Top

Published in:

01-08-2015

High-definition resolution three-dimensional imaging systems in laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: randomized comparative study with high-definition resolution two-dimensional systems

Authors: Hidefumi Kinoshita, Ken Nakagawa, Yukio Usui, Masatsugu Iwamura, Akihiro Ito, Akira Miyajima, Akio Hoshi, Yoichi Arai, Shiro Baba, Tadashi Matsuda

Published in: Surgical Endoscopy | Issue 8/2015

Abstract

Background

Three-dimensional (3D) imaging systems have been introduced worldwide for surgical instrumentation. A difficulty of laparoscopic surgery involves converting two-dimensional (2D) images into 3D images and depth perception rearrangement. 3D imaging may remove the need for depth perception rearrangement and therefore have clinical benefits.

Methods

We conducted a multicenter, open-label, randomized trial to compare the surgical outcome of 3D-high-definition (HD) resolution and 2D-HD imaging in laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP), in order to determine whether an LRP under HD resolution 3D imaging is superior to that under HD resolution 2D imaging in perioperative outcome, feasibility, and fatigue. One-hundred twenty-two patients were randomly assigned to a 2D or 3D group. The primary outcome was time to perform vesicourethral anastomosis (VUA), which is technically demanding and may include a number of technical difficulties considered in laparoscopic surgeries.

Results

VUA time was not significantly shorter in the 3D group (26.7 min, mean) compared with the 2D group (30.1 min, mean) (p = 0.11, Student’s t test). However, experienced surgeons and 3D-HD imaging were independent predictors for shorter VUA times (p = 0.000, p = 0.014, multivariate logistic regression analysis). Total pneumoperitoneum time was not different. No conversion case from 3D to 2D or LRP to open RP was observed. Fatigue was evaluated by a simulation sickness questionnaire and critical flicker frequency. Results were not different between the two groups. Subjective feasibility and satisfaction scores were significantly higher in the 3D group.

Conclusions

Using a 3D imaging system in LRP may have only limited advantages in decreasing operation times over 2D imaging systems. However, the 3D system increased surgical feasibility and decreased surgeons’ effort levels without inducing significant fatigue.

Ukimura O (2010) Image-guided surgery in minimally invasive urology. Curr Opin Urol 20:136–140PubMedCrossRef

Hara AK, Johnson CD, Reed JE, Ahlquist DA, Nelson H, MacCarty RL et al (1997) Detection of colorectal polyps with CT colography: initial assessment of sensitivity and specificity. Radiology 205:59–65PubMedCrossRef

Beller S, Hünerbein M, Eulenstein S, Lange T, Schlag PM (2007) Feasibility of navigated resection of liver tumors using multiplanar visualization of intraoperative 3-dimensional ultrasound data. Ann Surg 246:288–294PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

Radtke A, Sotiropoulos GC, Molmenti EP, Schroeder T, Peitgen HO, Frilling A et al (2010) Computer-assisted surgery planning for complex liver resections: when is it helpful? A single-center experience over an 8-year period. Ann Surg 252:876–883PubMedCrossRef

Ukimura O, Nakamoto M, Gill Inderbir S (2012) Three-dimensional reconstruction of renovascular-tumor anatomy to facilitate zero-ischemia partial nephrectomy. Eur Urol 61:211–217PubMedCrossRef

Teber D, Guven S, Simpfendorfer T, Baumhauer M, Güven EO, Yencilek F et al (2009) Augmented reality: a new tool to improve surgical accuracy during laparoscopic partial nephrectomy? Preliminary in vitro and in vivo results. Eur Urol 56:332–338PubMedCrossRef

Su LM, Vagvolgyi BP, Agarwal R, Reiley CE, Taylor RH, Hager GD (2009) Augmented reality during robot-assisted laparoscopic partial nephrectomy: toward real-time 3D-CT to stereoscopic video registration. Urology 73:896–900PubMedCrossRef

Ficarra V, Novara G, Artibani W, Cestari A, Galfano A, Graefen M et al (2009) Retropubic, laparoscopic, and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: a systematic review and cumulative analysis of comparative studies. Eur Urol 55:1037–1063PubMedCrossRef

Badani KK, Bhandari A, Tewari A, Menon M (2005) Comparison of two-dimensional and three-dimensional suturing: is there a difference in a robotic surgery setting? J Endourol 19:1212–1215PubMedCrossRef

10.

Hanna GB, Shimi SM, Cuschieri A (1998) Randomised study of influence of two-dimensional versus threedimensional imaging on performance of laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Lancet 351:248–251PubMedCrossRef

11.

Good DW, Stewart GD, Stolzenburg JU, McNeill SA (2013) Analysis of the pentafecta learning curve for laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. World J Urol 32:1225–1233PubMedCrossRef

12.

Secin FP, Savage C, Abbou C, de La Taille A, Salomon L, Rassweiler J et al (2010) The learning curve for laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: an international multicenter study. J Urol 184:2291–2296PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

13.

Kennedy RS, Lane NE, Berbaum KS, Lilienthal MG (1993) Simulator sickness questionnaire: an enhanced method for quantifying simulator sickness. Int J Aviat Psychol 3:203–220CrossRef

14.

Simonson E (1959) The fusion frequency of flicker as a criterion of central nervous system fatigue. Am J Ophthalmol 47:556–565PubMedCrossRef

15.

Taffinder N, Smith SG, Huber J, Russell RC, Darzi A (1999) The effect of a second-generation 3D endoscope on the laparoscopic precision of novices and experienced surgeons. Surg Endosc 13:1087–1092PubMedCrossRef

16.

LaGrange CA, Clark CJ, Gerber EW, Strup SE (2008) Evaluation of three laparoscopic modalities: robotics versus three-dimensional vision laparoscopy versus standard laparoscopy. J Endourol 22:511–516PubMedCrossRef

17.

Kong SH, Oh BM, Yoon H, Ahn HS, Lee HJ, Chung SG et al (2010) Comparison of two- and three-dimensional camera systems in laparoscopic performance: a novel 3D system with one camera. Surg Endosc 24:1132–1143PubMedCrossRef

18.

Blavier A, Gaudissart Q, Cadiere GB, Nyssen AS (2006) Impact of 2D and 3D vision on performance of novice subjects using da Vinci robotic system. Acta Chir Belg 106:662–664PubMed

19.

Storz P, Buess GF, Kunert W, Kirschniak A (2012) 3D HD versus 2D HD: surgical task efficiency in standardized phantom tasks. Surg Endosc 26:1454–1460PubMedCrossRef

20.

Wagner OJ, Hagen M, Kurmann A, Kurmann A, Horgan S, Candinas D, Vorburger SA (2012) Three-dimensional vision enhances task performance independently of the surgical method. Surg Endosc 26:2961–2968PubMedCrossRef

21.

Mueller MD, Camartin C, Dreher E, Hänggi W (1999) Three-dimensional laparoscopy: gadget or progress? A randomized trial on the efficacy of three-dimensional laparoscopy. Surg Endosc 13:469–472PubMedCrossRef

22.

Herron DM, Lantis JC II, Maykel J, Basu C, Schwaitzberg SD (1999) The 3-D monitor and head-mounted display: a quantitative evaluation of advanced laparoscopic viewing technologies. Surg Endosc 13:751–755PubMedCrossRef

23.

Hanna GB, Cuschieri A (2000) Influence of two-dimensional and three-dimensional imaging on endoscopic bowel suturing. World J Surg 24:444–448 discussion 448–449PubMedCrossRef

24.

Vickers AJ, Savage CJ, Hruza M, Cronin AM, O’Brien MF, Pettersson K et al (2009) The surgical learning curve for laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: a retrospective cohort study. Lancet Oncol 10:475–480PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

25.

Voorhorst FA, Overbeeke KJ, Smets GJ (1996) Using movement parallax for 3D laparoscopy. Med Prog Technol 21:211–218PubMedCrossRef

26.

Solimini AG, Mannocci A, Di Thiene D, La Torre G (2012) A survey of visually induced symptoms and associated factors in spectators of three dimensional stereoscopic movies. BMC Public Health 12:779PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

27.

van Bergen P, Kunert W, Buess GF (2000) The effect of high-definition imaging on surgical task efficiency in minimally invasive surgery: an experimental comparison between three-dimensional imaging and direct vision through a stereoscopic TEM rectoscope. Surg Endosc 14:71–74PubMedCrossRef

28.

Hagiike M, Phillips EH, Berci G (2007) Performance differences in laparoscopic surgical skills between true high-definition and three-chip CCD video systems. Surg Endosc 21:1849–1854PubMedCrossRef

Title: High-definition resolution three-dimensional imaging systems in laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: randomized comparative study with high-definition resolution two-dimensional systems
Authors: Hidefumi Kinoshita
Ken Nakagawa
Yukio Usui
Masatsugu Iwamura
Akihiro Ito
Akira Miyajima
Akio Hoshi
Yoichi Arai
Shiro Baba
Tadashi Matsuda
Publication date: 01-08-2015
Publisher: Springer US
Published in: Surgical Endoscopy / Issue 8/2015
Print ISSN: 0930-2794
Electronic ISSN: 1432-2218
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-014-3925-8

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on sleep in brain health

Springer Medicine

High-definition resolution three-dimensional imaging systems in laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: randomized comparative study with high-definition resolution two-dimensional systems

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on sleep in brain health

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 8/2015

Efficacy of laparoscopic-assisted approach for reversal of Hartmann’s procedure: results from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) database

The effect of a preoperative warm-up with a custom-made Nintendo video game on the performance of laparoscopic surgeons

Safety of transvaginal hybrid NOTES cholecystectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Intracorporeal versus extracorporeal anastomosis. Results from a multicentre comparative study on 512 right-sided colorectal cancers

Face, content, and construct validity of four, inanimate training exercises using the da Vinci ® Si surgical system configured with Single-Site ™ instrumentation

Enhanced recovery simulation in colorectal surgery: design of virtual online patients