Skip to main content
Erschienen in: Surgical Endoscopy 4/2020

Open Access 16.07.2019

3D laparoscopy does not reduce operative duration or errors in day-case laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a randomised controlled trial

verfasst von: Katie E. Schwab, Nathan J. Curtis, Martin B. Whyte, Ralph V. Smith, Timothy A. Rockall, Karen Ballard, Iain C. Jourdan

Erschienen in: Surgical Endoscopy | Ausgabe 4/2020

Abstract

Background

Contemporary 3D platforms have overcome past deficiencies. Available trainee and laboratory studies suggest stereoscopic imaging improves performance but there is little clinical data or studies assessing specialists. We aimed to determine whether stereoscopic (3D) laparoscopic systems reduce operative time and number of intraoperative errors during specialist-performed laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC).

Methods

A parallel arm (1:1) randomised controlled trial comparing 2D and 3D passive-polarised laparoscopic systems in day-case LC using was performed. Eleven consultant surgeons that had each performed > 200 LC (including > 10 3D LC) participated. Cases were video recorded and a four-point difficulty grade applied. The primary outcome was overall operative time. Subtask time and the number of intraoperative consequential errors as identified by two blinded assessors using a hierarchical task analysis and the observational clinical human reliability analysis technique formed secondary endpoints.

Results

112 patients were randomised. There was no difference in operative time between 2D and 3D LC (23:14 min (± 10:52) vs. 20:17 (± 9:10), absolute difference − 14.6%, p = 0.148) although 3D surgery was significantly quicker in difficulty grade 3 and 4 cases (30:23 min (± 9:24), vs. 18:02 (± 7:56), p < 0.001). No differences in overall error count was seen (total 47, median 1, range 0–4 vs. 45, 1, 0–3, p = 0.62) although there were significantly fewer 3D gallbladder perforations (15 vs. 6, p = 0.034).

Conclusion

3D laparoscopy did not reduce overall operative time or error frequency in laparoscopic cholecystectomies performed by specialist surgeons. 3D reduced Calot’s dissection time and operative time in complex cases as well as the incidence of iatrogenic gallbladder perforation (NCT01930344).
Hinweise

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s00464-019-06961-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Previous communication

Awarded the Gerhard Buess technology award for best presentation at the 24th European Association of Endoscopic Surgeons Congress, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, June 2016. The conference abstract has been previously published in a supplement of Surgical Endoscopy (Surg Endosc. 2017 Jun;31(Suppl 2):S262. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s00464-017-5564-3 PMID: 28444491).

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
The short-term patient benefits provided by laparoscopy present surgical challenges. The inherent loss of depth perception has been a source of focus for industry and led to the development and marketing of three-dimensional (3D) systems. Adoption of early 3D platforms was limited by poor image resolution and user side effects [1]. Technological advancements in processing and visual presentation have revived surgical interest as contemporary systems appear to have addressed these issues without increasing cognitive load [24].
Systematic reviews have concluded that 3D systems appear to improve task and operative time and reduce performance errors when compared to 2D laparoscopy [5, 6]. However, the role of 3D laparoscopy in routine clinical practice has not been sufficiently evaluated as the available literature predominantly focusses on trainee performance of box trainer tasks or comparative studies with significant methodological concerns reported [2, 5, 7]. Ex-vivo specialist performance has also been seen to improve but the paucity of clinical studies mean it is unclear if this translates to the delivery of laparoscopic interventions in the operating room [8, 9].
Therefore, we aimed to investigate whether the reported benefits in surgical efficiency and error reduction from the use of 3D laparoscopic systems were present in routine clinical practice. We hypothesised that 3D laparoscopy reduces the operative time and number of intraoperative errors enacted during laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) compared to the current 2D reference standard.

Methods

A single centre, parallel arm (1:1) randomised controlled trial (RCT) was designed in keeping with an IDEAL stage IIb exploration study as well as recommendations for 3D laparoscopic studies and the CONSORT principles (Supplementary Table 1) [5, 7, 10]. Research ethical approval was granted by the UK National Health Service East Midlands committee (ref: 13/EM/0092) and local research department (ref: 13SURN0004). This trial is registered (NCT01930344).

Patient eligibility criteria

Inclusion criteria were patients listed for elective day-case LC, age 18–80 and provision of written informed consent. All patients received an abdominal ultrasound scan and liver function tests. Additional pre-operative imaging was performed at the discretion of the responsible surgeon. Exclusion criteria were previous upper abdominal surgery, known common bile duct stones, cholecystectomy planned with any other combined surgical procedure (including bile duct exploration), planned overnight or post-operative inpatient stay and inability or refusal to provide written informed consent. In keeping with standard practice for day-case surgery, patients with an American Society of Anaesthesiologists physical classification score > 2, age > 80 or a body mass index ≥ 35 kg/m2 were also excluded.

Surgeon eligibility criteria and stereopsis testing

All consultant surgeons performing laparoscopic cholecystectomy at the Royal Surrey County Hospital UK were approached to participate. All had performed a minimum of 200 independent day-case elective LC including at least 10 3D laparoscopic cases. Surgeons received a written information pack and face-to-face trial briefing. To enrol, surgeons had to provide written informed consent and undergo stereopsis testing (Wirt Fly sterotest (Stereo Optical Inc®, Chicago, IL, USA). This evaluates both gross stereopsis (2500 to 1200 s of arc) and fine depth perception (800 to 40 s). All participants were seen to have normal stereo acuity (defined as ≤ 120 s of arc).

