Three-Dimensional Versus Two-Dimensional Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: In the last decades, the three-dimensional (3D) imaging systems have been introduced in an attempt to improve depth perception and image quality during laparoscopic cholecystectomy interventions. The goal of our systematic review was to provide enough convincing evidences on superiority and benefits of 3D over two-dimensional (2D) imaging systems, from both surgeon's and patient's point of view, justifying the cost-effectiveness of newly developed 3D systems.

METHODS: Two authors separately performed a full literature search aiming to find randomized controlled trials evaluating the advantages and disadvantages of 3D versus 2D laparoscopic cholecystectomy procedures. The patients who underwent elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy were included in this study irrespective of their age and sex. Differing opinions between the two authors were reviewed by the third author.

RESULTS: A total of 912 articles were initially reviewed by their titles and abstracts for eligibility. After being filtered through predetermined inclusion and exclusion criteria, and excluding the duplicates, only 10 studies underwent the final evaluation by the full text assessment. Eventually, only five randomized controlled studies were included in this study. Operative time and depth perception/image quality were set as the primary and secondary outcomes, respectively. The operative time was significantly shorter in 60% of the studies. Of five studies that evaluated the depth perception and image quality, all five (100%) reported a better depth perception and image quality.

CONCLUSIONS: 3D imaging systems tend to shorten the operative time compared to 2D systems and result in a better depth perception. More studies and investigations with bigger cohort sizes and using unique 3D visual systems are necessary to justify the cost-effectiveness of the new, more expensive 3D systems.