Two-Dimensional Versus Three-Dimensional Laparoscopic Systems in Urology: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Two-Dimensional Versus Three-Dimensional Laparoscopic Systems in Urology: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Laparoscopy is widely used in the urological field. This systematic review and a meta-analysis were conducted to assess the clinical and surgical efficacy of the three-dimensional (3D) laparoscopic system in comparison with two-dimensional (2D) laparoscopy for treatment of different urological condi...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of endourology 2018-09, Vol.32 (9), p.781-790
Hauptverfasser: Dirie, Najib Isse, Wang, Qing, Wang, Shaogang
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Review
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 790
container_issue 9
container_start_page 781
container_title Journal of endourology
container_volume 32
creator Dirie, Najib Isse
Wang, Qing
Wang, Shaogang
description Laparoscopy is widely used in the urological field. This systematic review and a meta-analysis were conducted to assess the clinical and surgical efficacy of the three-dimensional (3D) laparoscopic system in comparison with two-dimensional (2D) laparoscopy for treatment of different urological conditions. Following guidelines of Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses, a systematic literature search in Web of Science, PubMed, Cochrane Library, and EMBase was carried out to identify relevant studies published up to May 2018. Articles published in the English language of both randomized and observational studies comparing 3D and 2D laparoscopic systems in urological surgeries were included. Level of evidence and quality assessments of all included studies were conducted. Interested data were extracted for comparison and meta-analysis. Our literature search generated 17 studies comparing 3D and 2D laparoscopic systems in different urological surgeries. Of these, 13 studies containing 548 and 449 patients operated on with 2D and 3D laparoscopic systems, respectively, were included for meta-analysis. These 13 studies were divided into three groups according to surgical type. Group 1: Partial nephrectomy (PN); operative time (p = 0.19), estimated blood loss (EBL) (p = 0.51), dissecting time (p = 0.58), and suturing time (p = 0.28) were not statistically significant between 2D and 3D laparoscopic systems. However, warm ischemia time during PN was significantly shorter during 3D laparoscopy (p 
doi_str_mv 10.1089/end.2018.0411
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_6156697</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2064240529</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c387t-b1ac6b216d6bb7cd0d0a9b90c3d3e161d3b4d63d761e70bef0114959ee343d3a3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpVkUFPGzEQRq0KVNK0x17RHrlsOrPe9cY9VIootEhBSDRB3CyvPQGj3XVqb0D59zgiIDhZmu_pG2seY98RJghT-YN6OykApxMoET-xEVZVnUuA2wM2SnmR17WEI_YlxgcA5AL5Z3ZUSCmkxGLE_OLJ579dR310vtdtdkMhbmK2uA9EH4K5Xuvgo_FrZ7J_2zhQFzPXZ8vgW3-3_ZnN9lM9JOCaHh09Zbq32SUNOp-lim108Ss7XOk20rf9O2bL87PF6d98fvXn4nQ2zw2f1kPeoDaiKVBY0TS1sWBBy0aC4ZYTCrS8Ka3gthZINTS0AsRSVpKIlwnRfMx-vfSuN01H1lA_BN2qdXCdDlvltVMfk97dqzv_qARWQsg6FZzsC4L_v6E4qM5FQ22re_KbqAoQZVFCVciE5i-oSfeJgVZvaxDUTpJKktROktpJSvzx-7-90a9W-DMRGpCN</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2064240529</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Two-Dimensional Versus Three-Dimensional Laparoscopic Systems in Urology: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis</title><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Dirie, Najib Isse ; Wang, Qing ; Wang, Shaogang</creator><creatorcontrib>Dirie, Najib Isse ; Wang, Qing ; Wang, Shaogang</creatorcontrib><description>Laparoscopy is widely used in the urological field. This systematic review and a meta-analysis were conducted to assess the clinical and surgical efficacy of the three-dimensional (3D) laparoscopic system in comparison with two-dimensional (2D) laparoscopy for treatment of different urological conditions. Following guidelines of Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses, a systematic literature search in Web of Science, PubMed, Cochrane Library, and EMBase was carried out to identify relevant studies published up to May 2018. Articles published in the English language of both randomized and observational studies comparing 3D and 2D laparoscopic systems in urological surgeries were included. Level of evidence and quality assessments of all included studies were conducted. Interested data were extracted for comparison and meta-analysis. Our literature search generated 17 studies comparing 3D and 2D laparoscopic systems in different urological surgeries. Of these, 13 studies containing 548 and 449 patients operated on with 2D and 3D laparoscopic systems, respectively, were included for meta-analysis. These 13 studies were divided into three groups according to surgical type. Group 