Equipment, set-up and procedures

All cases were performed using either a Karl Storz IMAGE1 S D3-Link™ system with zero-degree 10 mm TIPCAM®1 SPIES 3D video laparoscopes or Olympus 3DV-190 system with Endoeye™ 10 mm rigid 3D laparoscopes. Images were displayed on liquid crystal display high definition screens (Panasonic EJ-MDA32E-K, Panasonic® Europe, Wiesbaden, Germany or Sony LMD-2451MT, Sony Europe Ltd., Surrey, UK) and viewed with passive polarising glasses. 2D cases used identical equipment. Screen positioning and viewing distance was at the discretion of each surgical team. All surgeons used a four-port technique with dissection performed with Maryland forceps or hook diathermy. To maximise recruitment, generalisability of results and ethical and surgeon acceptability, no constraint on anaesthetic techniques, timing of surgery, precise operative technique, instrument use or intraoperative decision were made. On table cholangiography was performed at the discretion of the operating surgeon. All perioperative care proceeded as per local site policies.

Randomisation procedure

Upon provision of consent, each patient was allocated a unique trial ID as sole identifier. This was matched to a block plan of two options randomised over 120 stems which had been generated pre-trial. These results were placed in sealed envelopes, labelled by study ID, in the theatre admissions unit and opened during induction of anaesthesia maintaining allocation concealment. Given the sample size, further stratification was not undertaken.

Observational clinical human reliability analysis (OCHRA)

To assess whether 3D imaging influences intraoperative performance, analysis of intervention delivery was performed. The OCHRA technique assesses the interaction of humans with complex systems with the aim of highlighting the mode and mechanism behind error occurrence and increase awareness and data to aid future avoidance [1114]. OCHRA involves structured analysis of operative case video to identify errors. In this study, consequential errors were defined “adverse events that required extra unplanned step(s) to correct or manage, or deviation from the standard operative task”. OCHRA has been successfully applied to a variety of laparoscopic procedures including LC, cases performed within RCTs, as well as assessment of specialist surgical performance with reliability and face, construct and concurrent validity established [1113, 1518].
As surgical interventions can be considered as a series of interconnecting steps which can be further broken down into sub-tasks, a previously reported LC hierarchical task analysis (HTA) was utilised [14]. Each step was analysed for consequential errors and a model of error production applied to each event. Additionally, the nature, timepoint and brief description of each error event was captured and categorised using a pre-defined list of external error modes (EEM, Table 3) [14, 19]. OCHRA analysis was performed independently by two reviewers after completion of human factors and OCHRA training from expert assessors. Reviewers were blinded to trial arm, surgeon, date of surgery and all patient and clinical details.

Endpoints and sample size

The primary end-point was total surgical time (from grasping and elevation of the gallbladder fundus until complete detachment of the gallbladder from the liver bed) (Table 2). As there was no prior 3D LC research to guide sample size calculations, mean operative times from a meta-analysis of 12 four-port LC RCTs (all in 2D) were reviewed showing a weighted mean time of 45.8 min [20]. A minimally clinically important difference of 12 min (25%) was adopted. Using a two-sided test (α 0.05, β 0.8), a minimum of 50 patients per arm would be required. Allowing for attrition, a recruitment target of 120 was selected. Pre-defined secondary endpoints were time for each operative task zone (Table 2) and number of consequential errors enacted.

Data collection

The integrated stack systems (AIDA™), Karl Storz Endoskopy, Germany and image management hub IMH-20, Olympus Europe, Hamburg, Germany) were used to record unedited, deidentified procedures. Irrespective of trial arm, all videos were recorded in 2D without sound or extra corporeal views. To reduce heterogeneity and ensure comparable assessment, video files were edited using iMovie for MacOS (v10, Apple Inc™, Cupertino, CA, USA) to show the three task sections forming the primary endpoint which were left unaltered (Table 2). If an on table cholangiogram was performed, this segment was removed from the video and not analysed nor contributed to any endpoint. Edited videos were collated and issued for assessment at least 3 months after surgery.

Case difficulty grading

Procedural difficulty varies and can influence surgical time and error rate [21]. Therefore, an intraoperative assessment of macroscopic gallbladder pathology was made using a validated scale: grade 1 (thin-walled gallbladder, no adhesions), grade 2 (filmy gallbladder adhesions), grade 3 (thick-walled or surrounded by adhesions) or grade 4 (dense adhesions, attachment of adjacent organs or gallbladder mucocele or empyema) [22].

Statistical analyses

The data were analysed using SPSS (v25.0; SPSS Inc, Chicago, IL, USA). Data were tested for normality with the Shapiro–Wilk test and detrended Q–Q plots and compared with parametric or non-parametric tests as appropriate. Unpaired T Test, Mann–Whitney U and Kruskal–Wallis testing were used to compare means/medians from normal and non-normally distributed populations respectively. For categorical data, association between groups was analysed with cross-tabulation, Fisher’s exact test or Pearson’s Chi squared. Operative time was log transformed and 2D and 3D cases compared with ANCOVA using gallbladder case grade as a covariant. The degree of inter-rater agreement between OCHRA observers was compared using Cohen’s kappa (κ) with the 95% confidence interval (CI) calculated using the standard error of κ. Data are displayed as means with standard deviations unless otherwise specified. Comparative results are reported as (2D vs. 3D) throughout. Intention to treat data is presented although where a complete case recording was necessary for analysis, a per protocol approach was used. Statistical significance was defined as p < 0.05.

