ArticleWideochirurgia i inne techniki maloinwazyjne = Videosurgery and other miniinvasive techniques2022
A randomized, controlled trial comparing the clinical outcomes of 3D versus 2D laparoscopic hysterectomy.
Article in Wideochirurgia i inne techniki maloinwazyjne = Videosurgery and other miniinvasive techniques, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The comparison of 2D and 3D systems in total laparoscopic hysterectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Archives of gynecology and obstetrics · 2024Pooled it
- Application and research progress of single-port laparoscopy in retroperitoneal lymphadenectomy for gynecologic malignancies.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Review
- Minimally Invasive Hysterectomy Approaches: Comparative Learning Curves and Perioperative Outcomes of Robotic Versus V-NOTES Techniques.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Expanding Robotic-Assisted Surgery in Gynecology Using the Potential of an Advanced Robotic System.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2023Review
- The Era of 4K Three-dimensional Imaging is Coming.Gynecology and minimally invasive therapyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThere have been a few clinical studies on the use of three-dimensional (3D) laparoscopy with different results.
aimTo compare the surgical outcomes of 3D versus two-dimensional (2D) laparoscopic hysterectomy for benign or premalignant gynecologic diseases. MATERIAL AND
methodsIn this double-blind trial, 68 patients were randomly assigned to either the 3D or 2D groups at a 1 : 1 ratio. The only difference between the two groups was the laparoscopic vision system used. The primary outcome was operative blood loss and operative time. The other surgical outcomes including failure of the intended surgery, length of hospital stay, and operative complications were also assessed.
resultsThe baseline characteristics did not statistically significantly differ between the groups. The mean operative blood loss was not significantly different between the 3D group (74.4 ±51.6 ml) and the 2D group (79.2 ±55.4 ml) (p = 0.743). The operative time was similar in both groups (84.5 ±20.5 min vs. 87.8 ±24.4 min, p = 0.452). Moreover, no differences were observed between the groups in other surgical outcomes.
conclusionsThe 3D imaging system had no surgical advantage in laparoscopic hysterectomy for benign or premalignant gynecologic diseases. However, 3D laparoscopy did not have any negative effects on surgical outcomes and did not increase the surgical risk.
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.