Literature DB >> 27046747

How Technology Can Impact Surgeon Performance: A Randomized Trial Comparing 3-Dimensional versus 2-Dimensional Laparoscopy in Gynecology Oncology.

Francesco Fanfani1, Cristiano Rossitto2, Stefano Restaino3, Alfredo Ercoli4, Vito Chiantera5, Giorgia Monterossi2, Giulia Barbati6, Giovanni Scambia2.   

Abstract

This randomized clinical trial (Canadian Task Force classification I) aimed to compare 2-dimension (2-D) versus 3-dimensional (3-D) laparoscopic hysterectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy in endometrial and cervical cancer patients. Between December 2014 and March 2015, 90 patients were enrolled: 29 (32.2%) with early or locally advanced cervical cancer after neoadjuvant treatment and 61 (67.8%) with early-stage endometrial cancer. Patients were randomly assigned to undergo 2-D (Group A, n = 48 [53.3%]) or 3-D (Group B, n = 42 [46.7%)]) laparoscopy. Baseline characteristics were superimposable in the 2 groups. Median operative time was similar in the 2 groups. Median estimated blood loss during lymphadenectomy was significantly lower in Group B than in Group A (38 mL [range, 0-450] vs 65 mL [range, 0-200]; p = .033). In cervical cancer patients operative time of pelvic lymphadenectomy performed by "novice" surgeons (those with <10 procedures performed) was statistically significantly lower in Group B (p = .047). No differences in perioperative outcomes and postoperative complications were observed between the 2 groups. The 2-D and 3-D systems can be used safely in laparoscopic hysterectomy. However, the 3-D system could provide key benefits to intraoperative techniques and postoperative outcomes in reducing operative time for "expert" surgeons and in enhancing surgical precision for "novice" surgeons.
Copyright © 2016 AAGL. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Cervical cancer; Endometrial cancer; Three-dimensional laparoscopic

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27046747     DOI: 10.1016/j.jmig.2016.03.020

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Minim Invasive Gynecol        ISSN: 1553-4650            Impact factor:   4.137


  5 in total

1.  The use of 3D laparoscopic imaging systems in surgery: EAES consensus development conference 2018.

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

2.  Surgical outcomes of total laparoscopic hysterectomy with 2-dimensional versus 3-dimensional laparoscopic surgical systems.

Authors:  Hiroyuki Yazawa; Kaoru Takiguchi; Karin Imaizumi; Marina Wada; Fumihiro Ito
Journal:  Fukushima J Med Sci       Date:  2018-03-15

Review 3.  Flexible Gastro-intestinal Endoscopy - Clinical Challenges and Technical Achievements.

Authors:  Niehls Kurniawan; Martin Keuchel
Journal:  Comput Struct Biotechnol J       Date:  2017-01-18       Impact factor: 7.271

4.  4K versus 3D total laparoscopic hysterectomy by resident in training: a prospective randomised trial.

Authors:  S Restaino; V Vargiu; A Rosati; M Bruno; G Dinoi; E Cola; R Moroni; G Scambia; F Fanfani
Journal:  Facts Views Vis Obgyn       Date:  2021-09

5.  A randomized, controlled trial comparing the clinical outcomes of 3D versus 2D laparoscopic hysterectomy.

Authors:  Taejong Song; Du-Young Kang
Journal:  Wideochir Inne Tech Maloinwazyjne       Date:  2021-04-30       Impact factor: 1.195

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.