1: Partial nephrectomy (PN); operative time (p = 0.19), estimated blood loss (EBL) (p = 0.51), dissecting time (p = 0.58), and suturing time (p = 0.28) were not statistically significant between 2D and 3D laparoscopic systems. However, warm ischemia time during PN was significantly shorter during 3D laparoscopy (p &lt; 0.00001). Group 2: Pyeloplasty; this procedure showed no significant difference between the two systems. Group 3: Radical prostatectomy (RP); shorter operative time (p &lt; 0.0001) and lower EBL (p = 0.001) were associated with the 3D laparoscopic system. Three-dimensional laparoscopy mainly improves the depth of perception, leading to better visibility, which is important for some complex urological surgeries such as PN, pyeloplasty, and RP. Based on our findings, 3D laparoscopy seems to provide better clinical and surgical outcomes in some urological procedures compared with conventional 2D laparoscopy.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0892-7790</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1557-900X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1089/end.2018.0411</identifier><identifier>PMID: 29969912</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Mary Ann Liebert, Inc., publishers</publisher><subject>Review</subject><ispartof>Journal of endourology, 2018-09, Vol.32 (9), p.781-790</ispartof><rights>Najib Isse Dirie et al. 2018; Published by Mary Ann Liebert, Inc. 2018</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c387t-b1ac6b216d6bb7cd0d0a9b90c3d3e161d3b4d63d761e70bef0114959ee343d3a3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c387t-b1ac6b216d6bb7cd0d0a9b90c3d3e161d3b4d63d761e70bef0114959ee343d3a3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>230,314,776,780,881,27901,27902</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29969912$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Dirie, Najib Isse</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wang, Qing</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wang, Shaogang</creatorcontrib><title>Two-Dimensional Versus Three-Dimensional Laparoscopic Systems in Urology: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis</title><title>Journal of endourology</title><addtitle>J Endourol</addtitle><description>Laparoscopy is widely used in the urological field. This systematic review and a meta-analysis were conducted to assess the clinical and surgical efficacy of the three-dimensional (3D) laparoscopic system in comparison with two-dimensional (2D) laparoscopy for treatment of different urological conditions. Following guidelines of Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses, a systematic literature search in Web of Science, PubMed, Cochrane Library, and EMBase was carried out to identify relevant studies published up to May 2018. Articles published in the English language of both randomized and observational studies comparing 3D and 2D laparoscopic systems in urological surgeries were included. Level of evidence and quality assessments of all included studies were conducted. Interested data were extracted for comparison and meta-analysis. Our literature search generated 17 studies comparing 3D and 2D laparoscopic systems in different urological surgeries. Of these, 13 studies containing 548 and 449 patients operated on with 2D and 3D laparoscopic systems, respectively, were included for meta-analysis. These 13 studies were divided into three groups according to surgical type. Group 1: Partial nephrectomy (PN); operative time (p = 0.19), estimated blood loss (EBL) (p = 0.51), dissecting time (p = 0.58), and suturing time (p = 0.28) were not statistically significant between 2D and 3D laparoscopic systems. However, warm ischemia time during PN was significantly shorter during 3D laparoscopy (p &lt; 0.00001). Group 2: Pyeloplasty; this procedure showed no significant difference between the two systems. Group 3: Radical prostatectomy (RP); shorter operative time (p &lt; 0.0001) and lower EBL (p = 0.001) were associated with the 3D laparoscopic system. Three-dimensional laparoscopy mainly improves the depth of perception, leading to better visibility, which is important for some complex urological surgeries such as PN, pyeloplasty, and RP. Based on our findings, 3D laparoscopy seems to provide better clinical and surgical outcomes in some urological procedures compared with conventional 2D laparoscopy.