Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Three-dimensional vision enhances task performance independently of the surgical method

  • Published:
Surgical Endoscopy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Within the next few years, the medical industry will launch increasingly affordable three-dimensional (3D) vision systems for the operating room (OR). This study aimed to evaluate the effect of two-dimensional (2D) and 3D visualization on surgical skills and task performance.

Methods

In this study, 34 individuals with varying laparoscopic experience (18 inexperienced individuals) performed three tasks to test spatial relationships, grasping and positioning, dexterity, precision, and hand–eye and hand–hand coordination. Each task was performed in 3D using binocular vision for open performance, the Viking 3Di Vision System for laparoscopic performance, and the DaVinci robotic system. The same tasks were repeated in 2D using an eye patch for monocular vision, conventional laparoscopy, and the DaVinci robotic system.

Results

Loss of 3D vision significantly increased the perceived difficulty of a task and the time required to perform it, independently of the approach (P < 0.0001–0.02). Simple tasks took 25 % to 30 % longer to complete and more complex tasks took 75 % longer with 2D than with 3D vision. Only the difficult task was performed faster with the robot than with laparoscopy (P = 0.005). In every case, 3D robotic performance was superior to conventional laparoscopy (2D) (P < 0.001–0.015).

Conclusions

The more complex the task, the more 3D vision accelerates task completion compared with 2D vision. The gain in task performance is independent of the surgical method.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Dagher I, Di Giuro G, Dubrez J, Lainas P, Smadja C, Franco D (2009) Laparoscopic versus open right hepatectomy: a comparative study. Am J Surg 198:173–177

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Keus F, de Jong JA, Gooszen HG, van Laarhoven CJ (2006) Laparoscopic versus open cholecystectomy for patients with symptomatic cholecystolithiasis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev (4):CD006231

  3. Laine S, Rantala A, Gullichsen R, Ovaska J (1997) Laparoscopic vs conventional Nissen fundoplication: a prospective randomized study. Surg Endosc 11:441–444

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Medeiros LR, Stein AT, Fachel J, Garry R, Furness S (2008) Laparoscopy versus laparotomy for benign ovarian tumor: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Gynecol Cancer 18:387–399

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Sauerland S, Lefering R, Neugebauer EA (2004) Laparoscopic versus open surgery for suspected appendicitis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev (4):CD001546

  6. Avital S, Zundel N, Szomstein S, Rosenthal R (2005) Laparoscopic transhiatal esophagectomy for esophageal cancer. Am J Surg 190(1):69–74

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Sinha CK, Paramalingam S, Patel S, Davenport M, Ade-Ajayi N (2009) Feasibility of complex minimally invasive surgery in neonates. Pediatr Surg Int 25:217–221

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Heemskerk J, Zandbergen R, Maessen JG, Greve JW, Bouvy ND (2006) Advantages of advanced laparoscopic systems. Surg Endosc 20:730–733

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Gallagher AG, Ritter EM, Lederman AB, McClusky DA III, Smith CD (2005) Video-assisted surgery represents more than a loss of three-dimensional vision. Am J Surg 189:76–80

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Hubber JW, Taffinder N, Russell RC, Darzi A (2003) The effects of different viewing conditions on performance in simulated minimal access surgery. Ergonomics 46:999–1016

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Risucci D, Geiss A, Gellman L, Pinard B, Rosser J (2001) Surgeon-specific factors in the acquisition of laparoscopic surgical skills. Am J Surg 181:289–293

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. 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 

  13. Goldstein E (2003) Blackwell handbook of sensation and perception, 6th edn. Wiley, Engelska

  14. Bhayani SB, Andriole GL (2005) Three-dimensional (3D) vision: does it improve laparoscopic skills? An assessment of a 3D head-mounted visualization system. Rev Urol 7:211–214

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Buess GF, van Bergen P, Kunert W, Schurr MO (1996) Comparative study of various 2-D and 3-D vision systems in minimally invasive surgery. Chirurg 67:1041–1046

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. 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  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Dion YM, Gaillard F (1997) Visual integration of data and basic motor skills under laparoscopy: influence of 2-D and 3-D video-camera systems. Surg Endosc 11:995–1000

