Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Two-dimensional (2-D) vs. three-dimensional (3-D) laparoscopic right hemicolectomy with intracorporeal anastomosis for colon cancer: comparison of short-term results

  • 2020 SAGES Oral
  • Published:
Surgical Endoscopy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

There are few reports comparing safety and efficacy of 2-D and 3-D video technology in laparoscopic right hemicolectomy. The aim of the study was to assess the short-term results of laparoscopic right hemicolectomy (LHR) with intracorporeal anastomosis with 2-D/3-D video in patients with right colon cancer.

Methods

Data from 239 patients undergoing LRH for cancer in a 14-year period (June 2005–January 2020) were prospectively collected. Surgical procedures were performed by two expert laparoscopic surgeons.

Results

One hundred and fourteen patients were included in the study: 55 (48.2%) operated with 2-D and 59 (51.8%) with 3-D video. Tumor site and postoperative stage distribution were similar. Mean operative time was comparable in the two groups (159.0 ± 48.8 min vs. 17.06 ± 36.0 min, p = ns, group 2-D and 3-D, respectively). Group 3-D patients had a similar percentage of associated procedures (44.1% vs. 29.1%, p = ns). Intraoperative complications were nil in both groups, while postoperative complications were similar (30.9% 2-D vs 25.4% 3-D, p = ns). The mean number of lymph nodes retrieved was similar in group 3-D (26.0 ± 14.6 vs. 22.9 ± 9.3, p = ns) and the length of stay was comparable in 3-D and 2-D patients (8.4 ± 2.6 vs. 9.1 ± 3.3 days, respectively, p = ns).

Conclusions

Laparoscopic 3-D vision is as equally effective as 2-D vision in LRH with intracorporeal anastomosis, with a similar proportion of associated procedures and number of lymph nodes retrieved in the same operative time. Further prospective larger randomized studies are necessary to verify if LRH with 3-D video can reduce postoperative complications, compared to 2-D video.

Graphic Abstract

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Clinical Outcomes of Surgical Therapy Study group (2004) A comparison of laparoscopically assisted and open colectomy for colon cancer. N Engl J Med 350:2050–2059

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Lacy AM, Garcia-Valdecasas JC, Delgado S, Castells A, Taurá P, Piqué JM, Visa J (2002) Laparoscopy-assisted colectomy versus open colectomy for treatment of non-metastatic colon cancer: a randomised trial. Lancet 359:2224–2229

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Lacy AM, Delgado S, Castells A, Prins HA, Arroyo V, Ibarzabal A, Piqué JM (2008) The long-term results of a randomized clinical trial of laparoscopic-assisted versus open surgery for colon cancer. Ann Surg 248:1–7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Colon Cancer Laparoscopic or Open Resection Study Group, Buunen M, Veldkamp R, Hop WC, Kuhry E, Jeekel J, Haglind E, Påhlman L, Cuesta MA, Msika S, Morino M, Lacy A, Bonjer HJ (2009) Survival after laparoscopic surgery versus open surgery for colon cancer: long-term outcome of a randomised clinical trial. Lancet Oncol 10:44–52

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Tao K, Liu X, Deng M, Shi W, Gao J (2016) Three-dimensional against 2-dimensional laparoscopic colectomy for right-sided colon cancer. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 26:324–327

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Currò G, Cogliandolo A, Bartolotta M, Navarra G (2016) Three-dimensional versus two-dimensional laparoscopic right hemicolectomy. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech 26:213–217

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Vettoretto N, Reggiani L, Cirocchi R, Henry BM, Covarelli P, D’Andrea V, Popivanov G, Randolph J (2018) Three-dimensional versus two-dimensional laparoscopic right colectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Colorectal Dis 33:1799–1801

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Yoon J, Kang SI, Kim MH, Kim MJ, Oh HK, Kim DW, Kang SB (2019) Comparison of short-term outcomes between 3D and 2D imaging laparoscopic colectomy with D3 lymphadenectomy for colon cancer. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech 29:340–345

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Zeng Q, Lei F, Gao Z, Wang Y, Gao QK (2017) Case-matched study of short-term effects of 3D vs 2D laparoscopic radical resection of rectal cancer. World J Surg Oncol 15:178

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Currò G, La Malfa G, Lazzara S, Caizzone A, Fortugno A, Navarra G (2015) Three-dimensional versus two-dimensional laparoscopic cholecystectomy: is surgeon experience relevant? J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech 25:566–570

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Currò G, La Malfa G, Caizzone A, Rampulla V, Navarra G (2015) Three-dimensional (3D) versus two-dimensional (2D) laparoscopic bariatric surgery: a single-surgeon prospective randomized comparative study. Obes Surg 25:2120–2124

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Agrusa A, di Buono G, Chianetta D, Sorce V, Citarella R, Galia M, Vernuccio L, Romano G, Gulotta G (2016) Three-dimensional (3D) versus two-dimensional (2D) laparoscopic adrenalectomy: a case-control study. Int J Surg 28:S114–117

