Study Results
The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.
Basic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
UNKNOWN
350 participants
OBSERVATIONAL
2016-01-31
2017-10-31
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
* To evaluate the visual overload in surgeons using 3D laparoscopic technique.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Evaluation of 3D Visualization for Total Colectomy
NCT02370056
Comparison of Laparoscopic Colectomy Versus Open Colectomy for Colorectal Cancer: … A Prospective Randomized Trial
NCT00155727
Comparison of Short- and Long-term Outcomes Between Robotic and Laparoscopic Hemicolectomy of Right Colon Cancer : A Multicenter Propensity Score Matching Analysis
NCT07029464
Laparoscopic-Assisted Surgery Compared With Open Surgery in Treating Patients With Colon Cancer
NCT00002575
Gut Oxygenation and Laparoscopy
NCT01040013
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
This new technology has been widely tested in pelvic trainer, not yet in live surgery. Moreover effects on surgeons visual work load are unknown.
Aim of the present study is to evaluate the potential superiority of 3D laparoscopic technique on 2D one in terms on postoperative complications and oncological radicality (in case of neoplastic disease).
Secondary aim is to study the possible major visual stress on surgeons brain caused by 3D camera rather than 2D videos.
ENROLLMENT All patients affected by neoplastic or inflammatory colorectal disease are enrolled in the study.
Preoperative, intraoperative e postoperative data are collected dividing all the patients according the camera system used during the operation: 2D group vs 3D group.
Preoperative data: sex, age, date of birth, id, date of admission, past medical history Intraoperative data: date of surgery, pathology, site of pathology, type of surgery and duration, intraoperative blood loss, other intraoperative problems, loop ileostomy, colostomy, drain positioning, intensive care unit admission Postoperative data (at 30th postoperative day): complications according to Dindo-Clavien scale (Dindo-Clavien classification of surgical complications), type of complications, transfusion, reoperation, other treatments, histology specimen report.
At the end of every operation, the 1st surgeon has to fill in the NASA (The National Aeronautics and Space Administration) task load index and the Simulator Sickness questionnaire.
Number of participants: 350 Years necessary: 2
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
OTHER
PROSPECTIVE
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
* inflammatory bowel disease affected colon and rectum that need surgery
Exclusion Criteria
18 Years
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Casa di Cura Dott. Pederzoli
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Marco Inama
General Surgeon
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Marco Inama, MD PhDs
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
Hospital "Dott. Pederzoli"
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Hospital "Dott. Pederzoli"
Peschiera del Garda, Verona, Italy
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
Central Contacts
Reach out to these primary contacts for questions about participation or study logistics.
Facility Contacts
Find local site contact details for specific facilities participating in the trial.
References
Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.
Poudel S, Kurashima Y, Watanabe Y, Ebihara Y, Tamoto E, Murakami S, Nakamura T, Tsuchikawa T, Okamura K, Shichinohe T, Hirano S. Impact of 3D in the training of basic laparoscopic skills and its transferability to 2D environment: a prospective randomized controlled trial. Surg Endosc. 2017 Mar;31(3):1111-1118. doi: 10.1007/s00464-016-5074-8. Epub 2016 Jun 28.
Sinha RY, Raje SR, Rao GA. Three-dimensional laparoscopy: Principles and practice. J Minim Access Surg. 2017 Jul-Sep;13(3):165-169. doi: 10.4103/0972-9941.181761.
Shakir F, Jan H, Kent A. 3D straight-stick laparoscopy versus 3D robotics for task performance in novice surgeons: a randomised crossover trial. Surg Endosc. 2016 Dec;30(12):5380-5387. doi: 10.1007/s00464-016-4893-y. Epub 2016 Apr 8.
Sakata S, Watson MO, Grove PM, Stevenson AR. The Conflicting Evidence of Three-dimensional Displays in Laparoscopy: A Review of Systems Old and New. Ann Surg. 2016 Feb;263(2):234-9. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000001504.
Usta TA, Gundogdu EC. The role of three-dimensional high-definition laparoscopic surgery for gynaecology. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 2015 Aug;27(4):297-301. doi: 10.1097/GCO.0000000000000189.
Ozsoy M, Kallidonis P, Kyriazis I, Panagopoulos V, Vasilas M, Sakellaropoulos GC, Liatsikos E. Novice surgeons: do they benefit from 3D laparoscopy? Lasers Med Sci. 2015 May;30(4):1325-33. doi: 10.1007/s10103-015-1739-0. Epub 2015 Mar 15.
Ashraf A, Collins D, Whelan M, O'Sullivan R, Balfe P. Three-dimensional (3D) simulation versus two-dimensional (2D) enhances surgical skills acquisition in standardised laparoscopic tasks: a before and after study. Int J Surg. 2015 Feb;14:12-6. doi: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2014.12.020. Epub 2015 Jan 2.
Ko JK, Li RH, Cheung VY. Two-dimensional versus three-dimensional laparoscopy: evaluation of physicians' performance and preference using a pelvic trainer. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2015 Mar-Apr;22(3):421-7. doi: 10.1016/j.jmig.2014.11.007. Epub 2014 Nov 21.
Smith R, Schwab K, Day A, Rockall T, Ballard K, Bailey M, Jourdan I. Effect of passive polarizing three-dimensional displays on surgical performance for experienced laparoscopic surgeons. Br J Surg. 2014 Oct;101(11):1453-9. doi: 10.1002/bjs.9601. Epub 2014 Aug 18.
Alaraimi B, El Bakbak W, Sarker S, Makkiyah S, Al-Marzouq A, Goriparthi R, Bouhelal A, Quan V, Patel B. A randomized prospective study comparing acquisition of laparoscopic skills in three-dimensional (3D) vs. two-dimensional (2D) laparoscopy. World J Surg. 2014 Nov;38(11):2746-52. doi: 10.1007/s00268-014-2674-0.
Marcus HJ, Hughes-Hallett A, Cundy TP, Di Marco A, Pratt P, Nandi D, Darzi A, Yang GZ. Comparative effectiveness of 3-dimensional vs 2-dimensional and high-definition vs standard-definition neuroendoscopy: a preclinical randomized crossover study. Neurosurgery. 2014 Apr;74(4):375-80; discussion 380-1. doi: 10.1227/NEU.0000000000000249.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
3Dvs2D
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.