ReviewCancers2020
Frontiers of Robotic Gastroscopy: A Comprehensive Review of Robotic Gastroscopes and Technologies.
Review in Cancers, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
19 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Endoluminal Procedures and Devices for Esophageal Tract Investigation: A Critical Review.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Pooled it
- Interventional cardiac magnetic resonance imaging: current applications, technology readiness level, and future perspectives.Therapeutic advances in cardiovascular diseasePooled it
- A variable stiffness manipulator with multifunctional channels for endoscopic submucosal dissection.International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery · 2023Article
- Flexible robotic endoscopy for treating gastrointestinal neoplasms.World journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2023Review
- Sex/gender differences in gastrointestinal endoscopy from the perspective of patients and gastroenterologists.Clinical endoscopy · 2023Review
- Burnout in healthcare - the Emperor's New Clothes.Przeglad gastroenterologiczny · 2023Review
- Actuation and design innovations in earthworm-inspired soft robots: A review.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2023Review
- Magnetic controlled capsule endoscope (MCCE)'s diagnostic performance for H. pylori infection status based on the Kyoto classification of gastritis.BMC gastroenterology · 2022Article
- Endoscopic Features of Gastric Epithelial Neoplasm of Fundic Gland Mucosa Lineage.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Unsedated Transnasal Endoscopy: A Safe, Well-Tolerated and Accurate Alternative to Standard Diagnostic Peroral Endoscopy.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2022Review
- Den lille Havfrue for the gut.Endoscopy international open · 2022Article
- A Novel Biopsy Capsule Robot Based on High-Speed Cutting Tissue.Cyborg and bionic systems (Washington, D.C.) · 2022Article
- Gastric Cancer Screening Methods: A Comparative Study of the Chinese New Gastric Cancer Screening Score and Kyoto Classification of Gastritis.Gastroenterology research and practice · 2022Article
- Comparison of Magnifying Endoscopy with Blue Light Imaging and Narrow Band Imaging for Determining the Invasion Depth of Superficial Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma by the Japanese Esophageal Society's Intrapapillary Capillary Loop Classification.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- A Wi-Fi-Based Mask-Type Laryngoscope for Telediagnosis During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Instrument Validation Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2021Article
- A Flavor of the Future of GI Endoscopy-New Solutions Shape the Field of Modern Gastrointestinal Care.Cancers · 2021Article
- Review
- An Origami-Based Soft Robotic Actuator for Upper Gastrointestinal Endoscopic Applications.Frontiers in robotics and AI · 2021Article
- Artificial Intelligence in Gastroenterology-Walking into the Room of Little Miracles.Journal of clinical medicine · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Upper gastrointestinal (UGI) tract pathology is common worldwide. With recent advancements in robotics, innovative diagnostic and treatment devices have been developed and several translational attempts made. This review paper aims to provide a highly pictorial critical review of robotic gastroscopes, so that clinicians and researchers can obtain a swift and comprehensive overview of key technologies and challenges. Therefore, the paper presents robotic gastroscopes, either commercial or at a progressed technology readiness level. Among them, we show tethered and wireless gastroscopes, as well as devices aimed for UGI surgery. The technological features of these instruments, as well as their clinical adoption and performance, are described and compared. Although the existing endoscopic devices have thus far provided substantial improvements in the effectiveness of diagnosis and treatment, there are certain aspects that represent unwavering predicaments of the current gastroenterology practice. A detailed list includes difficulties and risks, such as transmission of communicable diseases (e.g., COVID-19) due to the doctor-patient proximity, unchanged learning curves, variable detection rates, procedure-related adverse events, endoscopists' and nurses' burnouts, limited human and/or material resources, and patients' preferences to choose non-invasive options that further interfere with the successful implementation and adoption of routine screening. The combination of robotics and artificial intelligence, as well as remote telehealth endoscopy services, are also discussed, as viable solutions to improve existing platforms for diagnosis and treatment are emerging.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.