all four tasks and made approximately 18% fewer mistakes in two of the tasks in comparison to group B. The experts significantly benefited from the 3D system in terms of accuracy compared to non-experts and students. The students demonstrated a significantly greater benefit from the 3D system when performing non-linear, continuous movements. Loss of concentration occurred at the same rate for subjects using the 2D and 3D systems. Nausea and dizziness were reported only when working with the 3D system. 91% found the 3D system advantageous for accomplishing the tasks.Conclusions: Irrespective of experience level, 3D laparoscopy shows advantages in saving time, increasing accuracy and reducing mistakes. These benefits were also accompanied by subjective advantages that were noted by the participants. However, the more complex the task, the less significant the benefit of the 3D system and some people feel handicapped by the eyewear. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Since it's introduction, laparoscopic surgery represented a real revolution in clinical practice. The use of a new generation three-dimensional (3D) HD laparoscopic system can be considered a favorable "hybrid" made by combining two different elements: feasibility and diffusion of laparoscopy and improved quality of vision. In this study we report our clinical experience with use of three-dimensional (3D) HD vision system for laparoscopic surgery. Between 2013 and 2017 a prospective cohort study was conducted at the University Hospital of Palermo. We considered 163 patients underwent to laparoscopic three-dimensional (3D) HD surgery for various indications. This 3D-group was compared to a retrospective-prospective control group of patients who underwent the same surgical procedures. Considerating specific surgical procedures there is no significant difference in term of age and gender. The analysis of all the groups of diseases shows that the laparoscopic procedures performed with 3D technology have a shorter mean operative time than comparable 2D procedures when we consider surgery that require complex tasks. The use of 3D laparoscopic technology is an extraordinary innovation in clinical practice, but the instrumentation is still not widespread. Precisely for this reason the studies in literature are few and mainly limited to the evaluation of the surgical skills to the simulator. This study aims to evaluate the actual benefits of the 3D laparoscopic system integrating it in clinical practice. The three-dimensional view allows advanced performance in particular conditions, such as small and deep spaces and promotes performing complex surgical laparoscopic procedures., Competing Interests: CONFLICTS OF INTEREST The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Introduction: 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 two-dimensional (2D) laparoscopy: lack of depth perception and loss of spatial orientation. Tree-dimensional (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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Objective: Progress in endoscopic surgery in the past few decades has led to the application of 3-dimensional (3D) procedures in operating rooms. This permits patient- and surgeon-friendly operations and also maximizes the superiority of laparoscopy over laparotomy. In this study, we compare 2-dimensional (2D) and 3D endoscopy techniques with regard to time, efficiency, optics, and handling by users with different degrees of experience at 4 difficulty levels., Design: A randomized controlled trial on a pelvitrainer in objectively graded surgical steps for students and postgraduates., Setting: The trials took place at the Kiel School of Gynaecological Endoscopy, a training unit of the Kiel University Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, a tertiary academic medical center., Participants: The 277 study participants, divided into students, residents, and specialists, worked on pelvitrainers with 2 different optical systems, the 2D full HD and the 3D mode. The following 4 exercises were performed with each optical system: (1) grasping and transferring of pins, (2) cutting predetermined marks, (3) vaginal closure with prevention of prolapse, and (4) sacrocolpopexy. The duration and success of the tasks were measured and compared. A self-assessment questionnaire was completed by the participants., Results: Overall, the 3D-system permitted a greater improvement in working speed, superior optical visualization, and better endoscopic handling in all groups, independent of surgical experience. All students improved in speed (exercises: 1-3) and made significantly fewer mistakes (exercise 2) on 3D compared with 2D. Residents made progress in time (exercises: 1-4) and task performance (exercise 3). Specialists improved significantly in the more challenging tasks 3 and 4. Subjectively, 68.8% of participants preferred 3D for performing laparoscopy., Conclusion: Systematic training programs on pelvitrainers can improve endoscopic skills not only in beginners but also in experienced surgeons. The 3D system offered distinct advantages over 2D imaging and was well accepted by surgeons., (Copyright © 2017 Association of Program Directors in Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)