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. 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  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. 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  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. 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  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Jones DB, Brewer JD, Soper NJ (1996) The influence of three-dimensional video systems on laparoscopic task performance. Surg Laparosc Endosc 6:191–197

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. 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  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Pietrabissa A, Scarcello E, Carobbi A, Mosca F (1994) Three-dimensional versus two-dimensional video system for the trained endoscopic surgeon and the beginner. Endosc Surg Allied Technol 2:315–317

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. 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  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Thomsen MN, Lang RD (2004) An experimental comparison of 3-dimensional and 2-dimensional endoscopic systems in a model. Arthroscopy 20:419–423

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. 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 

  29. 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 

  30. Badani KK, Bhandari A, Tewari A, Menon M (2005) Comparison of two-dimensional and three-dimensional suturing: Is there a difference in a robotic surgery setting? J Endourol 19:1212–1215

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Blavier A, Gaudissart Q, Cadiere GB, Nyssen AS (2006) Impact of 2D and 3D vision on performance of novice subjects using da Vinci robotic system. Acta Chir Belg 106:662–664

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Blavier A, Gaudissart Q, Cadiere GB, Nyssen AS (2007) Comparison of learning curves and skill transfer between classical and robotic laparoscopy according to the viewing conditions: implications for training. Am J Surg 194:115–121

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Falk V, Mintz D, Grunenfelder J, Fann JI, Burdon TA (2001) Influence of three-dimensional vision on surgical telemanipulator performance. Surg Endosc 15:1282–1288

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Hubens G, Coveliers H, Balliu L, Ruppert M, Vaneerdeweg W (2003) A performance study comparing manual and robotically assisted laparoscopic surgery using the da Vinci system. Surg Endosc 17:1595–1599

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. 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  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. LaGrange CA, Clark CJ, Gerber EW, Strup SE (2008) Evaluation of three laparoscopic modalities: robotics versus three-dimensional vision laparoscopy versus standard laparoscopy. J Endourol 22:511–516

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Moorthy K, Munz Y, Dosis A, Hernandez J, Martin S, Bello F, Rockall T, Darzi A (2004) Dexterity enhancement with robotic surgery. Surg Endosc 18:790–795

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Munz Y, Moorthy K, Dosis A, Hernandez JD, Bann S, Bello F, Martin S, Darzi A, Rockall T (2004) The benefits of stereoscopic vision in robotic-assisted performance on bench models. Surg Endosc 18:611–616

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. 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  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. 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 

  41. Hasson HM, Jason H (2007) Information retention and skill acquisition after CME meetings. Laparosc Today 6:4–6

    Google Scholar 

  42. Vickers AJ, Savage CJ, Hruza M, Tuerk I, Koenig P, Martinez-Pineiro L, Janetschek G, Guillonneau B (2009) The surgical learning curve for laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: a retrospective cohort study. Lancet Oncol 10:475–480

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Disclosures

Monika E. Hagen receives a salary from Intuitive Surgical Inc. However, the financial relation started after the current study was completed. O. J. Wagner, Anita Kurmann, S. Horgan, Daniel Candinas, and Stephan A. Vorburger have no conflicts of interest or financial ties to disclose.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Visceral and Transplantation Surgery, Inselspital, University Hospital Bern and University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland

    O. J. Wagner, M. Hagen, A. Kurmann, D. Candinas & S. A. Vorburger

  2. Department of Surgery, Center for the Future of Surgery, University of California, San Diego, CA, USA

    O. J. Wagner & S. Horgan

  3. Division of Visceral Surgery, University Hospital Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland

    M. Hagen

  4. Regional Hospital Emmental, Oberburgstrasse 54, 3400, Burgdorf, Switzerland

    S. A. Vorburger

Authors
  1. O. J. Wagner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. M. Hagen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. A. Kurmann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. S. Horgan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. D. Candinas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. S. A. Vorburger
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to S. A. Vorburger.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Wagner, O.J., Hagen, M., Kurmann, A. et al. Three-dimensional vision enhances task performance independently of the surgical method. Surg Endosc 26, 2961–2968 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-012-2295-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-012-2295-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation