179 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 32642847)
21. 3D vs. 4K Display System - Influence of "State-of-the-art"-Display Technique On Surgical Performance (IDOSP-Study) in minimally invasive surgery: protocol for a randomized cross-over trial.
Wahba R; Datta RR; Hedergott A; Bußhoff J; Bruns T; Kleinert R; Dieplinger G; Fuchs H; Gietzelt C; Möller D; Hellmich M; Bruns CJ; Stippel DL
Trials; 2019 May; 20(1):299. PubMed ID: 31138290
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Is a robotic system really better than the three-dimensional laparoscopic system in terms of suturing performance?: comparison among operators with different levels of experience.
Park YS; Oo AM; Son SY; Shin DJ; Jung DH; Ahn SH; Park DJ; Kim HH
Surg Endosc; 2016 Apr; 30(4):1485-90. PubMed ID: 26139502
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. Three-dimensional Laparoscopy: Does Improved Visualization Decrease the Learning Curve Among Trainees in Advanced Procedures?
Cologne KG; Zehetner J; Liwanag L; Cash C; Senagore AJ; Lipham JC
Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech; 2015 Aug; 25(4):321-3. PubMed ID: 26053113
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. Impact of simulated three-dimensional perception on precision of depth judgements, technical performance and perceived workload in laparoscopy.
Sakata S; Grove PM; Hill A; Watson MO; Stevenson ARL
Br J Surg; 2017 Jul; 104(8):1097-1106. PubMed ID: 28425560
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. 3D HD versus 2D HD: surgical task efficiency in standardised phantom tasks.
Storz P; Buess GF; Kunert W; Kirschniak A
Surg Endosc; 2012 May; 26(5):1454-60. PubMed ID: 22179446
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Design of a Proficiency-Based Skills Training Curriculum for Our Newly Validated 3-Dimensional (3D) Laparoscopic Models, Using MISTELS.
Merali N; Iosif E; Morawala AJ; Almeida RAR; Al Araimi B; Patel B
J Invest Surg; 2021 Feb; 34(2):194-204. PubMed ID: 30897977
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
27. Three-Dimensional (3D) Versus Two-Dimensional (2D) Laparoscopic Bariatric Surgery: a Single-Surgeon Prospective Randomized Comparative Study.
Currò G; La Malfa G; Caizzone A; Rampulla V; Navarra G
Obes Surg; 2015 Nov; 25(11):2120-4. PubMed ID: 25893652
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. Three-Dimensional Versus Two-Dimensional Laparoscopic Right Hemicolectomy.
Currò G; Cogliandolo A; Bartolotta M; Navarra G
J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A; 2016 Mar; 26(3):213-7. PubMed ID: 26863202
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. 3D vs. 2D imaging in laparoscopic surgery-an advantage? Results of standardised black box training in laparoscopic surgery.
Buia A; Stockhausen F; Filmann N; Hanisch E
Langenbecks Arch Surg; 2017 Feb; 402(1):167-171. PubMed ID: 27761712
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Distraction and proficiency in laparoscopy: 2D versus robotic console 3D immersion.
Kim S; May A; Ryan H; Mohsin A; Tsuda S
Surg Endosc; 2017 Nov; 31(11):4625-4630. PubMed ID: 28409364
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. 3D vision accelerates laparoscopic proficiency and skills are transferable to 2D conditions: A randomized trial.
Sørensen SMD; Konge L; Bjerrum F
Am J Surg; 2017 Jul; 214(1):63-68. PubMed ID: 28302275
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. [Skills comparison using a 2D vs. 3D laparoscopic simulator].
Romero-Loera S; Cárdenas-Lailson LE; de la Concha-Bermejillo F; Crisanto-Campos BA; Valenzuela-Salazar C; Moreno-Portillo M
Cir Cir; 2016; 84(1):37-44. PubMed ID: 26259739
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. Development and Validation of a Homemade and Low-Cost Three-Dimensional Laparoscopic Simulator for Novices.
Tan Q; Yang Y; Yao Y; Yang N; Jin L; Hu X; Xu X; Wang Z; Yang J; Zheng J
J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A; 2022 Oct; 32(10):1071-1077. PubMed ID: 35467968
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
34. Novice surgeons: do they benefit from 3D laparoscopy?
Özsoy M; Kallidonis P; Kyriazis I; Panagopoulos V; Vasilas M; Sakellaropoulos GC; Liatsikos E
Lasers Med Sci; 2015 May; 30(4):1325-33. PubMed ID: 25772250
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Comparison of two-dimensional high-definition, ultra high-definition and three-dimensional endovision systems: an ex-vivo randomised study.
Bhattacharjee HK; Chaliyadan S; Mishra AK; Agarwal H; Suhani S; Joshi M; Parshad R
Surg Endosc; 2021 Sep; 35(9):5328-5337. PubMed ID: 32959182
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. Using Automated Continuous Instrument Tracking to Benchmark Simulated Laparoscopic Performance and Personalize Training.
Keni S; Ilin R; Partridge R; Hughes MA; Brennan PM
J Surg Educ; 2021; 78(3):998-1006. PubMed ID: 33077417
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. A study of the visual symptoms in two-dimensional versus three-dimensional laparoscopy.
El Boghdady M; Ramakrishnan G; Alijani A
Am J Surg; 2018 Dec; 216(6):1114-1117. PubMed ID: 30093093
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Box- or Virtual-Reality Trainer: Which Tool Results in Better Transfer of Laparoscopic Basic Skills?-A Prospective Randomized Trial.
Brinkmann C; Fritz M; Pankratius U; Bahde R; Neumann P; Schlueter S; Senninger N; Rijcken E
J Surg Educ; 2017; 74(4):724-735. PubMed ID: 28089473
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Two-dimensional versus three-dimensional laparoscopy: evaluation of physicians' performance and preference using a pelvic trainer.
Ko JK; Li RH; Cheung VY
J Minim Invasive Gynecol; 2015; 22(3):421-7. PubMed ID: 25461685
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. Comparative Study of 2D and 3D Optical Imaging Systems: Laparoendoscopic Single-Site Surgery in an Ex Vivo Model.
Vilaça J; Pinto JP; Fernandes S; Costa P; Pinto JC; Leão P
Surg Innov; 2017 Dec; 24(6):598-604. PubMed ID: 28871872
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