Results

136 patients underwent day-case LC between May 2013 and September 2014. Trial CONSORT diagram is shown in Fig. 1. Of the 120 patients screened, 113 were eligible and 112 (99%) recruited. The attrition rate was 11.6% and equal between arms (incomplete or corrupt case video (n = 7), conversion to open surgery (n = 2, 1.8%, 1 per arm), LC performed by a trainee (n = 2, one per arm), subtotal cholecystectomy (n = 1) and one patient declined surgery). In total, 99 patients underwent day-case LC with a complete video available.
74% of participants were female. Mean age was 52 years (range 24–80). Baseline patient characteristics were evenly distributed between the trial arms (Table 1). Biliary colic was the most common indication for surgery (52%) followed by past cholecystitis (39%), gallstone pancreatitis (5%), gallbladder polyp (2%) and passed common bile duct stone (1%).
Table 1
Patient demographics, indication and LC case difficulties
 
2D
3D
p
Mean (SD)
Count
Column N (%)
Mean (SD)
Count
Column N (%)
Age
53 (14)
  
51 (16)
  
0.679
Gallbladder case difficulty grade
       
 1
 
17
34
 
23
46.9
0.991
 2
 
22
44
 
7
14.3
 
 3
 
7
14
 
14
28.6
 
 4
 
4
8
 
5
10.2
 
Sex
       
 Females
 
34
68
 
40
81.6
0.119
 Males
 
16
32
 
9
18.4
 
Indication for surgery
       
 Biliary colic
 
26
52
 
26
54.2
0.397
 Cholecystitis
 
18
36
 
20
41.7
 
 Gallstone pancreatitis
 
2
4
 
2
4.2
 
 Gallbladder polyp
 
3
6
 
0
  
 Passed common bile duct stone
 
1
2
 
0
  
As might be expected from the inclusion criteria there were significantly more lower grade cases (p < 0.001)

Operative case complexity

In keeping with study inclusion criteria overall there were significantly higher numbers of low-grade cases (grade 1 n = 40, grade 2 n = 29, grade 3 n = 21 and grade 4 n = 9; p < 0.001, Table 1). Overall gallbladder grades were equal between the trial arms (p = 0.991) although the 3D arm contained a significantly higher proportion of grade 3 and 4 cases (p = 0.011). No surgeon reported any eye symptoms or complaints during the duration of this study.

Operative time

The mean time to complete a 3D LC was 20:17 (± 9:10) minutes compared to 23:14 (± 10:52), absolute difference − 14.6%, p = 0.148. Operative time increased with each gallbladder grade (grade 1 = 14:24 min (± 4:42) vs. grade 2 = 23:01 (± 8:50) vs. grade 3 = 27:07 (± 7:28) vs. grade 4 = 38:02 (± 9.22), p < 0.001, Fig. 2). Grade 3 and 4 cases were performed significantly faster in 3D (18:02 (± 9:24) vs. 30:23, p < 0.001).
Following natural log transformation of the three hierarchical task zones, a normal distribution was seen (Shapiro–Wilk test p = 0.23). ANCOVA analysis showed that higher gallbladder grades were significantly associated with longer operative times (partial η2 = 0.507, p < 0.001, Table 2). Overall operative times were reduced with 3D systems, but this did not reach statistical significance with a small effect size observed (partial η2 = 0.039, p = 0.056). HTA defined operative task 1–3 breakdown showed a statistically significant time reduction for task one when 3D was used (median 724 s (interquartile range 380–1068) vs. 540 (288–792, p = 0.013)) but not task 2 or 3 (Table 2).
Table 2
Hierarchical task analysis used in the trial.
Adapted from the reports by Joice et al. [14] and Tang et al. [11]
Task
Start point
End point
Trial arm
Median (IQR) (s)
p
Dependent variable of natural log of time. Partial η2
p
1. Dissection of Calot’s triangle
Grasping of fundus and elevating
Clear identification of cystic artery and duct
2D
724 (380–1068)
0.061
0.063
0.013
3D
540 (288–792)
2. Clipping and dividing cystic artery and cystic duct
Appearance of clip applicator
Cystic artery and duct divided
2D
140.5 (44–237)
0.23
0.007
0.414
3D
182 (76–288)
3. Detaching gallbladder from liver bed
At completion of cystic artery and duct division
Gallbladder fully removed from liver bed
2D
324.5 (203.5–445.5)
0.894
0.000
0.941
3D
281 (196–366)
Total operative time
Grasping of fundus and elevating
Gallbladder fully removed from liver bed
2D
1287 (834–1783)
0.148
0.039
0.056
3D
1070 (790–1616)
Time (s) is displayed. No differences are seen in the direct comparison but after natural transformation a significant difference in Calot’s dissection alone is seen

