Randomized trial compares robot-assisted ESD and conventional ESD, indicating improved efficiency and safety.
BACKGROUND: Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection (ESD) requires high expertise as conventional endoscopes cannot provide simultaneous traction and dissection, resulting in unstable visualisation and inconsistent cutting depth. METHODS: A coaxial over-the-scope bimanual robotic system was developed to enable lesion-aligned traction and dissection while maintaining compatibility with commercial endoscopes. Engineering performance was evaluated, followed by a pre-clinical comparison between robot-assisted ESD (R-ESD) and conventional ESD (C-ESD) using synthetic tissue. RESULTS: The forceps arm generated sufficient traction (0.581 N), and the coaxial mechanism provided hemispherical manipulation. In pre-clinical trials (n = 30), R-ESD significantly reduced total procedure time (9.20 vs. 11.80 min) and dissection time (2.99 vs. 8.35 min). Depth safety improved with shallower mean depth (2.48 vs. 4.06 mm) and a substantial reduction in muscle-invasion-risk regions (0.15 vs. 29.38%). CONCLUSIONS: The proposed coaxial bimanual robotic system improves procedural efficiency and depth safety through lesion-aligned manipulation. Its compatibility with existing endoscopes suggests clinical applicability without procedural complexity.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kim et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: