Safety and efficacy of three-dimensional versus two-dimensional endoscopy in otolaryngology surgery and training: A systematic review.

OBJECTIVE

Three-dimensional (3D) endoscopy has been developed to provide depth perception to allow for improved visualisation during otolaryngology surgery. We conducted a systematic review to determine the surgical safety and efficacy of 3D endoscopy in comparison to two-dimensional (2D) endoscopy in performing otolaryngology procedures, and the role of 3D endoscopy as a training tool for novice otolaryngology surgeons.

METHODS

Primary studies were identified through MEDLINE, Embase and Web of Science databases, which were searched for articles published through June 2022 that compared the outcomes of 2D and 3D endoscopy in otolaryngology surgical procedures or otolaryngology-relevant simulations. Candidate articles were independently reviewed by two authors.

RESULTS

A total of 18 full-text articles met inclusion criteria for this study. In clinical trials (n = 8 studies, 362 subjects), there were no significant differences in performance time, intraoperative or postoperative complications with 3D endoscopes when compared to 2D. In simulation studies (n = 10 studies, 336 participants), 3D endoscopes demonstrated a decreased error rate (n = 5 studies) and shorter performance time (n = 3 studies). Studies also reported improved depth perception (n = 14 studies) and visualisation preference (n = 5 studies) with 3D over 2D systems. The 3D systems were found to have a shorter learning curve and better manoeuvrability among novice surgeons.

CONCLUSION

3D endoscopy showed equivalent safety and efficacy compared to 2D endoscopy in otolaryngology surgery. The improved depth perception and performance for novices using 3D endoscopes suggests the technology may be superior to 2D endoscopes as a training tool for otolaryngology surgeons.