OCHRA error analysis

99 complete videos were available for analysis comprising 2156 min of LC surgery. A total of 92 intraoperative errors were identified (median 1 per case, range 0–4). No differences were seen between the 2D and 3D arms (median 1, range 0–4, total 47, cases with error(s) 66%, vs. 1, 0–3, 45, 61%, p = 0.62). Excellent inter-rater reliability was seen (κ = 0.81 (95% CI 0.7–0.92), p < 0.001, Supplementary Table 1).
Errors were more frequent in higher grade gallbladder cases (grade 1 = 0.75 per case, grade 2 = 0.97, grade 3 = 0.86 and grade 4 = 1.78; p < 0.001) but when controlling for grade, no differences were seen between 2D and 3D LC (p = 0.879). There was no difference in error counts between the three surgical task phases (39 vs. 25 vs. 27, p = 0.181). OCHRA categorical data is displayed in Table 3. Executional errors (EEM 7–10) accounted for 75% of error events with no difference between the trial arms (p = 0.186). With regards to consequential errors, gallbladder perforations were significantly reduced in the 3D cases (15 vs. 6, p = 0.034) otherwise no differences were seen in the external error modes or specific nature and frequency of errors between the trial arms (Table 3).
Table 3
External error modes—this model considers errors as being either ‘inter-step’ (the correct steps being performed in the correct order; error modes 1–6), or ‘intra-step’ (the execution, or lack of, the subtask; error modes 7–10).
Adapted from Cuschieri et al. [32]
External error mode
2D error count
3D error count
Error event enacted
Inter-step errors (EEM 1–6)
Intra-step errors (EEM 7–10)
2D
3D
2D
3D
Step is not done
1
1
Calot’s triangle bleeding
1
1
  
Step is partially completed
5
7
Bleeding from gallbladder
0
0
  
Step is repeated
2
4
Injury to liver
0
0
  
Second step is done in addition
1
2
Clip application error
8
13
  
Second step is done instead of first step
0
0
Gall bladder perforation
0
0
  
Step is done out of sequence
0
0
     
Step is done with too much force/speed/depth/distance/time/rotation
20
17
Calot’s triangle bleeding
  
8
6
Step is done with too little force/speed/depth/distance/time/rotation
3
3
Bleeding from gallbladder
  
8
12
Step is done in wrong orientation/direction/point in space
15
11
Injury to liver
  
5
5
Step is done on/with the wrong object
0
0
Clip application error
  
2
2
   
Gall bladder perforation
  
15
6
Sum
47
45
 
9
14
38
31
OCHRA results are shown. No difference in error modes are seen between the 2D and 3D cases. Intra-step (executional, EEM 7–10) errors accounted for 75% of error events. The only significant difference observed was fewer gallbladder perforations with 3D surgery (p = 0.034)

Discussion

The minimal access surgery revolution is dependent on advancements of technology and technique. Stereoptic laparoscopy overcomes the inherent loss of depth perception associated with 2D systems. Laboratory-based studies with trainee and specialist participants have suggested 3D allows faster performance with fewer errors, but their findings cannot be assumed to be applicable to actual operating theatre performance [3]. As there is increasing uptake of 3D systems without supportive evidence it could be argued that the innovation has outpaced surgical evaluation.
We performed an RCT assessing the impact on time and errors using LC as a representative high-volume index procedure and additionally as the Cochrane 2D/3D LC review was based on a single 1998 RCT [23, 24]. We incorporated all methodological recommendations for 3D studies advocated by the available 3D systematic reviews and evaluation of surgery as defined by the IDEAL collaborative [5, 7, 10].
We saw a non-clinically nor statistically significant 3-min reduction in operative time with 3D arm primarily from faster Calot’s triangle dissection. Case difficulty could represent a major confounding variable within LC studies. We applied a four-point difficulty classification based on direct intraoperative visualisation recently validation in our population and saw a significant increase in operation time with each additional grade [22]. Although there were only 21 grade 3 and 9 grade 4 cases in the trial and there was a higher proportion of these within the 3D arm, 3D was significantly faster in these potentially challenging cases with a 40% operative time reduction.
Operative duration alone is an insufficient measure of surgical performance. Direct observation of the intraoperative period was performed independently by two blinded reviewers using the structured, validated OCHRA technique as this is where any impact of imaging technology is most likely to be evident. Provision of stereoscopic imaging did not alter the number of enacted error events or the underlying external error mode. Significantly fewer perforations of the gallbladder, which can present significant consequences to patients [25], occurred in 3D cases as the only difference between the arms.
Our findings, which could be expected to be widely applicable, are comparable with the original 1998 and very recent 2D/3D LC RCT reports although our notable absence of subjectively reported side effects and eye symptoms suggests contemporary 3D technology holds improved usability [24, 26]. Our data suggests specialist LC performance was not altered by the technology used, possibly as the participating surgeon experience allowed them to overcome the loss of depth perception. There is supportive evidence for 3D laparoscopy for trainees, but the specialist surgeon proficiency gain curve has not been defined [3].
Surgical technologies undergo intensive development and safety testing but efficacy assessment including within-operating room settings are not mandatory for licencing which contrasts with regulatory requirements in other healthcare areas. Surgical intervention studies can present challenges not encountered in other areas of clinical research [10]. Our study is strengthened by the randomised design that aimed to reduce potential bias that can influence comparative studies of surgical technology. Robotics represents another area of contemporary debate where high level evidence has contradicted previous favourable reports with concerns raised regarding the influence of industry funding on study reporting [27, 28]. A number of questions on 3D laparoscopy remain, particularly regarding health economic data. Although not formally studied here, our results suggest no meaningful difference in resources would be expected.
We successfully recruited to time and target and observed very high recruitment of eligible patients, however, our findings should be considered in light of some limitations. As there were no contemporary 3D LC data available at the time of study design we based our power calculation on external 2D LC RCT reports with differing operative time definitions [20]. Our operative duration was considerably faster in both 2D and 3D LC which likely invalidates this calculation and risks introduction of type II errors although the small observed time difference is unlikely to be clinically significant or relevant to healthcare providers. Ideally, trial equipment would have been standardised but regular simultaneous day-case LC theatre lists necessitated use of a second 3D comparable passive polarising technology platform although this was from a second manufacturer. Reassuringly no outcome differences were seen between the two systems.
We observed that case difficulty was a major cofounding variable with a larger impact on operative time than the imaging system used. The case complexity distributions were unequal between the trial arms with more complex cases in the 3D arm which affected the primary endpoint comparison. As there is no reliable method to pre-operatively predict case difficulty, we would advise future researchers to consider on table randomisation which allows stratification for the observed difficulty. This has been successfully used in surgical interventional RCTs to ensure participant and procedure eligibility [29]. Although we complied with the CONSORT criteria and 80% of elective UK LC are now performed as day-case procedures [30], selection bias cannot be fully excluded as more comorbid patients, potentially difficult LC cases (including the acute cases and the emergent setting) were excluded. Finally, case video review does not capture human factors that may influence surgical performance and procedure duration [31].

