Related Experiment Video
Updated: Mar 9, 2026

Utilizing a 3D Printed Laparoscopic Nissen Fundoplication Model to Shorten a Resident's Learning Curve
Published on: August 15, 2025
Impact of Training on Three-Dimensional versus Two-Dimensional Laparoscopic Systems on Acquisition of Laparoscopic
Yasser A Noureldin1, Ana Stoica2, Pepa Kaneva2
1Division of Urology, McGill University Health Center, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada; Department of Urology, Benha University Hospital, Benha University, Benha, Egypt.
Abstract:
In this prospective educational study, 10 medical students (novices) were randomized to practice two basic laparoscopic tasks from the MISTELS program, namely, Pegboard Transfer (PT) and Intracorporeal Knot Tying (IKT) tasks, using either a 2D or a 3D laparoscopic platform. There was no significant difference between both groups in the baseline assessments (PT task: 130.8 ± 18.7 versus 151.5 ± 33.4; p = 0.35) (IKT task: 123.9 ± 41.0 versus 122.9 ± 44.9; p = 0.986). Following two training sessions, there was a significant increase in the scores of PT task for the 2D (130.8 ± 18.7 versus 222.6 ± 7.0; p = 0.0004) and the 3D groups (151.5 ± 33.4 versus 211.7 ± 16.2; p = 0.0001). Similarly, there was a significant increase in the scores of IKT task for the 2D (123.9 ± 41.0 versus 373.3 ± 47.2; p = 0.003) and the 3D groups (122.9 ± 44.9 versus 338.8 ± 28.6; p = 0.0005). However, there was no significant difference in the final assessment scores between 2D and 3D groups for both tasks (p > 0.05). Therefore, 3D laparoscopic systems do not provide an advantage over 2D systems for training novices in basic laparoscopic skills.
More Related Videos
09:51Model Surgical Training: Skills Acquisition in Fetoscopic Laser Photocoagulation of Monochorionic Diamniotic Twin Placenta Using Realistic Simulators
Published on: March 21, 2018
06:39Three-dimensional Location Approach with Silk Thread Guided Laparoscopic Segmentectomy for Liver Tumor
Published on: May 23, 2025