A Suggestion on How to Compare 2D and 3D Laparoscopy: A Qualitative Analysis of the Literature and Randomized Pilot Study

Abstract

Abstract

Background and Aims:

The results of studies comparing two-dimensional (2D) and three-dimensional (3D) laparoscopy have shown variable results. We aimed to review the literature and develop an appropriate instrument to compare 2D and 3D laparoscopy. We further aimed to use the data extracted to perform a pilot study.

Methods:

Sixty-seven recent articles on 3D laparoscopy were reviewed and data extracted on factors influencing outcome variables. These variables were used to design a pilot study of 28 novices using a randomized crossover design. The results were analyzed using descriptive statistics and the Wilcoxon signed-rank tests.

Results:

Seven themes were identified to influence the outcome of 3D studies: applied technique (1), experience of subjects (2), study design (3), learning curve (4), subjective qualitative reports (5), laparoscopic tasks (6), and chosen outcome variables (7). The consecutively developed five laparoscopic simulation tasks contained placing a rubber band over hooks, ring and pearl transfer, threading a pipe cleaner through loops, and placing a suturise. The pilot study showed a primary benefit of 3D laparoscopy that was unrelated to repetition. Two tasks served well to assess first-time performance, and two tasks promise to serve well to assess a learning curve if performed repeatedly.

Conclusion:

We were able to identify important issues influencing the outcome of studies analyzing 3D laparoscopy. These may help evaluate future studies. The developed tasks resulted in meaningful data in favor of 3D visualization, but further studies are necessary to confirm the pilot test results.