Conclusion

3D laparoscopy did not reduce overall operative time or error frequency in laparoscopic cholecystectomies performed by specialist surgeons. 3D reduced Calot’s dissection time and operative time in complex cases as well as the incidence of iatrogenic gallbladder perforation (NCT01930344).

Acknowledgements

The authors gratefully acknowledge the support and contribution of the following in the delivery of this study: All participating surgeons, Alison Snook and Matt Dunstan (Minimal Access Therapy Training Unit, University of Surrey), all theatre teams at the day-case surgery unit and the research and development office, Royal Surrey County Hospital, Guildford, UK. OCHRA training and human factors training was provided by Terema Ltd., ICENI Centre, Colchester and Mr. Danilo Miskovic and Ms Susannah Wyles (Department of Surgery of Cancer, Imperial College London).

Compliance with ethical standards

Disclosures

Ms. Schwab, Mr. Curtis, Dr. Whyte, Mr. Smith, Prof. Rockall, Prof. Ballard and Mr. Jourdan confirm they hold no conflict of interest or financial ties to disclose.
Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://​creativecommons.​org/​licenses/​by/​4.​0/​), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Unsere Produktempfehlungen

Die Chirurgie

Print-Titel

Das Abo mit mehr Tiefe

Mit der Zeitschrift Die Chirurgie erhalten Sie zusätzlich Online-Zugriff auf weitere 43 chirurgische Fachzeitschriften, CME-Fortbildungen, Webinare, Vorbereitungskursen zur Facharztprüfung und die digitale Enzyklopädie e.Medpedia.

Bis 30. April 2024 bestellen und im ersten Jahr nur 199 € zahlen!

e.Med Interdisziplinär

Kombi-Abonnement

Für Ihren Erfolg in Klinik und Praxis - Die beste Hilfe in Ihrem Arbeitsalltag

Mit e.Med Interdisziplinär erhalten Sie Zugang zu allen CME-Fortbildungen und Fachzeitschriften auf SpringerMedizin.de.

