ArticleSurgical endoscopy2026
A novel bimanual endoluminal robotic platform compatible with standard gastroscopes for endoscopic submucosal dissection: preclinical feasibility and ergonomic evaluation.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
aimsEndoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) enables en bloc resection of early gastrointestinal neoplasia but remains technically demanding because of limited traction, lack of triangulation, and high operator workload, contributing to a steep learning curve. We evaluated a novel endoluminal robotic platform designed to provide surgical-like bimanual triangulation, stable traction/counter-traction, and improved ergonomics while preserving compatibility with standard gastroscopes.
methodsThe robotic system (Intilume System, Agilis Robotics, Hong Kong, SAR) uses an external positioning cart to drive two 3.5-mm flexible robotic instruments mounted onto a native gastroscope via a cap-and-sheath interface and controlled by compact pen-style motion-tracking controllers enabling seated operation. Available instruments included a bipolar T-knife and a tissue grasper. In a randomized crossover ex vivo porcine stomach study, two gastroenterology fellows without prior ESD experience and two interventional endoscopy fellows with early experience each performed four ESDs (two robotic, two conventional), for a total of 16 procedures. Outcomes included en bloc resection, procedure time, specimen surface area, dissection speed, tissue injury, and operator workload assessed using NASA-TLX, with exploratory OSATS and GEARS evaluations.
resultsAll procedures were completed (8 robotic, 8 conventional). Robotic ESD achieved 100% en bloc resection versus 75% with conventional ESD (p = 0.47), was significantly faster (14.1 ± 4.3 vs 21.6 ± 7.6 min; p = 0.028), and demonstrated higher dissection speed (36.5 ± 23.4 vs 16.3 ± 10.1 mm
conclusionIn a randomized ex vivo model, a bimanual endoluminal robotic platform compatible with standard endoscopes demonstrated promising improvements in ESD efficiency, tissue control, and operator ergonomics compared with conventional ESD. These preliminary findings support further development and progression to first-in-human feasibility evaluation, with potential to facilitate ESD skill acquisition pending clinical validation.
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.