Peer-reviewed veterinary case report
3D vs 2D laparoscopy for dog gastropexy surgery time and workload
By Balsa, Ingrid M et al.·Published in Veterinary surgery : VS·2021·Department of Surgical and Radiological Sciences, United States·View original on PubMed →
PetCaseFinder translated the abstract of this peer-reviewed paper into plain English so pet owners can read it. We do not publish original research — every detail traces back to the citation above. How we work →
Original publication title: A randomized controlled trial of three-dimensional versus two-dimensional imaging system on duration of surgery and mental workload for laparoscopic gastropexies in dogs.
- Species:
- dog
Plain-English summary
A group of 30 dogs underwent a minimally invasive surgery called laparoscopic gastropexy, which helps prevent stomach twisting. Some dogs had the procedure done using a 3D imaging system, while others had it done with a standard 2D system. The surgery took about 3 minutes less on average with the 3D system, but this difference wasn't significant, and both methods had similar outcomes in terms of complications and the surgeon's workload. More research is needed to see if 3D laparoscopy can improve surgery times or reduce complications in dogs.
People also search for: dog gastropexy surgery · laparoscopic surgery for dogs · 3D vs 2D laparoscopy in dogs
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of three-dimensional (3D) laparoscopy compared to two-dimensional (2D) laparoscopy when evaluating duration of surgery for canine intracorporeally sutured gastropexy. STUDY DESIGN: Randomized controlled clinical trial. ANIMALS: Thirty client-owned dogs. METHODS: Dogs were randomized into 2D or 3D groups and underwent a three-port laparoscopic intracorporeally sutured incisional gastropexy with barbed suture. Procedures were performed by a single board-certified surgeon. Duration of surgery was recorded and workload was assessed immediately after surgery using the NASA Task Load Index (TLX). RESULTS: Median duration of surgery was 3 min shorter for 3D versus 2D (95%CI -10 to 13; p = .51). Surgical component durations, total and component TLX scores, and intraoperative complications also did not differ between groups. In a subgroup analysis excluding the first eight cases due to presumption of a learning curve with suturing technique, total TLX score (p = .004) and all component scores were lower for 3D as compared to 2D laparoscopy, although duration of surgery did not differ (p = .20). CONCLUSION: The use of 3D laparoscopy was not associated with shorter duration of surgery when compared to 2D laparoscopy. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: 3D laparoscopy requires further investigation in veterinary medicine to determine its utility in decreasing surgical duration, surgical complications or surgeon mental or physical workload.
Find similar cases for your pet
PetCaseFinder finds other peer-reviewed reports of pets with the same symptoms, plus a plain-English summary of what was tried across them.
Search related cases →Original publication on PubMed: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33864647/