Literatur
1.
Zurück zum Zitat Schwab K, Smith R, Brown V, Whyte M, Jourdan I (2017) Evolution of stereoscopic imaging in surgery and recent advances. World J Gastrointest Endosc 9(8):368–377CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Schwab K, Smith R, Brown V, Whyte M, Jourdan I (2017) Evolution of stereoscopic imaging in surgery and recent advances. World J Gastrointest Endosc 9(8):368–377CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
2.
Zurück zum Zitat Vettoretto N, Foglia E, Ferrario L, Arezzo A, Cirocchi R, Cocorullo G et al (2018) Why laparoscopists may opt for three-dimensional view: a summary of the full HTA report on 3D versus 2D laparoscopy by S.I.C.E. (Societa Italiana di Chirurgia Endoscopica e Nuove Tecnologie). Surg Endosc 32(6):2986–2993CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Vettoretto N, Foglia E, Ferrario L, Arezzo A, Cirocchi R, Cocorullo G et al (2018) Why laparoscopists may opt for three-dimensional view: a summary of the full HTA report on 3D versus 2D laparoscopy by S.I.C.E. (Societa Italiana di Chirurgia Endoscopica e Nuove Tecnologie). Surg Endosc 32(6):2986–2993CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
5.
Zurück zum Zitat Sorensen SM, Savran MM, Konge L, Bjerrum F (2016) Three-dimensional versus two-dimensional vision in laparoscopy: a systematic review. Surg Endosc 30(1):11–23CrossRefPubMed Sorensen SM, Savran MM, Konge L, Bjerrum F (2016) Three-dimensional versus two-dimensional vision in laparoscopy: a systematic review. Surg Endosc 30(1):11–23CrossRefPubMed
6.
Zurück zum Zitat Cheng J, Gao J, Shuai X, Wang G, Tao K (2016) Two-dimensional versus three-dimensional laparoscopy in surgical efficacy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Oncotarget 7(43):70979–70990PubMedPubMedCentral Cheng J, Gao J, Shuai X, Wang G, Tao K (2016) Two-dimensional versus three-dimensional laparoscopy in surgical efficacy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Oncotarget 7(43):70979–70990PubMedPubMedCentral
7.
Zurück zum Zitat Sakata S, Watson MO, Grove PM, Stevenson AR (2016) The conflicting evidence of three-dimensional displays in laparoscopy: a review of systems old and new. Ann Surg 263(2):234–239CrossRefPubMed Sakata S, Watson MO, Grove PM, Stevenson AR (2016) The conflicting evidence of three-dimensional displays in laparoscopy: a review of systems old and new. Ann Surg 263(2):234–239CrossRefPubMed
8.
Zurück zum Zitat Smith R, Schwab K, Day A, Rockall T, Ballard K, Bailey M et al (2014) Effect of passive polarizing three-dimensional displays on surgical performance for experienced laparoscopic surgeons. Br J Surg 101(11):1453–1459CrossRefPubMed Smith R, Schwab K, Day A, Rockall T, Ballard K, Bailey M et al (2014) Effect of passive polarizing three-dimensional displays on surgical performance for experienced laparoscopic surgeons. Br J Surg 101(11):1453–1459CrossRefPubMed
9.
Zurück zum Zitat Wilhelm D, Reiser S, Kohn N, Witte M, Leiner U, Muhlbach L et al (2014) Comparative evaluation of HD 2D/3D laparoscopic monitors and benchmarking to a theoretically ideal 3D pseudodisplay: even well-experienced laparoscopists perform better with 3D. Surg Endosc 28(8):2387–2397CrossRefPubMed Wilhelm D, Reiser S, Kohn N, Witte M, Leiner U, Muhlbach L et al (2014) Comparative evaluation of HD 2D/3D laparoscopic monitors and benchmarking to a theoretically ideal 3D pseudodisplay: even well-experienced laparoscopists perform better with 3D. Surg Endosc 28(8):2387–2397CrossRefPubMed
10.
Zurück zum Zitat McCulloch P, Altman DG, Campbell WB, Flum DR, Glasziou P, Marshall JC et al (2009) No surgical innovation without evaluation: the IDEAL recommendations. Lancet 374(9695):1105–1112CrossRefPubMed McCulloch P, Altman DG, Campbell WB, Flum DR, Glasziou P, Marshall JC et al (2009) No surgical innovation without evaluation: the IDEAL recommendations. Lancet 374(9695):1105–1112CrossRefPubMed
11.
Zurück zum Zitat Tang B, Hanna GB, Joice P, Cuschieri A (2004) Identification and categorization of technical errors by observational clinical human reliability assessment (OCHRA) during laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Arch Surg 139(11):1215–1220CrossRefPubMed Tang B, Hanna GB, Joice P, Cuschieri A (2004) Identification and categorization of technical errors by observational clinical human reliability assessment (OCHRA) during laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Arch Surg 139(11):1215–1220CrossRefPubMed
12.
Zurück zum Zitat Foster JD, Miskovic D, Allison AS, Conti JA, Ockrim J, Cooper EJ et al (2016) Application of objective clinical human reliability analysis (OCHRA) in assessment of technical performance in laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery. Tech Coloproctol 20(6):361–367CrossRefPubMed Foster JD, Miskovic D, Allison AS, Conti JA, Ockrim J, Cooper EJ et al (2016) Application of objective clinical human reliability analysis (OCHRA) in assessment of technical performance in laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery. Tech Coloproctol 20(6):361–367CrossRefPubMed
13.
Zurück zum Zitat Miskovic D, Ni M, Wyles SM, Parvaiz A, Hanna GB (2012) Observational clinical human reliability analysis (OCHRA) for competency assessment in laparoscopic colorectal surgery at the specialist level. Surg Endosc 26(3):796–803CrossRefPubMed Miskovic D, Ni M, Wyles SM, Parvaiz A, Hanna GB (2012) Observational clinical human reliability analysis (OCHRA) for competency assessment in laparoscopic colorectal surgery at the specialist level. Surg Endosc 26(3):796–803CrossRefPubMed
14.
Zurück zum Zitat Joice P, Hanna GB, Cuschieri A (1998) Errors enacted during endoscopic surgery—a human reliability analysis. Appl Ergon 29(6):409–414CrossRefPubMed Joice P, Hanna GB, Cuschieri A (1998) Errors enacted during endoscopic surgery—a human reliability analysis. Appl Ergon 29(6):409–414CrossRefPubMed
15.
Zurück zum Zitat Tang B, Hanna GB, Bax NM, Cuschieri A (2004) Analysis of technical surgical errors during initial experience of laparoscopic pyloromyotomy by a group of Dutch pediatric surgeons. Surg Endosc 18(12):1716–1720CrossRefPubMed Tang B, Hanna GB, Bax NM, Cuschieri A (2004) Analysis of technical surgical errors during initial experience of laparoscopic pyloromyotomy by a group of Dutch pediatric surgeons. Surg Endosc 18(12):1716–1720CrossRefPubMed
16.
Zurück zum Zitat van Rutte P, Nienhuijs SW, Jakimowicz JJ, van Montfort G (2017) Identification of technical errors and hazard zones in sleeve gastrectomy using OCHRA: “OCHRA for sleeve gastrectomy”. Surg Endosc 31(2):561–566CrossRefPubMed van Rutte P, Nienhuijs SW, Jakimowicz JJ, van Montfort G (2017) Identification of technical errors and hazard zones in sleeve gastrectomy using OCHRA: “OCHRA for sleeve gastrectomy”. Surg Endosc 31(2):561–566CrossRefPubMed
17.
