Fernando Martínez-Ubieto1, Cristian Aragón-Benedí2, Ignacio Barranco-Dominguez1, Lucía Tardós-Ascaso3, Teresa Jiménez-Bernadó4, Ana Pascual-Bellosta3, José Manuel Ramírez-Rodriguez5, Javier Martínez-Ubieto3. 1. Department of Bariatric Surgery, Viamed Montecanal Hospital, Cesáreo Alierta 16, 50008, Zaragoza, Spain. 2. Department of Anesthesia, Resuscitation and Pain Therapy, Miguel Servet University Hospital, Zaragoza, Spain. cristianaragon@outlook.com. 3. Department of Anesthesia, Resuscitation and Pain Therapy, Miguel Servet University Hospital, Zaragoza, Spain. 4. Department of Physiatry and Nursing, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Zaragoza, Zaragoza, Spain. 5. Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, University of Zaragoza, Zaragoza, Spain.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Advanced laparoscopic procedures are still challenging. One critical issue is the lack of stereoscopic vision. The aim of this surgical study is to evaluate whether 3D vision offers any advantages for surgical performance over 2D vision during sleeve gastrectomy for morbid obesity using a laparoscopic system that allows changing between 2D and 3D optics. METHODS: A total of 78 patients were analyzed, with 37 in the 2D group and 41 in the 3D group. Performance time, hospital stay, complications, and early outcomes were collected. To assess the quality of the 2D and 3D techniques, visual analog scales from 0 to 10 were designed, and image quality, depth of field, precision in performing tasks, and general ergonomics were measured. RESULTS: According to the vision system used, the mean duration of surgery was 85 ± 16.8 min for patients operated on with the 2D system and 69 ± 16.9 min for those operated on with the 3D system. There were no significant differences between the overall percentages of complications according to the type of vision used. However, postoperative complications were more severe in the 2D laparoscopy group. The average length of stay was shorter for patients in the 3D group. Regarding the differences perceived by the surgeon, the depth of field and the precision of tasks were better in the 3D vision group. CONCLUSION: The 3D system provided greater depth perception and precision in more complex tasks, enabling safer surgery. This led to a reduction in the operative time and hospital stay. Moreover, the severity of complications was less.
PURPOSE: Advanced laparoscopic procedures are still challenging. One critical issue is the lack of stereoscopic vision. The aim of this surgical study is to evaluate whether 3D vision offers any advantages for surgical performance over 2D vision during sleeve gastrectomy for morbid obesity using a laparoscopic system that allows changing between 2D and 3D optics. METHODS: A total of 78 patients were analyzed, with 37 in the 2D group and 41 in the 3D group. Performance time, hospital stay, complications, and early outcomes were collected. To assess the quality of the 2D and 3D techniques, visual analog scales from 0 to 10 were designed, and image quality, depth of field, precision in performing tasks, and general ergonomics were measured. RESULTS: According to the vision system used, the mean duration of surgery was 85 ± 16.8 min for patients operated on with the 2D system and 69 ± 16.9 min for those operated on with the 3D system. There were no significant differences between the overall percentages of complications according to the type of vision used. However, postoperative complications were more severe in the 2D laparoscopy group. The average length of stay was shorter for patients in the 3D group. Regarding the differences perceived by the surgeon, the depth of field and the precision of tasks were better in the 3D vision group. CONCLUSION: The 3D system provided greater depth perception and precision in more complex tasks, enabling safer surgery. This led to a reduction in the operative time and hospital stay. Moreover, the severity of complications was less.
Authors: Giuseppe Currò; Giuseppe La Malfa; Antonio Caizzone; Valentina Rampulla; Giuseppe Navarra Journal: Obes Surg Date: 2015-11 Impact factor: 4.129
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
Authors: Alfonso Torquati; Prapimporn Chattranukulchai Shantavasinkul; Philip Omotosho; Leonor Corsino; Anna Spagnoli Journal: Surgery Date: 2019-08-29 Impact factor: 3.982
Authors: Fernando Martínez-Ubieto; Teresa Jiménez-Bernadó; Javier Martínez-Ubieto; Antonio Cabrerizo; Ana Pascual-Bellosta; Luis Muñoz-Rodriguez; Alfredo Jiménez-Bernadó Journal: Int Surg Date: 2015-06