ArticleWorld journal of surgery2021
Comparative Analysis of Three-Versus Two-dimensional Imaging in Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy.
Article in World journal of surgery, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of 2D and 3D visualization in minimally invasive and robotic surgery: a systematic review.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Pooled it
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThree-dimensional (3D) imaging has been suggested to improve learning and performance of laparoscopy. We sought to investigate whether 3D imaging could improve the outcomes after laparoscopic cholecystectomy. MATERIALS AND
methodsTwo-hundred and forty-one consecutive patients underwent elective or urgent laparoscopic cholecystectomy using 2D (n = 111) and 3D (n = 130) imaging equipments from March 2017 to March 2019 at the Kainuu Central Hospital, Finland. The main outcomes of this study were biliary tract injury, conversion to open procedure and procedure duration.
resultsIn the overall series, there were 5 cases of biliary tract injury (2.1%). When compared to 3D imaging, 2D was associated with increased risk of biliary tract injury in the overall series (0% in 3D vs. 4.7% in 2D, p = 0.026) in addition to a subgroup of acute cholecystitis patients operated by senior surgeons (n = 92), 0% in 3D group (n = 60) vs. 10.0% in 2D group (n = 32), p = 0.037 in univariate analysis. The rates of conversion to open surgery did not differ between the groups in the overall series (5.3 vs 5.7%, p = 0.909) or any of the subgroups. Duration of surgery with 3D vs. 2D imaging were comparable in the elective (57.0 ± 16.3 vs. 54.1 ± 18.9 min, p = 0.228) and urgent setting (66.9 ± 15.1 vs. 67.4 ± 16.6 min, p = 0.805). Such differences were not significant in multivariate analysis.
conclusionsThe present study suggests that the use of 3D imaging is significantly associated with a reduced risk of intraoperative biliary tract injury during laparoscopic cholecystectomy especially in acute cholecystitis.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.