Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Comparison of two- and three-dimensional camera systems in laparoscopic performance: a novel 3D system with one camera

  • Published:
Surgical Endoscopy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

This study evaluated the effects of a three-dimensional (3D) imaging system on laparoscopy performance compared with the conventional 2D system using a novel one-camera 3D system.

Methods

In this study, 21 novices and 6 experienced surgeons performed two tasks with 2D and 3D systems in 4 consecutive days. Performance time and error as well as subjective parameters such as depth perception and visual discomforts were assessed in each session. Electromyography was used to evaluate the usage of muscles.

Results

The 3D system provided significantly greater depth perception than the 2D system. The errors during the two tasks were significantly lower with 3D system in novice group, but performance time was not different between the 2D and 3D systems. The novices had more dizziness with the 3D system in first 2 days. However, the severity of dizziness was minimal (less than 2 of 10) and overcome with the passage of time. About 54% of the novices and 80% of the experienced surgeons preferred the 3D system. Electromyography (EMG) showed a tendency toward less usage of the right arm and more usage of the left arm with the 3D system.

Conclusion

The new 3D imaging system increased the accuracy of laparoscopy performance, with greater depth perception and only minimal dizziness. The authors expect that the 3D laparoscopic system could provide good depth perception and accuracy in surgery.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Berguer R, Smith WD, Chung YH (2001) Performing laparoscopic surgery is significantly more stressful for the surgeon than open surgery. Surg Endosc 15:1204–1207

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Gofrit ON, Mikahail AA, Zorn KC, Zagaja GP, Steinberg GD, Shalhav AL (2008) Surgeons’ perceptions and injuries during and after urologic laparoscopic surgery. Urology 71:404–407

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Berguer R, Gerber S, Kilpatrick G, Remler M, Beckley D (1999) A comparison of forearm and thumb muscle electromyographic responses to the use of laparoscopic instruments with either a finger grasp or a palm grasp. Ergonomics 42:1634–1645

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Galleano R, Carter F, Brown S, Frank T, Cuschieri A (2006) Can armrests improve comfort and task performance in laparoscopic surgery? Ann Surg 243:329–333

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Jourdan IC, Dutson E, Garcia A, Vleugels T, Leroy J, Mutter D, Marescaux J (2004) Stereoscopic vision provides a significant advantage for precision robotic laparoscopy. Br J Surg 91:879–885

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Becker H, Melzer A, Schurr MO, Buess G (1993) 3-D video techniques in endoscopic surgery. Endosc Surg Allied Technol 1:40–46

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. van Bergen P, Kunert W, Bessell J, Buess GF (1998) Comparative study of two-dimensional and three-dimensional vision systems for minimally invasive surgery. Surg Endosc 12:948–954

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Birkett DH, Josephs LG, Este-McDonald J (1994) A new 3-D laparoscope in gastrointestinal surgery. Surg Endosc 8:1448–1451

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Taffinder N, Smith SG, Huber J, Russell RC, Darzi A (1999) The effect of a second-generation 3D endoscope on the laparoscopic precision of novices and experienced surgeons. Surg Endosc 13:1087–1092

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Tevaearai HT, Mueller XM, von Segesser LK (2000) 3-D vision improves performance in a pelvic trainer. Endoscopy 32:464–468

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Peitgen K, Walz MV, Holtmann G, Eigler FW (1996) A prospective randomized experimental evaluation of three-dimensional imaging in laparoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc 44:262–267

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Chan AC, Chung SC, Yim AP, Lau JY, Ng EK, Li AK (1997) Comparison of two-dimensional vs three-dimensional camera systems in laparoscopic surgery. Surg Endosc 11:438–440

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Hanna GB, Shimi SM, Cuschieri A (1998) Randomised study of influence of two-dimensional versus three-dimensional imaging on performance of laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Lancet 351:248–251

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Herron DM, Lantis JC II, Maykel J, Basu C, Schwaitzberg SD (1999) The 3-D monitor and head-mounted display: a quantitative evaluation of advanced laparoscopic viewing technologies. Surg Endosc 13:751–755

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. McDougall EM, Soble JJ, Wolf JS Jr, Nakada SY, Elashry OM, Clayman RV (1996) Comparison of three-dimensional and two-dimensional laparoscopic video systems. J Endourol 10:371–374

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Mueller MD, Camartin C, Dreher E, Hanggi W (1999) Three-dimensional laparoscopy: gadget or progress? A randomized trial on the efficacy of three-dimensional laparoscopy. Surg Endosc 13:469–472

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Sun CC, Chiu AW, Chen KK, Chang LS (2000) Assessment of a three-dimensional operating system with skill tests in a pelvic trainer. Urol Int 64:154–158

