Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33167972›Full record

ArticleBMC surgery2020

A laparoscopic study investigating 3D vs 2D imaging systems using a pelvitrainer model with experts, non-experts, and students.

Tibor Andrea Zwimpfer, Dominik Lacher, Bernhard Fellmann-Fischer, Michael Mueller

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC surgery, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Safety of Three-Dimensional versus Two-Dimensional Laparoscopic Hysterectomy during the COVID-19 Pandemic.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Tibor Andrea ZwimpferUniversity Hospital Basel, Gynecological Clinic, Basel, Switzerland. tibor.zwimpfer@unibas.ch.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1574-6572
Dominik LacherHospital Limmattal, Zürich, Switzerland.
Bernhard Fellmann-FischerUniversity Hospital Basel, Gynecological Clinic, Basel, Switzerland.
Michael MuellerUniversity Hospital Berne, Gynecological Clinic, Berne, Switzerland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundVision is an essential element of laparoscopic surgery that defines the outcome of an operation in regards to time, mistakes and precision. A 3-dimensional (3D) perspective may improve vision during an operation. Therefore, this study was designed to compare 3D versus 2-dimensional (2D) perspectives using a pelvitrainer model.

methodsFifty candidates were divided into 3 categories based on different experience levels. The candidates were randomised into two groups, with each group performing the same 4 standardised tasks. Group A approached the tasks first with 3D high definition and in a second turn with 2D high definition. Group B carried out the tasks with the systems in reverse order. Task completion time and the number of mistakes made for each task were recorded. After completing the tasks, participants answered questions concerning the two systems.

resultsGroup A was, on average, 20% faster at all four tasks and made approximately 18% fewer mistakes in two of the tasks in comparison to group B. The experts significantly benefited from the 3D system in terms of accuracy compared to non-experts and students. The students demonstrated a significantly greater benefit from the 3D system when performing non-linear, continuous movements. Loss of concentration occurred at the same rate for subjects using the 2D and 3D systems. Nausea and dizziness were reported only when working with the 3D system. 91% found the 3D system advantageous for accomplishing the tasks.

conclusionsIrrespective of experience level, 3D laparoscopy shows advantages in saving time, increasing accuracy and reducing mistakes. These benefits were also accompanied by subjective advantages that were noted by the participants. However, the more complex the task, the less significant the benefit of the 3D system and some people feel handicapped by the eyewear.

Indexed as

Clinical CompetenceImaging, Three-DimensionalHumansLaparoscopyRandom AllocationStudentsUrology2D laparoscopy3D laparoscopyPelvitrainerStandardised tasks

Identifiers

PMID33167972
PMCPMC7650199

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.