Zurück zum Zitat Talebpour M, Alijani A, Hanna GB, Moosa Z, Tang B, Cuschieri A (2009) Proficiency-gain curve for an advanced laparoscopic procedure defined by observation clinical human reliability assessment (OCHRA). Surg Endosc 23(4):869–875CrossRefPubMed Talebpour M, Alijani A, Hanna GB, Moosa Z, Tang B, Cuschieri A (2009) Proficiency-gain curve for an advanced laparoscopic procedure defined by observation clinical human reliability assessment (OCHRA). Surg Endosc 23(4):869–875CrossRefPubMed
18.
Zurück zum Zitat Mishra A, Catchpole K, Dale T, McCulloch P (2008) The influence of non-technical performance on technical outcome in laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Surg Endosc 22(1):68–73CrossRefPubMed Mishra A, Catchpole K, Dale T, McCulloch P (2008) The influence of non-technical performance on technical outcome in laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Surg Endosc 22(1):68–73CrossRefPubMed
20.
Zurück zum Zitat Pisanu A, Reccia I, Porceddu G, Uccheddu A (2012) Meta-analysis of prospective randomized studies comparing single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC) and conventional multiport laparoscopic cholecystectomy (CMLC). J Gastrointest Surg 16(9):1790–1801CrossRefPubMed Pisanu A, Reccia I, Porceddu G, Uccheddu A (2012) Meta-analysis of prospective randomized studies comparing single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC) and conventional multiport laparoscopic cholecystectomy (CMLC). J Gastrointest Surg 16(9):1790–1801CrossRefPubMed
21.
Zurück zum Zitat Eijkemans MJ, van Houdenhoven M, Nguyen T, Boersma E, Steyerberg EW, Kazemier G (2010) Predicting the unpredictable: a new prediction model for operating room times using individual characteristics and the surgeon’s estimate. Anesthesiology 112(1):41–49CrossRefPubMed Eijkemans MJ, van Houdenhoven M, Nguyen T, Boersma E, Steyerberg EW, Kazemier G (2010) Predicting the unpredictable: a new prediction model for operating room times using individual characteristics and the surgeon’s estimate. Anesthesiology 112(1):41–49CrossRefPubMed
22.
Zurück zum Zitat Griffiths EA, Hodson J, Vohra RS, Marriott P, Katbeh T, Zino S et al (2019) Utilisation of an operative difficulty grading scale for laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Surg Endosc 33(1):110–121CrossRefPubMed Griffiths EA, Hodson J, Vohra RS, Marriott P, Katbeh T, Zino S et al (2019) Utilisation of an operative difficulty grading scale for laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Surg Endosc 33(1):110–121CrossRefPubMed
23.
Zurück zum Zitat Gurusamy KS, Sahay S, Davidson BR (2011) Three dimensional versus two dimensional imaging for laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2011(1):CD006882 Gurusamy KS, Sahay S, Davidson BR (2011) Three dimensional versus two dimensional imaging for laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2011(1):CD006882
24.
Zurück zum Zitat Hanna GB, Shimi SM, Cuschieri A (1998) Randomised study of influence of two-dimensional versus three-dimensional imaging on performance of laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Lancet 351(9098):248–251CrossRefPubMed Hanna GB, Shimi SM, Cuschieri A (1998) Randomised study of influence of two-dimensional versus three-dimensional imaging on performance of laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Lancet 351(9098):248–251CrossRefPubMed
25.
Zurück zum Zitat Brockmann JG, Kocher T, Senninger NJ, Schurmann GM (2002) Complications due to gallstones lost during laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Surg Endosc 16(8):1226–1232CrossRefPubMed Brockmann JG, Kocher T, Senninger NJ, Schurmann GM (2002) Complications due to gallstones lost during laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Surg Endosc 16(8):1226–1232CrossRefPubMed
27.
Zurück zum Zitat Jayne D, Pigazzi A, Marshall H, Croft J, Corrigan N, Copeland J et al (2017) Effect of robotic-assisted vs conventional laparoscopic surgery on risk of conversion to open laparotomy among patients undergoing resection for rectal cancer: the ROLARR randomized clinical trial. JAMA 318(16):1569–1580CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Jayne D, Pigazzi A, Marshall H, Croft J, Corrigan N, Copeland J et al (2017) Effect of robotic-assisted vs conventional laparoscopic surgery on risk of conversion to open laparotomy among patients undergoing resection for rectal cancer: the ROLARR randomized clinical trial. JAMA 318(16):1569–1580CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
28.
Zurück zum Zitat Criss CN, MacEachern MP, Matusko N, Dimick JB, Maggard-Gibbons M, Gadepalli SK (2019) The impact of corporate payments on robotic surgery research: a systematic review. Ann Surg 269(3):389–396CrossRefPubMed Criss CN, MacEachern MP, Matusko N, Dimick JB, Maggard-Gibbons M, Gadepalli SK (2019) The impact of corporate payments on robotic surgery research: a systematic review. Ann Surg 269(3):389–396CrossRefPubMed
29.
Zurück zum Zitat Cornish J, Harries RL, Bosanquet D, Rees B, Ansell J, Frewer N et al (2016) Hughes Abdominal Repair Trial (HART)—abdominal wall closure techniques to reduce the incidence of incisional hernias: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial. Trials 17(1):454CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Cornish J, Harries RL, Bosanquet D, Rees B, Ansell J, Frewer N et al (2016) Hughes Abdominal Repair Trial (HART)—abdominal wall closure techniques to reduce the incidence of incisional hernias: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial. Trials 17(1):454CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
30.
Zurück zum Zitat CholeS Study Group WMRC (2016) Population-based cohort study of outcomes following cholecystectomy for benign gallbladder diseases. Br J Surg 103(12):1704–1715CrossRef CholeS Study Group WMRC (2016) Population-based cohort study of outcomes following cholecystectomy for benign gallbladder diseases. Br J Surg 103(12):1704–1715CrossRef
31.
Zurück zum Zitat Gjeraa K, Spanager L, Konge L, Petersen RH, Ostergaard D (2016) Non-technical skills in minimally invasive surgery teams: a systematic review. Surg Endosc 30(12):5185–5199CrossRefPubMed Gjeraa K, Spanager L, Konge L, Petersen RH, Ostergaard D (2016) Non-technical skills in minimally invasive surgery teams: a systematic review. Surg Endosc 30(12):5185–5199CrossRefPubMed
32.
Zurück zum Zitat Cuschieri GB, Hanna NK, Francis A (2001) Psychomotor ability testing and human reliability analysis (HRA) in surgical practice. Minim Invasive Therapy Allied Technol 10(3):181–195CrossRef Cuschieri GB, Hanna NK, Francis A (2001) Psychomotor ability testing and human reliability analysis (HRA) in surgical practice. Minim Invasive Therapy Allied Technol 10(3):181–195CrossRef
Metadaten
Titel
3D laparoscopy does not reduce operative duration or errors in day-case laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a randomised controlled trial
verfasst von
Katie E. Schwab
Nathan J. Curtis
Martin B. Whyte
Ralph V. Smith
Timothy A. Rockall
Karen Ballard
Iain C. Jourdan
Publikationsdatum
16.07.2019
Verlag
Springer US
Erschienen in
Surgical Endoscopy / Ausgabe 4/2020
Print ISSN: 0930-2794
Elektronische ISSN: 1432-2218
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-019-06961-1

