Background: 3D heads-up visualization systems are aimed to improve the surgical experience by providing high-resolution imaging. Objective of our study is to analyze, over a long-time span, the grade of satisfaction and safety of day-to-day 3D surgery compared to standard surgery and to investigate the technical distinctiveness between the heads-up systems currently in use. Methods: In this retrospective observational case series. we reviewed all surgical records of our ophthalmology-dedicated operatory rooms since the arrival of 3D heads-up viewing system, in November 2017. In particular, we compared the procedural complications of 3D-equipped operatory room (3DR) with the standard microscope operatory room (2DR). Moreover, a satisfaction questionnaire was administered to those surgeons shifting on both rooms to test their preferences on seven specific parameters (comfort, visibility, image quality, depth perception, simplicity of use, maneuverability and teaching potential). Results: 5483 eye surgeries were considered. 2777 (50.6%) were performed in 3DR and 2706 (49.3%) in 2DR. Procedural complication rate was comparable in 3DR and 2DR, also when considering different subtypes of surgery. Twelve surgeons (100% of our surgery team) participated in our satisfaction survey, expressing highest satisfaction score for 3D when applied in retina surgery. For cataract surgery, 3D scored best in all the parameters except for facility in use and depth of field perception. Conclusion: Long-term day-to-day use of 3D heads-up visualization systems showed its safety and its outstanding teaching potential in all ophthalmic surgical subtypes, with higher surgeons confidence for retina and cataract surgery.
Analyzing the performance of a cluster-based architecture for immersive visualization systems