A Comparison of Three-Dimensional Visualization Systems and Two-Dimensional Visualization Systems During Laparoscopic...

Background: Laparoscopic cholecystectomy is a common procedure for the definitive treatment for cholecystitis and symptomatic cholelithiasis. One advancement in minimally invasive surgery has been the development of three-dimensional (3D) visualization systems to provide stereopsis. It is yet to be determined whether this innovation is beneficial to the surgeon or simply just a gimmick. This narrative review aims to answer the following research question, what is the impact of 3D visualization systems on surgical efficiency compared with two-dimensional visualization systems in laparoscopic cholecystectomy? Methods: Through a broad literature search it was determined that operative time and intraoperative errors have been used in published research to assess intraoperative efficiency. Results: Studies published to date have used operative time, intraoperative errors, and intraoperative bleeding as current measures for intraoperative efficiency. Previous meta-analysis have shown a slight improvement in operative time for 3D visualization systems; however, subsequent randomized control trials have not shown a significant difference in operative time. Reporting of intraoperative errors has been quite subjective and a difference between visualisation modality has not been shown. Conclusion: 3D visualization systems have shown a minor improvement in operative time compared with traditional laparoscopic systems and it is unlikely to be of any clinical significance. Studies that measure intraoperative error vary greatly in what they report, and which assessment tool is used. Across existing literature, studies do not control for surgeon's experience, elective/emergent cases, and grade of gallbladder/difficulty. Further research is required, using novel tools for assessment in laparoscopic cholecystectomy to determine intraoperative differences through objective and quantitative variables.