Trial reportSurgical endoscopy2022
Gender benefit in laparoscopic surgical performance using a 3D-display system: data from a randomized cross-over trial.
Trial report in Surgical endoscopy, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Does surgeon sex and anthropometry matter for tool usability in traditional laparoscopic surgery? A systematic review and meta-analysis.Surgical endoscopy · 2023Pooled it
- Glasses-free three-dimensional laparoscopic systems in oncologic surgery: Innovation or equivalence?World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2025Article
- Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe use of 3D technique compared to high-resolution 2D-4K-display technique has been shown to optimize spatial orientation and surgical performance in laparoscopic surgery. Since women make up an increasing amount of medical students and surgeons, this study was designed to investigate whether one gender has a greater benefit from using a 3D compared to a 4K-display system.
methodsIn a randomized cross-over trial, the surgical performance of male and female medical students (MS), non-board certified surgeons (NBCS), and board certified surgeons (BCS) was compared using 3D- vs. 4K-display technique at a minimally invasive training parkour with multiple surgical tasks and repetitions.
results128 participants (56 women, 72 men) were included. Overall parkour time in seconds was 3D vs. 4K for all women 770.7 ± 31.9 vs. 1068.1 ± 50.0 (p < 0.001) and all men 664.5 ± 19.9 vs. 889.7 ± 31.2 (p < 0.001). Regarding overall mistakes, participants tend to commit less mistakes while using the 3D-vision system, showing 10.2 ± 1.1 vs. 13.3 ± 1.3 (p = 0.005) for all women and 9.6 ± 0.7 vs. 12.2 ± 1.0 (p = 0.001) for all men. The benefit of using a 3D system, measured by the difference in seconds, was for women 297.3 ± 41.8 (27.84%) vs. 225.2 ± 23.3 (25.31%) for men (p = 0.005). This can be confirmed in the MS group with 327.6 ± 65.5 (35.82%) vs. 249.8 ± 33.7 (32.12%), p = 0.041 and in the NBCS group 359 ± 52.4 (28.25%) vs. 198.2 ± 54.2 (18.62%), p = 0.003. There was no significant difference in the BCS group.
conclusion3D laparoscopic display technique optimizes surgical performance compared to the 2D-4K technique for both women and men. The greatest 3D benefit was found for women with less surgical experience. As a possible result of surgical education, this gender specific difference disappears with higher grade of experience. Using a 3D-vision system could facilitate surgical apprenticeship, especially for women.
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.