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Byrn JC, Schluender S, Divino CM, Conrad J, Gurland B, Shlasko E, Szold A (2007) Three-dimensional imaging improves surgical performance for both novice and experienced operators using the da Vinci Robot System. Am J Surg 193:519–522

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Votanopoulos K, Brunicardi FC, Thornby J, Bellows CF (2008) Impact of three-dimensional vision in laparoscopic training. World J Surg 32:110–118

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Patel HR, Ribal MJ, Arya M, Nauth-Misir R, Joseph JV (2007) Is it worth revisiting laparoscopic three-dimensional visualization? A validated assessment. Urology 70:47–49

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Yohannes P, Rotariu P, Pinto P, Smith AD, Lee BR (2002) Comparison of robotic versus laparoscopic skills: is there a difference in the learning curve? Urology 60:39–45 discussion 45

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Guru KA, Kuvshinoff BW, Pavlov-Shapiro S, Bienko MB, Aftab MN, Brady WE, Mohler JL (2007) Impact of robotics and laparoscopy on surgical skills: a comparative study. J Am Coll Surg 204:96–101

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Vlaovic PD, Sargent ER, Boker JR, Corica FA, Chou DS, Abdelshehid CS, White SM, Sala LG, Chu F, Le T, Clayman RV, McDougall EM (2008) Immediate impact of an intensive one-week laparoscopy training program on laparoscopic skills among postgraduate urologists. JSLS 12:1–8

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Tendick F, Bhoyrul S, Way LW (1997) Comparison of laparoscopic imaging systems and conditions using a knot-tying task. Comput Aided Surg 2:24–33

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Perotto A (1994) Anatomical guide for the electromyographer, the limbs and trunk, 3rd edn. Thomas, Springfield

    Google Scholar 

  26. Fishman JM, Ellis SR, Hasser CJ, Stern JD (2008) Effect of reduced stereoscopic camera separation on ring placement with a surgical telerobot. Surg Endosc 22:2396–2400

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Hanna GB, Cuschieri A (2000) Influence of two-dimensional and three-dimensional imaging on endoscopic bowel suturing. World J Surg 24:444–448 discussion 448–449

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Voorhorst FA, Overbeeke KJ, Smets GJ (1996) Using movement parallax for 3D laparoscopy. Med Prog Technol 21:211–218

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Gallagher AG, Cowie R, Crothers I, Jordan-Black JA, Satava RM (2003) PicSOr: an objective test of perceptual skill that predicts laparoscopic technical skill in three initial studies of laparoscopic performance. Surg Endosc 17:1468–1471

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Hagiike M, Phillips EH, Berci G (2007) Performance differences in laparoscopic surgical skills between true high-definition and three-chip CCD video systems. Surg Endosc 21:1849–1854

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Blehm C, Vishnu S, Khattak A, Mitra S, Yee RW (2005) Computer vision syndrome: a review. Surv Ophthalmol 50:253–262

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We thank the medical students, interns, and fellow surgeons who participated in this study. We also thank Tae Su Han, Jae Jin Cho, and Jee Eun Yoo for their contributions of time checking and EMG monitoring to this study.

Disclosures

Seong-Ho Kong, Byung-Mo Oh, Hongman Yoon, Hye Seong Ahn, Hyuk-Joon Lee, Sun Geun Chung, Norio Shiraishi, Seigo Kitano, and Han-Kwang Yang have no conflicts of interest or financial ties to disclose.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgery, Seoul National University College of Medicine, 28 Yongon-dong, Chongno-gu, Seoul, 110-744, Korea

    Seong-Ho Kong, Hongman Yoon, Hye Seong Ahn, Hyuk-Joon Lee & Han-Kwang Yang

  2. Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, Seoul National University College of Medicine, 28 Yongon-dong, Chongno-gu, Seoul, 110-744, Korea

    Byung-Mo Oh & Sun Geun Chung

  3. Department of Surgery I, Faculty of Medicine, Oita University, Oita, Japan

    Norio Shiraishi & Seigo Kitano

Authors
  1. Seong-Ho Kong
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Byung-Mo Oh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Hongman Yoon
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Hye Seong Ahn
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Hyuk-Joon Lee
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Sun Geun Chung
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Norio Shiraishi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Seigo Kitano
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Han-Kwang Yang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Han-Kwang Yang.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kong, SH., Oh, BM., Yoon, H. et al. Comparison of two- and three-dimensional camera systems in laparoscopic performance: a novel 3D system with one camera. Surg Endosc 24, 1132–1143 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-009-0740-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-009-0740-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation