A laparoscopic study investigating 3D vs 2D imaging systems using a pelvitrainer model with experts, non-experts, and students

• Published in: BMC surgery 2020-11, Vol.20 (1), p.276-276, Article 276
• Main Authors: Zwimpfer, Tibor Andrea, Lacher, Dominik, Fellmann-Fischer, Bernhard, Mueller, Michael
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: 2D laparoscopy; 3D laparoscopy; Cameras; Clinical Competence; Completion time; Errors; Eyewear; High definition; Humans; Image processing equipment; Imaging systems; Imaging, Three-Dimensional; Investigations; Laparoscopy; Laparoscopy - education; Medical students; Nausea; Pelvitrainer; Questionnaires; Random Allocation; Standardised tasks; Students; Surgeons; Surgery; Two dimensional models; Urology - education; Vision
• ISSN: 1471-2482; 1471-2482
• DOI: 10.1186/s12893-020-00892-8

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. 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. 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. 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.