Download PDF
J Reconstr Microsurg 2022; 38(04): 313-320
DOI: 10.1055/s-0041-1735291
Original Article

A Comparison of the Use of Two-Dimensional and Three-Dimensional Visualization Systems by Novice and Experienced Microsurgeons in Microsurgical Vessel Anastomosis: An Analysis Using the Chicken Model

Wen-Chien Wang
1   Department of Medical Education, Taichung Veterans General Hospital, Taichung, Taiwan
,
Hsiang-Wei Hu
2   Department of Medical Education, National Cheng Kung University Hospital, Tainan, Taiwan
,
Pedro Ciudad
3   Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Surgery, China Medical University Hospital, Taichung, Taiwan
4   School of Medicine, College of Medicine, China Medical University, Taichung, Taiwan
5   Department of Plastic, Reconstructive and Burn Surgery, Arzobispo Loayza National Hospital, Lima, Peru
,
Bor-Shyh Lin
6   Institute of Imaging and Biomedical Photonics, National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University, Tainan, Taiwan
,
Hung-Chi Chen
3   Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Surgery, China Medical University Hospital, Taichung, Taiwan
4   School of Medicine, College of Medicine, China Medical University, Taichung, Taiwan
,
Chang-Cheng Chang
3   Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Surgery, China Medical University Hospital, Taichung, Taiwan
4   School of Medicine, College of Medicine, China Medical University, Taichung, Taiwan
6   Institute of Imaging and Biomedical Photonics, National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University, Tainan, Taiwan
7   Institute of Cosmeceutics, China Medical University, Taichung, Taiwan
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
Also available at
  Buy Article Permissions and Reprints
Zoom Image

Abstract

Background Various studies have discussed the benefits of applying three-dimensional (3D) techniques, specifically its advantages with respect to ergonomics, feasibility, and the rate of learning achievable in microsurgery training. However, no study has been conducted that compares the operator experience of using two-dimensional (2D) and 3D systems in microsurgical training. The aim of this study is to compare 2D- and 3D-assisted microsurgical training in novices based on anastomosis of chicken femoral arteries.

Methods The participants were grouped by previous microsurgical experience. Group A includes novice participants. Group B includes 2D-experienced participants. Group C includes both participants in groups A and B. A questionnaire composed of 10 parameters in the field of image quality, dexterity, ergonomic, and feasibility will be filled out after each participant finished their anastomoses by the 2D and 3D systems.

Results The results demonstrated 3D system was scored better on “field of view” (p = 0.004), “less tremor” (p = 0.005), “neck/upper back comfort” (p = 0.043), “lower back comfort” (p = 0.015), “technical feasibility” (p = 0.020), and “educational feasibility” (p = 0.004) in group A (N = 12). In group B (N = 9), 3D system was scored better on “field of view” (p = 0.041) but worse on “image resolution” (p = 0.031).

Conclusion With the 3D visualization system for microsurgical anastomosis of chicken femoral model, there are significant improvements in the field of view, stability, ergonomics, and educational value compared with 2D system among all participants. Accordingly, 3D-assisted microsurgery training can be a novel and potential popular training method.

Keywords

microsurgical training - three-dimensional (3D) visualization system - chicken femoral artery - medical - microsurgery

Note

We have presented a subset of our findings at 6th World Congress of World Association of Plastic Surgeons of Chinese Descend in Taipei in 2018, annual meeting of Taiwan Society for Reconstructive Microsurgery in Taipei in 2019, and 10th Congress of World Society for Reconstructive Microsurgery in 2019.


Ethical Approval

This research project was approved by the Research Ethics Committee (REC) of China Medical University Hospital (REC No.: CMUH107-REC1-146).




Publication History

Received: 14 February 2021

Accepted: 31 May 2021

Article published online:
28 August 2021

© 2021. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc.
333 Seventh Avenue, 18th Floor, New York, NY 10001, USA