Hanna G B, Cuschieri A
Department of Surgery and Surgical Skills Unit, Ninewells Hospital and Medical School, University of Dundee, Dundee Tayside DD1 9SY, UK.
World J Surg. 2000 Apr;24(4):444-8; discussion 448-9. doi: 10.1007/s002689910070.
Several three-dimensional (3-D) video-endoscopic systems have been introduced in surgical practice to enhance depth perception during minimal access surgery (MAS), but the facilitation of endoscopic manipulations by the current 3-D systems remains unproved. The aim of the study was to investigate the influence of 2-D and 3-D imaging modalities on intracorporeal suturing. The standard task consisted of suture closure of 60 mm enterotomies made in porcine small bowel with continuous seromuscular 3/0 Polysorb. Ten experienced surgeons participated in the study. The imaging systems were Storz (2-D), Welch Allyn (3-D), and Zeiss (as both 2-D and 3-D). Each surgeon performed two tasks with each modality in a random sequence. The outcome measures were execution time, suture line leakage pressure, and suture placement score. In addition, the participating surgeons assigned subjective scores on the image quality and the adverse effects of the imaging systems. There was no significant difference in the execution time, leakage pressure, and suture placement score among the various imaging modalities. Depth perception was rated as similar with 2-D and 3-D imaging. Surgeons experienced visual strain with the three systems, but it was rated higher with 3-D imaging. With the current technology, we have not documented any significant difference in task efficiency and quality of endoscopic bowel suturing by trained surgeons between 2-D and 3-D imaging systems.
几种三维(3-D)视频内窥镜系统已被引入外科手术实践中,以增强微创外科手术(MAS)期间的深度感知,但目前的3-D系统在内镜操作便利性方面仍未得到证实。本研究的目的是调查二维(2-D)和三维(3-D)成像模式对体内缝合的影响。标准任务包括用连续浆肌层3/0聚乙醇酸缝线缝合猪小肠上60毫米的肠切开处。十名经验丰富的外科医生参与了该研究。成像系统分别为史托斯(2-D)、伟伦(3-D)和蔡司(兼具2-D和3-D功能)。每位外科医生以随机顺序对每种模式执行两项任务。结果指标包括执行时间、缝线处渗漏压力和缝线放置评分。此外,参与研究的外科医生对成像系统的图像质量和不良反应给出主观评分。不同成像模式在执行时间、渗漏压力和缝线放置评分方面没有显著差异。二维和三维成像的深度感知被评为相似。外科医生在使用这三种系统时都经历了视觉疲劳,但三维成像的视觉疲劳评分更高。就目前的技术而言,我们尚未记录到在二维和三维成像系统之间,经过训练的外科医生在内镜肠缝合的任务效率和质量上有任何显著差异。