The effect on surgical skills of expert surgeons using 3D/HD and 2D/4K resolution monitors in laparoscopic phantom tasks

Hishida, Hitoshi; Kanaji, Shingo; Hasegawa, Hiroshi; Yamamoto, Masashi; Matsuda, Yoshiko; Yamashita, Kimihiro; Matsuda, Takeru; Oshikiri, Taro; Sumi, Yasuo; Nakamura, Tetsu; Suzuki, Satoshi; Kakeji, Yoshihiro

doi:10.1007/s00464-018-6169-1

Cited by 68 publications

(52 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Harada et al compared 3D HD and 4K laparoscopes in a simulator environment [19], and reported that performance in knotting and suturing tasks was equivalent for 3D and 4K when performed in confined spaces; however, 3D was superior to 4K in more open spaces. This difference was attributed to the shadows in confined spaces, and hence the enhanced monocular depth cues.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Is 3D faster and safer than 4K laparoscopic cholecystectomy? A randomised-controlled trial

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Laparoscopic surgery has well-established benefits for patients; however, laparoscopic procedures have a long and difficult learning curve, in large part due to the lack of stereoscopic depth perception. Developments in high-definition and stereoscopic imaging have attempted to overcome this. Three-dimensional high-definition (3D HD) systems are thought to improve operating times compared to two-dimensional high-definition systems. However their performance against new, ultra-high-definition ('4K') systems is not known. Methods Patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy were randomised to 3D HD or 4K laparoscopy. Operative videos were recorded, and the time from gallbladder exposure to separation from the liver (minus on table cholangiogram) was calculated. Blinded video assessment was performed to calculate intraoperative error scores. Results One hundred and twenty patients were randomised, of which 109 were analysed (3D HD n = 54; 4K n = 55). No reduction in operative time was detected with 3D HD compared to 4K laparoscopy (median [IQR]; 23.41 min [17.00-37.98] vs 20.90 min [17.67-33.03]; p = 0.91); nor was there any decrease observed in error scores (60 [56-62] vs 58 [56][57][58][59][60]; p = 0.27), complications or reattendance. Stone spillage occurred more frequently with 3D HD, but there were no other differences in individual error rates. Gallbladder grade and operating surgeon had significant effects on time to complete the operation. Gallbladder grade also had a significant effect on the error score. Conclusions A 3D HD laparoscopic system did not reduce operative time or error scores during laparoscopic cholecystectomy compared with a new 4K imaging system.Publisher's Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Is 3D faster and safer than 4K laparoscopic cholecystectomy? A randomised-controlled trial

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This does not occur when working with a conventional 2K endoscope. In addition, with the 8K endoscope, we felt a natural sense of depth when we were close to 3‐D images; this sense was thought to be related to the stereoscopic effect derived from very high‐resolution images . The surgeon can perform more accurate surgery with a high sense of presence while visually recognizing precise images with the stereoscopic effect.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 96%

“…In particular, it is important to improve the quality of the images displayed on the monitor. The use of the 2K high‐definition endoscope (1920 × 1080 pixels) is widespread, but the 3‐D endoscope and 4K endoscope (3840 × 2160 pixels) have also recently been used in the clinical setting . We performed laparoscopic surgery for three cases of colorectal cancer using an 8K ultra‐high‐definition (UHD) endoscope (7680 × 4320 pixels) and assessed our clinical experience with this endoscope system.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fruitful first experience with an 8K ultra‐high‐definition endoscope for laparoscopic colorectal surgery

Ohigashi

Takenaka

Shimada

et al. 2018

Asian J Endoscop Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We performed laparoscopic surgery for three cases of colorectal cancer using an 8K ultra-high-definition endoscopic system, which offers 16-fold higher resolution than the current 2K high-definition endoscope. The weight of the camera has been successfully reduced to 370 g. To maximize the advantages of the 8K ultra-high-definition endoscope, surgery was performed by darkening the room and placing a large 85-in. display as close to the surgeon as possible. As a result, the autonomic nerve was preserved, and the membrane structure could be clearly observed. Moreover, we were able to feel the stereoscopic effect near the 3-D image. This suggests the possibility of improved curability and function preservation with the 8K endoscope. Although there are some disadvantages that need to be overcome, the 8K ultra-high-definition endoscope will surely contribute to further progress in laparoscopic surgery. Details of the 8K UHD endoscope systemWe used the 8K UHD endoscopic system (8), which consists of an 8K camera head, rigid endoscope, xenon light source, camera control unit, 8K monitor, and 8K Asian J Endosc Surg 12 (2019) 362-365

