Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

3D vs. 2D imaging in laparoscopic surgery—an advantage? Results of standardised black box training in laparoscopic surgery

  • RAPID COMMUNICATIONS
  • Published:
Langenbeck's Archives of Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

3D imaging is an upcoming technology in laparoscopic surgery, and recent studies have shown that the modern 3D technique is superior in an experimental setting.

Methods

All 14 members of the Asklepios Klinik Langen Department of Visceral and Thoracic Surgery, as well as two gynaecologists, were asked to undertake 2D vs. 3D laparoscopic black box skill training. The black box training was adapted to the “fundamentals of laparoscopic surgery” programme provided by the Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons (SAGES). First, the participants categorised themselves as beginner, advanced or expert in laparoscopic surgery. Then, they were randomised in terms of whether the black box training commenced with 2D or 3D vision. The exercises included peg transfer with the dominant hand and the non-dominant hand (with and without transfer between the graspers), needle capping and cutting a sutured knot. The time taken to complete these exercises was measured. After the training, each participant was asked to describe his/her personal impression of the imaging systems employed.

Results

Overall, for the participants in all groups, the time required for all exercises showed a significant advantage for 3D imaging (3D vs. 2D; Wilcoxon matched pair test; mean 68.0 ± 94.9 s (3D) vs. 90.1 ± 69.4 s (2D); p = 0.002). Regarding the subgroups, the experts significantly improved their time in completing the exercises in 3D vs. 2D by a margin of 25.8 % (mean 30.8 ± 20.1 s (3D) vs. 41.5 ± 25.0 s (2D); p = 0.010). In the group of advanced surgeons, the results were similar, showing an improvement of 23.6 % for 3D, but without significance (mean 61.5 ± 41.1 s (3D) vs. 80.4 ± 72.8 s (2D); p = 0.123). The results for the beginner group also showed an improvement in the 3D exercises of 24.8 %; here, the result also showed a trend towards 3D but did not reach significance (mean 93.9 ± 90.7 s (3D) vs. 124.8 ± 118.72 (2D); p = 0.062).

Conclusion

In our opinion, 3D imaging could be an advantage in laparoscopic surgery, especially in the surgical education of upcoming surgical generations. To determine whether these ex vivo results can be transferred to the clinical situation, our group has initiated a randomised controlled study.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

References

  1. Hanna GB, Shimi SM, Cuschieri A (1998) Randomised study of influence of two-dimensional versus three-dimensional imaging on performance of laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Lancet 351:248–251. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(97)08005-7

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Information IS (2012) FLS Manual Skills Written Instructions and Performance Guidelines Task One: Peg Transfer FLS Manual Skills Written Instructions and Performance Guidelines Task Two: Precision Cutting Task Three: Placement and Securing of Ligating Loop.

  3. Alaraimi B, El Bakbak W, Sarker S et al (2014) A randomized prospective study comparing acquisition of laparoscopic skills in three-dimensional (3D) vs. two-dimensional (2D) laparoscopy. World J Surg:2746–2752. doi:10.1007/s00268-014-2674-0

  4. Bagan P, De Dominicis F, Hernigou J et al (2015) Complete thoracoscopic lobectomy for cancer: comparative study of three-dimensional high-definition with two-dimensional high-definition video systems. Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg:1–4. doi:10.1093/icvts/ivv031

  5. Kinoshita H, Nakagawa K, Usui Y et al (2015) High-definition resolution three-dimensional imaging systems in laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: randomized comparative study with high-definition resolution two-dimensional systems. Surg Endosc 29:2203–2209. doi:10.1007/s00464-014-3925-8

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Smith R, Schwab K, Day A et al (2014) Effect of passive polarizing three-dimensional displays on surgical performance for experienced laparoscopic surgeons. Br J Surg 101:1453–1459. doi:10.1002/bjs.9601

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Currò G, La Malfa G, Caizzone A et al (2015) Three-dimensional (3D) versus two-dimensional (2D) laparoscopic bariatric surgery: a single-surgeon prospective randomized comparative study. Obes Surg:1–5. doi:10.1007/s11695-015-1674-y

  8. Wilhelm D, Reiser S, Kohn N et al (2014) Comparative evaluation of HD 2D/3D laparoscopic monitors and benchmarking to a theoretically ideal 3D pseudodisplay: even well-experienced laparoscopists perform better with 3D. Surg Endosc:2387–2397. doi:10.1007/s00464-014-3487-9

  9. Sakata S, Watson ÃMO, Grove ÃPM et al (2016) The conflicting evidence of three-dimensional displays in laparoscopy: a review of systems old and new. Ann Surg 263:234–239. doi:10.1097/SLA.0000000000001504

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Dagash H, Chowdhury M, Pierro A (2003) When can I be proficient in laparoscopic surgery? A systematic review of the evidence. J Pediatr Surg 38:720–724

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Harrysson IJ, Cook J, Sirimanna P et al (2014) Systematic review of learning curves for minimally invasive abdominal surgery: a review of the methodology of data collection, depiction of outcomes, and statistical analysis. Ann Surg 260:37–45. doi:10.1097/sla.0000000000000596

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Tanagho YS, Andriole GL, Paradis AG et al (2012) 2D versus 3D visualization: impact on laparoscopic proficiency using the fundamentals of laparoscopic surgery skill set. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech 22:121016060844000. doi:10.1089/lap.2012.0220

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Smith R, Day A, Rockall T et al (2012) Advanced stereoscopic projection technology significantly improves novice performance of minimally invasive surgical skills. Surg Endosc Other Interv Tech 26:1522–1527. doi:10.1007/s00464-011-2080-8

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Storz P, Buess GF, Kunert W, Kirschniak A (2012) 3D HD versus 2D HD: surgical task efficiency in standardised phantom tasks. Surg Endosc Other Interv Tech 26:1454–1460. doi:10.1007/s00464-011-2055-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Sørensen SMD, Savran MM, Konge L, Bjerrum F (2015) Three-dimensional versus two-dimensional vision in laparoscopy: a systematic review. Surg Endosc. doi:10.1007/s00464-015-4189-7

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors’ contributions

Buia, A., Stockhausen, F., Filmann, N. and Hanisch, E. solely contributed to this paper.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of General and Visceral Surgery, St. Elisabethen-Krankenhaus, Academic Teaching Hospital Goethe-University Frankfurt, Ginnheimer Str. 3, 60487, Frankfurt, Germany

    A. Buia

  2. Department of General and Visceral Surgery, St. Elisabethen-Krankenhaus, Academic Teaching Hospital Goethe-University Frankfurt, Frankfurt, Germany

    F. Stockhausen

  3. Department of Medicine, Institute of Biostatistics and Mathematical Modelling, Goethe-University Frankfurt, Frankfurt, Germany

    N. Filmann

  4. Department of Visceral and Thoracic Surgery, Asklepios Klinik Langen, Academic Teaching Hospital, Goethe-University Frankfurt, Langen, Germany

    E. Hanisch

Authors
  1. A. Buia
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. F. Stockhausen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. N. Filmann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. E. Hanisch
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to A. Buia.

Ethics declarations

Funding

None.

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

Conflicts of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Additional information

(Study Registration No. DRKS0005685 https://drks-neu.uniklinik-freiburg.de/drks_web/)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Buia, A., Stockhausen, F., Filmann, N. et al. 3D vs. 2D imaging in laparoscopic surgery—an advantage? Results of standardised black box training in laparoscopic surgery. Langenbecks Arch Surg 402, 167–171 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00423-016-1526-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00423-016-1526-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation