ArticleSurgical endoscopy2023
User interfaces for actuated scope maneuvering in surgical systems: a scoping review.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Robot-assisted surgery in thoracic and visceral indications: an updated systematic review.Surgical endoscopy · 2024Pooled it
- Comprehensive Comparison of Features of Robotic Surgery Systems in Abdominal Surgeries: A Narrative Review Study.Health science reports · 2026Article
- Evaluation of User Interfaces for Actuated Control of Endoscopes During Flexible Endoscopy.IEEE journal of translational engineering in health and medicine · 2026Article
- Development of a single port dual arm robotically steerable endoscope for neurosurgical applications.npj Robotics · 2025Article
- Robotic platforms in gynaecological surgery: past, present, and future.Facts, views & vision in ObGyn · 2024Article
- A generic scope actuation system for flexible endoscopes.Surgical endoscopy · 2024Article
- An Actuated Variable-View Rigid Scope System to Assist Visualization in Diagnostic Procedures.IEEE journal of translational engineering in health and medicine · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundA variety of human computer interfaces are used by robotic surgical systems to control and actuate camera scopes during minimally invasive surgery. The purpose of this review is to examine the different user interfaces used in both commercial systems and research prototypes.
methodsA comprehensive scoping review of scientific literature was conducted using PubMed and IEEE Xplore databases to identify user interfaces used in commercial products and research prototypes of robotic surgical systems and robotic scope holders. Papers related to actuated scopes with human-computer interfaces were included. Several aspects of user interfaces for scope manipulation in commercial and research systems were reviewed.
resultsScope assistance was classified into robotic surgical systems (for multiple port, single port, and natural orifice) and robotic scope holders (for rigid, articulated, and flexible endoscopes). Benefits and drawbacks of control by different user interfaces such as foot, hand, voice, head, eye, and tool tracking were outlined. In the review, it was observed that hand control, with its familiarity and intuitiveness, is the most used interface in commercially available systems. Control by foot, head tracking, and tool tracking are increasingly used to address limitations, such as interruptions to surgical workflow, caused by using a hand interface.
conclusionIntegrating a combination of different user interfaces for scope manipulation may provide maximum benefit for the surgeons. However, smooth transition between interfaces might pose a challenge while combining controls.
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.