3D versus 2D laparoscopic radical prostatectomy for organ confined prostate cancer: Our experience

Abstract

Objective: Three-dimensional (3D) laparoscopy was developed to overcome the main limitations of traditional laparoscopy. The aim of our study was to compare operative, functional and oncological results of 3D and two-dimensional (2D) laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Materials and methods: A total of 102 consecutive patients with clinically localised prostate cancer underwent laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Patients were randomly assigned into two groups, 2D high definition (HD) camera (50 patients) for the first and 3D HD camera (52 patients) for the second group. Total operative time, anastomosis time, blood loss, complications and pentafecta rates for both groups were compared. All patients had at least one year of follow-up. Results: Total operative time was, respectively, 143 ± 17 and 118 ± 15 minutes, with a mean anastomosis time of 31± 12 and 23 ± 12 minutes. Mean blood loss was 230 ± 30 ml with 2D vision and 175 ± 40 with 3D vision. Pentafecta was reached, respectively, by 46% and 50% of patients at 3 months and 60% and 67.3% at 12 months. 3D vision offers an increased speed if compared with traditional vision ( P=0.02). Pentafecta results were significantly better in the 3D group ( P=0.03). Conclusion: We believe that 3D laparoscopy offers important advantages for surgeons and patients; its use should be encouraged. Level of evidence: 1c