Literature DB >> 10604615

Three-dimensional (3-D) video systems: bi-channel or single-channel optics?

P van Bergen1, W Kunert, G F Buess.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: This paper presents the results of a comparison between two different three-dimensional (3-D) video systems, one with single-channel optics, the other with bi-channel optics. The latter integrates two lens systems, each transferring one half of the stereoscopic image; the former uses only one lens system, similar to a two-dimensional (2-D) endoscope, which transfers the complete stereoscopic picture.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: In our training centre for minimally invasive surgery, surgeons were involved in basic and advanced laparoscopic courses using both a 2-D system and the two 3-D video systems. They completed analog scale questionnaires in order to record a subjective impression of the relative convenience of operating in 2-D and 3-D vision, and to identify perceived deficiencies in the 3-D system. As an objective test, different experimental tasks were developed, in order to measure performance times and to count pre-defined errors made while using the two 3-D video systems and the 2-D system. RESULTS AND
CONCLUSION: Using the bi-channel optical system, the surgeon has a heightened spatial perception, and can work faster and more safely than with a single-channel system. However, single-channel optics allow the use of an angulated endoscope, and the free rotation of the optics relative to the camera, which is necessary for some operative applications.

Mesh:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10604615     DOI: 10.1055/s-1999-80

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Endoscopy        ISSN: 0013-726X            Impact factor:   10.093


  8 in total

1.  [Comparative study of spatial imaging techniques in stereo-endoscopy].

Authors:  U D A Müller-Richter; A Limberger; P Weber; M Schilling
Journal:  Mund Kiefer Gesichtschir       Date:  2003-05-01

Review 2.  Possibilities and limitations of current stereo-endoscopy.

Authors:  U D A Mueller-Richter; A Limberger; P Weber; K W Ruprecht; W Spitzer; M Schilling
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2004-04-27       Impact factor: 4.584

3.  Advantages of advanced laparoscopic systems.

Authors:  J Heemskerk; R Zandbergen; J G Maessen; J W M Greve; N D Bouvy
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2006-03-09       Impact factor: 4.584

4.  Telesurgery: windows of opportunity.

Authors:  Sulbha Arora; Gautam N Allahbadia
Journal:  Int J Health Sci (Qassim)       Date:  2007-01

5.  3D presentation in surgery: a review of technology and adverse effects.

Authors:  Tianqi Wang; Bin Zheng
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2018-12-15

6.  Comparative evaluation of HD 2D/3D laparoscopic monitors and benchmarking to a theoretically ideal 3D pseudodisplay: even well-experienced laparoscopists perform better with 3D.

Authors:  D Wilhelm; S Reiser; N Kohn; M Witte; U Leiner; L Mühlbach; D Ruschin; W Reiner; H Feussner
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2014-03-21       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 7.  Evolution of stereoscopic imaging in surgery and recent advances.

Authors:  Katie Schwab; Ralph Smith; Vanessa Brown; Martin Whyte; Iain Jourdan
Journal:  World J Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2017-08-16

8.  A retrospective single-center study comparing clinical outcomes of 3-dimensional and 2-dimensional laparoscopic cholecystectomy in acute cholecystitis.

Authors:  Jong-Jin Yun; Eun-Young Kim; Eun-Jung Ahn; Jeong-Ki Kim; Ji-Hye Choi; Jong-Min Park; Sei Hyeog Park
Journal:  Ann Hepatobiliary Pancreat Surg       Date:  2019-11-29
  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.