Antonio Cicione1, Riccardo Autorino2, M Pilar Laguna3, Marco De Sio4, Salvatore Micali5, Burak Turna6, Rafael Sanchez-Salas7, Carmelo Quattrone4, Emanuel Dias8, Paulo Mota8, Giampoalo Bianchi5, Rocco Damiano1, Jens Rassweiler9, Estevao Lima8. 1. Department of Urology, Magna Graecia University, Catanzaro, Italy. 2. Department of Urology, University Hospitals, Cleveland, OH; Department of Urology, Second University, Napoli, Italy. Electronic address: riccardo.autorino@uhhospitals.org. 3. Department of Urology, AMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. 4. Department of Urology, Second University, Napoli, Italy. 5. Department of Urology, University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, Modena, Italy. 6. Department of Urology, Ege University School of Medicine, Izmir, Turkey. 7. Department of Urology, Institute Mutualiste Montsouris, Paris, France. 8. Life and Health Sciences Research Institute, University of Minho, Braga, Portugal. 9. Department of Urology, SLK-Klinikum Heilbronn, University of Heidelberg, Heilbronn, Germany.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the use of 3-dimensional (3D) imaging translates into a better surgical performance of naïve urologic laparoscopic surgeons during pyeloplasty (PY) and partial nephrectomy (PN) procedures. MATERIALS AND METHODS:Eighteen surgeons without any previous laparoscopic experience were randomly assigned to perform PY and PN in a porcine model using initially 2-dimensional (2D) and 3D laparoscopy. A surgical performance score was rated by an "expert" tutor through a modified 5-item global rating scale contemplating operative field view, bimanual dexterity, efficiency, tissue handling, and autonomy. Overall surgical time, complications, subjective perception of participating surgeons, and inconveniences related to the 3D vision were recorded. RESULTS: No difference in terms if operative time was found between 2D or 3D laparoscopy for both the PY (P = .51) and the PN (P = .28) procedures. A better rate in terms of surgical performance score was noted by the tutors when the study participants were using 3D vs 2D, for both PY (3.6 [0.8] vs 3.0 [0.4]; P = .034) and PN (3.6 [0.51] vs 3.15 [0.63]; P = .001). No complications occurred in any of the procedures. Most (77.2%) of the participating naïve laparoscopic surgeons had the perception that 3D laparoscopy was overall easier than 2D. Headache (18.1%), nausea (18.1%), and visual disturbance (18.1%) were the most common issues reported by the surgeons during 3D procedures. CONCLUSION: Despite the absence of translation in a shorter operative time, the use of 3D technology seems to facilitate the surgical performance of naïve surgeons during laparoscopic kidney procedures on a porcine model.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the use of 3-dimensional (3D) imaging translates into a better surgical performance of naïve urologic laparoscopic surgeons during pyeloplasty (PY) and partial nephrectomy (PN) procedures. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eighteen surgeons without any previous laparoscopic experience were randomly assigned to perform PY and PN in a porcine model using initially 2-dimensional (2D) and 3D laparoscopy. A surgical performance score was rated by an "expert" tutor through a modified 5-item global rating scale contemplating operative field view, bimanual dexterity, efficiency, tissue handling, and autonomy. Overall surgical time, complications, subjective perception of participating surgeons, and inconveniences related to the 3D vision were recorded. RESULTS: No difference in terms if operative time was found between 2D or 3D laparoscopy for both the PY (P = .51) and the PN (P = .28) procedures. A better rate in terms of surgical performance score was noted by the tutors when the study participants were using 3D vs 2D, for both PY (3.6 [0.8] vs 3.0 [0.4]; P = .034) and PN (3.6 [0.51] vs 3.15 [0.63]; P = .001). No complications occurred in any of the procedures. Most (77.2%) of the participating naïve laparoscopic surgeons had the perception that 3D laparoscopy was overall easier than 2D. Headache (18.1%), nausea (18.1%), and visual disturbance (18.1%) were the most common issues reported by the surgeons during 3D procedures. CONCLUSION: Despite the absence of translation in a shorter operative time, the use of 3D technology seems to facilitate the surgical performance of naïve surgeons during laparoscopic kidney procedures on a porcine model.
Authors: Felix Nickel; Jonathan D Hendrie; Karl-Friedrich Kowalewski; Thomas Bruckner; Carly R Garrow; Maisha Mantel; Hannes G Kenngott; Philipp Romero; Lars Fischer; Beat P Müller-Stich Journal: Langenbecks Arch Surg Date: 2016-04-07 Impact factor: 3.445
Authors: Alberto Arezzo; Nereo Vettoretto; Nader K Francis; Marco Augusto Bonino; Nathan J Curtis; Daniele Amparore; Simone Arolfo; Manuel Barberio; Luigi Boni; Ronit Brodie; Nicole Bouvy; Elisa Cassinotti; Thomas Carus; Enrico Checcucci; Petra Custers; Michele Diana; Marilou Jansen; Joris Jaspers; Gadi Marom; Kota Momose; Beat P Müller-Stich; Kyokazu Nakajima; Felix Nickel; Silvana Perretta; Francesco Porpiglia; Francisco Sánchez-Margallo; Juan A Sánchez-Margallo; Marlies Schijven; Gianfranco Silecchia; Roberto Passera; Yoav Mintz Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2018-12-04 Impact factor: 4.584