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 4/2020

Surgical Endoscopy 4/2020 Zur Ausgabe

Wie erfolgreich ist eine Re-Ablation nach Rezidiv?

23.04.2024 Ablationstherapie Nachrichten

Nach der Katheterablation von Vorhofflimmern kommt es bei etwa einem Drittel der Patienten zu Rezidiven, meist binnen eines Jahres. Wie sich spätere Rückfälle auf die Erfolgschancen einer erneuten Ablation auswirken, haben Schweizer Kardiologen erforscht.

Hinter dieser Appendizitis steckte ein Erreger

23.04.2024 Appendizitis Nachrichten

Schmerzen im Unterbauch, aber sonst nicht viel, was auf eine Appendizitis hindeutete: Ein junger Mann hatte Glück, dass trotzdem eine Laparoskopie mit Appendektomie durchgeführt und der Wurmfortsatz histologisch untersucht wurde.

Mehr Schaden als Nutzen durch präoperatives Aussetzen von GLP-1-Agonisten?

23.04.2024 Operationsvorbereitung Nachrichten

Derzeit wird empfohlen, eine Therapie mit GLP-1-Rezeptoragonisten präoperativ zu unterbrechen. Eine neue Studie nährt jedoch Zweifel an der Notwendigkeit der Maßnahme.

Ureterstriktur: Innovative OP-Technik bewährt sich

19.04.2024 EAU 2024 Kongressbericht

Die Ureterstriktur ist eine relativ seltene Komplikation, trotzdem bedarf sie einer differenzierten Versorgung. In komplexen Fällen wird dies durch die roboterassistierte OP-Technik gewährleistet. Erste Resultate ermutigen.

Update Chirurgie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.

S3-Leitlinie „Diagnostik und Therapie des Karpaltunnelsyndroms“

Karpaltunnelsyndrom BDC Leitlinien Webinare
CME: 2 Punkte

Das Karpaltunnelsyndrom ist die häufigste Kompressionsneuropathie peripherer Nerven. Obwohl die Anamnese mit dem nächtlichen Einschlafen der Hand (Brachialgia parästhetica nocturna) sehr typisch ist, ist eine klinisch-neurologische Untersuchung und Elektroneurografie in manchen Fällen auch eine Neurosonografie erforderlich. Im Anfangsstadium sind konservative Maßnahmen (Handgelenksschiene, Ergotherapie) empfehlenswert. Bei nicht Ansprechen der konservativen Therapie oder Auftreten von neurologischen Ausfällen ist eine Dekompression des N. medianus am Karpaltunnel indiziert.

Prof. Dr. med. Gregor Antoniadis
Berufsverband der Deutschen Chirurgie e.V.

S2e-Leitlinie „Distale Radiusfraktur“

Radiusfraktur BDC Leitlinien Webinare
CME: 2 Punkte

Das Webinar beschäftigt sich mit Fragen und Antworten zu Diagnostik und Klassifikation sowie Möglichkeiten des Ausschlusses von Zusatzverletzungen. Die Referenten erläutern, welche Frakturen konservativ behandelt werden können und wie. Das Webinar beantwortet die Frage nach aktuellen operativen Therapiekonzepten: Welcher Zugang, welches Osteosynthesematerial? Auf was muss bei der Nachbehandlung der distalen Radiusfraktur geachtet werden?

PD Dr. med. Oliver Pieske
Dr. med. Benjamin Meyknecht
Berufsverband der Deutschen Chirurgie e.V.

S1-Leitlinie „Empfehlungen zur Therapie der akuten Appendizitis bei Erwachsenen“

Appendizitis BDC Leitlinien Webinare
CME: 2 Punkte

Inhalte des Webinars zur S1-Leitlinie „Empfehlungen zur Therapie der akuten Appendizitis bei Erwachsenen“ sind die Darstellung des Projektes und des Erstellungswegs zur S1-Leitlinie, die Erläuterung der klinischen Relevanz der Klassifikation EAES 2015, die wissenschaftliche Begründung der wichtigsten Empfehlungen und die Darstellung stadiengerechter Therapieoptionen.

Dr. med. Mihailo Andric
Berufsverband der Deutschen Chirurgie e.V.