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Anania G, Agresta F, Artioli E, Rubino S, Resta G, Vettoretto N, Petz WL, Bergamini C, Arezzo A, Valpiani G, Morotti C, Sileccha G, SICE CoDIG (Colon Dx Italian Group) (2019) Laparoscopic right hemicolectomy: the SICE (Società Italiana Chirurgia Endoscopica e Nuove Tecnologie) network prospective trial on 1225 cases comparing intra corporeal versus extra corporeal ileo-colic side-to-side anastomosis. Surg Endosc. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-019-07255-2

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Al-Homoud S, Purkayastha S, Aziz O, Smith JJ, Thompson MD, Darzi AW, Stamatakis JD, Tekkis PP (2004) Evaluating operative risk in colorectal cancer surgery: ASA and POSSUM-based predictive models. Surg Oncol 13:83–92

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Charlson M, Szatrowski TP, Peterson J, Gold J (1994) Validation of a combined comorbidity index. J Clin Epidemiol 47:1245–1251

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Frenkel WJ, Jongerius EJ, Mandjes-van Uitert MJ, van Munster BC, de Rooij SE (2014) Validation of the Charlson Comorbidity Index in acutely hospitalized elderly adults: a prospective cohort study. J Am Geriatr Soc 62:342–346

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Sørensen SM, Savran MM, Konge L, Bjerrum F (2016) Three-dimensional versus two-dimensional vision in laparoscopy: a systematic review. Surg Endosc 30:11–23

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Fergo C, Burcharth J, Pommergaard HC, Kildebro N, Rosenberg J (2017) Three-dimensional laparoscopy vs 2-dimensional laparoscopy with high-definition technology for abdominal surgery: a systematic review. Am J Surg 213:159–170

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Herron DM, Lantis JC, Maykel J, Basu C, Schwaitzberg SD (1999) The 3-D monitor and head-mounted display. A quantitative evaluation of advanced laparoscopic viewing technologies. Surg Endosc 13:751–755

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Mueller MD, Camartin C, Dreher E, Hänggi W (1999) Three-dimensional laparoscopy. Gadget or progress? A randomized trial on the efficacy of three-dimensional laparoscopy. Surg Endosc 13:469–472

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Usta TA, Ozkaynak A, Kovalak E, Ergul E, Naki MM, Kaya E (2015) An assessment of the new generation three-dimensional high definition laparoscopic vision system on surgical skills: a randomized prospective study. Surg Endosc 29:2305–2313

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Feng X, Morandi A, Boehne M, Imvised T, Ure BM, Kuebler JF, Lacher M (2015) 3-dimensional (3D) laparoscopy improves operating time in small spaces without impact on hemodynamics and psychomental stress parameters of the surgeon. Surg Endosc 29:1231–1239

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Vettoretto N, Foglia E, Ferrario L, Arezzo A, Cirocchi R, Cocorullo G, Currò G, Marchi D, Portale G, Gerardi C, Nocco U, Tringali M, Anania G, Piccoli M, Silecchia G, Morino M, Valeri A, Lettieri E (2018) Why laparoscopists may opt for three-dimensional view: a summary of the full HTA report on 3D versus 2D laparoscopy by SICE (Società Italiana di Chirurgia Endoscopica e Nuove Tecnologie). Surg Endosc 32:2986–2993

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Arezzo A, Vettoretto N, Francis NK, Bonino MA, Curtis NJ, Amparore D, Arolfo S, Barberio M, Boni L, Brodie R, Bouvy N, Cassinotti E, Carus T, Checcucci E, Custers P, Diana M, Jansen M, Jaspers J, Marom G, Mamose K, Müller-Stich BP, Nakajima K, Nickel F, Perretta S, Porpiglia F, Sanchez-Margallo F, Sánchez Margallo JA, Schijven M, Silecchia G, Passera R, Mintz Y (2019) The use of 3D laparoscopic imaging systems in surgery: EAES consensus development conference in 2018. Surg Endosc 33:3251–3274

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Le Voyer TE, Sigurdson ER, Hanlon AL, Mayer RJ, Macdonald JS, Catalano PJ, Haller DG (2003) Colon cancer survival is associated with increasing number of lymph nodes analyzed: a secondary survey of intergroup Trial INT-0089. J Clin Oncol 21:2912–2919

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of General Surgery, Azienda Euganea ULSS 6, Via Casa di Ricovero, 40, 35013, Cittadella, Italy

    Giuseppe Portale, Sabrina Pedon, Chiara Cipollari & Valentino Fiscon

  2. Department of Epidemiology, Azienda Euganea ULSS 6, Padua, Italy

    Luca Benacchio

Authors
  1. Giuseppe Portale
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sabrina Pedon
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Luca Benacchio
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Chiara Cipollari
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Valentino Fiscon
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Giuseppe Portale.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

Drs. G. Portale, S. Pedon, L. Benacchio, C. Cipollari and V. Fiscon have no conflict of interest or financial ties to disclose.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (DOCX 22 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Portale, G., Pedon, S., Benacchio, L. et al. Two-dimensional (2-D) vs. three-dimensional (3-D) laparoscopic right hemicolectomy with intracorporeal anastomosis for colon cancer: comparison of short-term results. Surg Endosc 35, 5279–5286 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-020-07977-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-020-07977-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation