Performance differences in laparoscopic surgical skills between true high-definition and three-chip CCD video systems

Abstract

Background

Laparoscopic surgery requires surgeons to rely on visual clues for discrimination among differing tissues and for depth of field on a two-dimensional screen. High definition (HD) provides a superior image. If there is a measurable advantage with HD television (TV), the increase in the cost of the technology would be justified.

Methods

A digital three-chip CCD camera with a standard monitor (SD system) and a true HD camera (1,080 pixels) with a 16:9-ratio HD monitor (HD system) were compared in clinical and laboratory settings. Three experiments were performed: (1) subjective visual evaluation of the HD and SD systems during actual surgical cases, (2) subjective visual evaluation in a controlled laboratory surgical setting with simultaneous parallel recording, and (3) three laparoscopic surgical task evaluations in a laboratory setting, namely, task A (metric analysis of participants on the surgical simulator), task B (simple eye–hand coordination performance), and task C (knot tying).

Results

All 53 participants subjectively evaluated HD as superior to SD in the laboratory setting and during actual surgery. In task B, there was no significant difference between SD and HD (dominant hand: p = 0.19; nondominant hand: p = 0.07). In task C, the knot-tying time was significantly less when performed with HD (mean, 173 ± 84 s vs 214 ± 107 s; p = 0.003). Most importantly, subjects with less skill (more documented time required in the basic module on a surgical simulator) improved significantly in the knot-tying task with the HD system (R = 0.631; p = 0.005).

Conclusion

All the participants preferred HD to SD. High definition significantly improved laparoscopic knot tying, which requires precise depth perception, proving that HD is more than just a pretty picture.