3-dimensional Versus 2-dimensional Laparoscopy for Hysterectomy

3-dimensional Versus 2-dimensional Laparoscopy for Hysterectomy: a Randomized Controlled Trial

The aim of this study is to compare the surgical outcomes and efficacy of 3-dimensional (3D) versus 2-dimensional (2D) imaging systems in laparoscopic hysterectomy.

Laparoscopy is founded as a treatment of choice for benign uterine disease. The advantages of laparoscopic surgery over conventional open surgery are less pain, shorter recovery time, shorter hospital stay, and consequently faster return to normal activity as well as better cosmetic effects. However, laparoscopic surgery is more demanding compared with open surgery because operators should project three-dimensional (3D) field through a two-dimensional (2D) monitor.

However, to date, studies examining the possible benefits and drawbacks of 3D imaging system versus 2D in laparoscopic surgery have brought about conflicting results. Moreover, there have been few studies comparing the surgical outcomes of 3D and 2D laparoscopic laparoscopic hysterectomy. The aim of this study is to compare the surgical outcomes and efficacy of 3-dimensional (3D) versus 2-dimensional (2D) imaging systems in laparoscopic hysterectomy.

Inclusion Criteria:

• Uterine myoma requiring laparoscopic myomectomy
• American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status (ASAPS) classification I-II
• absence of pregnancy at the time of surgery.

Exclusion Criteria:

• any suspicious findings of malignant gynecologic diseases,