show abstract

“…In certain situations 4K technique might be beneficial: Harada et al compared minimally invasive suturing tasks performed by expert laparoscopic surgeons and saw an improved surgical performance with the 3D compared to 4K, but in narrow spaces with low grades of instrument movement 4K and 3D were comparable. 23 This was also reflected by the IDOSP- trial, where 4K only once outperformed the 3D system: in “paper cut” a static precise cut of exact 5 mm length cm on a 2 mm wide line should be performed. Here ultra-high resolution and zoom could be of value.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

3D Versus 4K Display System – Influence of “State-of-the-art”-Display Technique on Surgical Performance (IDOSP-study) in Minimally Invasive Surgery

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To evaluate if “state-of-the-art” 3D- versus 4K-display techniques could influence surgical performance. Background: High quality minimally invasive surgery is challenging. Therefore excellent vision is crucial. 3D display technique (3D) and 2D-4K technique (4K) are designed to facilitate surgical performance, either due to spatial resolution (3D) or due to very high resolution (4K). Methods: In randomized cross-over trial the surgical performance of medical students (MS), non-board certified surgeons (NBC), and board certified surgeons (BC) was compared using 3D versus 4K display technique at a minimally invasive training Parkour. Results: One hundred twenty-eight participants were included (February 2018 through October 2019, 49 MS, 39 NBC, 40 BC). The overall Parkour time (s) 3D versus 4K was 712.5 s ± 17.5 s versus 999.5 s ± 25.1 s ( P < 0.001) for all levels of experience. It was (3D vs 4K) for MS (30 tasks) 555.4 s ± 28.9 s versus 858.7 s ± 41.6 s, ( P < 0.0001), for NBC (42 tasks) 935.9 s ± 31.5 s versus 1274.1 s ± 45.1 s ( P =< 0.001) and for BC (42 task) 646.3 s ± 30.9 s versus 865.7 s ± 43.7 s ( P < 0.001). The overall number of mistakes was (3D vs 4K) 10.0 ± 0.5 versus 13.3 ± 0.7 ( P < 0.001), for MS 8.9 ± 0.9 versus 13.1 ± 1.1 ( P < 0.001), for NBC 12.45 ± 1.0 versus 16.7 ± 1.2 ( P < 0.001) and for BC 8.8 ± 1.0 versus 10.0 ± 1.2 ( P = 0.18). MS, BC, and NBC showed shorter performance time in 100% of the task with 3D (significantly in 6/7 tasks). For number of mistakes the effect was less pronounced for more experienced surgeons. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration-task load index was lower with 3D. Conclusion: 3D laparoscopic display technique optimizes surgical performance compared to the 4K technique. Surgeons benefit from the improved visualization regardless of their individual surgical expertise.

show abstract

The effect on surgical skills of expert surgeons using 3D/HD and 2D/4K resolution monitors in laparoscopic phantom tasks

Abstract: Compared to a 2D/HD monitor, a 3D/HD monitor improved the laparoscopic surgical technique of expert surgeons more than a 2D/4K monitor. However, the advantage of 2D/4K high-resolution images may be comparable to a 3D/HD monitor especially in narrow spaces.

Cited by 68 publications

References 12 publications

Is 3D faster and safer than 4K laparoscopic cholecystectomy? A randomised-controlled trial

Is 3D faster and safer than 4K laparoscopic cholecystectomy? A randomised-controlled trial

Fruitful first experience with an 8K ultra‐high‐definition endoscope for laparoscopic colorectal surgery

3D Versus 4K Display System – Influence of “State-of-the-art”-Display Technique on Surgical Performance (IDOSP-study) in Minimally Invasive Surgery

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About