</description><subject>Review</subject><issn>0892-7790</issn><issn>1557-900X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2018</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNpVkUFPGzEQRq0KVNK0x17RHrlsOrPe9cY9VIootEhBSDRB3CyvPQGj3XVqb0D59zgiIDhZmu_pG2seY98RJghT-YN6OykApxMoET-xEVZVnUuA2wM2SnmR17WEI_YlxgcA5AL5Z3ZUSCmkxGLE_OLJ579dR310vtdtdkMhbmK2uA9EH4K5Xuvgo_FrZ7J_2zhQFzPXZ8vgW3-3_ZnN9lM9JOCaHh09Zbq32SUNOp-lim108Ss7XOk20rf9O2bL87PF6d98fvXn4nQ2zw2f1kPeoDaiKVBY0TS1sWBBy0aC4ZYTCrS8Ka3gthZINTS0AsRSVpKIlwnRfMx-vfSuN01H1lA_BN2qdXCdDlvltVMfk97dqzv_qARWQsg6FZzsC4L_v6E4qM5FQ22re_KbqAoQZVFCVciE5i-oSfeJgVZvaxDUTpJKktROktpJSvzx-7-90a9W-DMRGpCN</recordid><startdate>20180912</startdate><enddate>20180912</enddate><creator>Dirie, Najib Isse</creator><creator>Wang, Qing</creator><creator>Wang, Shaogang</creator><general>Mary Ann Liebert, Inc., publishers</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20180912</creationdate><title>Two-Dimensional Versus Three-Dimensional Laparoscopic Systems in Urology: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis</title><author>Dirie, Najib Isse ; Wang, Qing ; Wang, Shaogang</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c387t-b1ac6b216d6bb7cd0d0a9b90c3d3e161d3b4d63d761e70bef0114959ee343d3a3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2018</creationdate><topic>Review</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Dirie, Najib Isse</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wang, Qing</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wang, Shaogang</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Journal of endourology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Dirie, Najib Isse</au><au>Wang, Qing</au><au>Wang, Shaogang</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Two-Dimensional Versus Three-Dimensional Laparoscopic Systems in Urology: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis</atitle><jtitle>Journal of endourology</jtitle><addtitle>J Endourol</addtitle><date>2018-09-12</date><risdate>2018</risdate><volume>32</volume><issue>9</issue><spage>781</spage><epage>790</epage><pages>781-790</pages><issn>0892-7790</issn><eissn>1557-900X</eissn><abstract>Laparoscopy is widely used in the urological field. This systematic review and a meta-analysis were conducted to assess the clinical and surgical efficacy of the three-dimensional (3D) laparoscopic system in comparison with two-dimensional (2D) laparoscopy for treatment of different urological conditions. Following guidelines of Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses, a systematic literature search in Web of Science, PubMed, Cochrane Library, and EMBase was carried out to identify relevant studies published up to May 2018. Articles published in the English language of both randomized and observational studies comparing 3D and 2D laparoscopic systems in urological surgeries were included. Level of evidence and quality assessments of all included studies were conducted. Interested data were extracted for comparison and meta-analysis. Our literature search generated 17 studies comparing 3D and 2D laparoscopic systems in different urological surgeries. Of these, 13 studies containing 548 and 449 patients operated on with 2D and 3D laparoscopic systems, respectively, were included for meta-analysis. These 13 studies were divided into three groups according to surgical type. Group 1: Partial nephrectomy (PN); operative time (p = 0.19), estimated blood loss (EBL) (p = 0.51), dissecting time (p = 0.58), and suturing time (p = 0.28) were not statistically significant between 2D and 3D laparoscopic systems. However, warm ischemia time during PN was significantly shorter during 3D laparoscopy (p &lt; 0.00001). Group 2: Pyeloplasty; this procedure showed no significant difference between the two systems. Group 3: Radical prostatectomy (RP); shorter operative time (p &lt; 0.0001) and lower EBL (p = 0.001) were associated with the 3D laparoscopic system. Three-dimensional laparoscopy mainly improves the depth of perception, leading to better visibility, which is important for some complex urological surgeries such as PN, pyeloplasty, and RP. Based on our findings, 3D laparoscopy seems to provide better clinical and surgical outcomes in some urological procedures compared with conventional 2D laparoscopy.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Mary Ann Liebert, Inc., publishers</pub><pmid>29969912</pmid><doi>10.1089/end.2018.0411</doi><tpages>10</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0892-7790
ispartof Journal of endourology, 2018-09, Vol.32 (9), p.781-790
issn 0892-7790
1557-900X
language eng
recordid cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_6156697
source Alma/SFX Local Collection
subjects Review
title Two-Dimensional Versus Three-Dimensional Laparoscopic Systems in Urology: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-03T06%3A39%3A27IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Two-Dimensional%20Versus%20Three-Dimensional%20Laparoscopic%20Systems%20in%20Urology:%20A%20Systematic%20Review%20and%20Meta-Analysis&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20endourology&rft.au=Dirie,%20Najib%20Isse&rft.date=2018-09-12&rft.volume=32&rft.issue=9&rft.spage=781&rft.epage=790&rft.pages=781-790&rft.issn=0892-7790&rft.eissn=1557-900X&rft_id=info:doi/10.1089/end.2018.0411&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E2064240529%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2064240529&rft_id=info:pmid/29969912&rfr_iscdi=true