How Technology Can Impact Surgeon Performance: A Randomized Trial Comparing 3-Dimensional versus 2-Dimensional Laparoscopy in Gynecology Oncology

This randomized clinical trial (Canadian Task Force classification I) aimed to compare 2-dimension (2-D) versus 3-dimensional (3-D) laparoscopic hysterectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy in endometrial and cervical cancer patients. Between December 2014 and March 2015, 90 patients were enrolled: 29 (32.2%) with early or locally advanced cervical cancer after neoadjuvant treatment and 61 (67.8%) with early-stage endometrial cancer. Patients were randomly assigned to undergo 2-D (Group A, n = 48 [53.3%]) or 3-D (Group B, n = 42 [46.7%)]) laparoscopy. Baseline characteristics were superimposable in the 2 groups. Median operative time was similar in the 2 groups. Median estimated blood loss during lymphadenectomy was significantly lower in Group B than in Group A (38 mL [range, 0-450] vs 65 mL [range, 0-200]; p = .033). In cervical cancer patients operative time of pelvic lymphadenectomy performed by “novice” surgeons (those with <10 procedures performed) was statistically significantly lower in Group B (p = .047). No differences in perioperative outcomes and postoperative complications were observed between the 2 groups. The 2-D and 3-D systems can be used safely in laparoscopic hysterectomy. However, the 3-D system could provide key benefits to intraoperative techniques and postoperative outcomes in reducing operative time for “expert” surgeons and in enhancing surgical precision for “novice” surgeons.