Brief Article
Copyright ©2011 Baishideng Publishing Group Co., Limited. All rights reserved.
World J Gastrointest Endosc. Jul 16, 2011; 3(7): 145-150
Published online Jul 16, 2011. doi: 10.4253/wjge.v3.i7.145
Development of a novel endoscopic manipulation system: The Endoscopic operation robot
Keiichiro Kume, Takeshi Kuroki, Takahiro Sugihara, Masafumi Shinngai
Keiichiro Kume, K’s Device; Laboratory for Endoscopy and Third Department of Internal Medicine, School of Medicine, University of Occupational and Environmental Health, Kitakyusyu 807-8555, Japan
Takeshi Kuroki, Takahiro Sugihara, Masafumi Shinngai, Kyushu Polytechnic College, Kitakyusyu, Japan
Author contributions: Kume K, Kuroki T, Sugihara T and Shingai M developed a novel endoscopic manipulation; Kume K wrote the paper.
Supported by Kitakyushu Foundation for the Advancement of Industry Science and Technology
Correspondence to: Keiichiro Kume, MD, PhD, K’s Device; Laboratory for Endoscopy, School of Medicine, University of Occupational and Environmental Health, 1-1, Iseigaoka, Yahatanishi-ku, Kitakyusyu 807-8555, Japan. k-kume@med.uoeh-u.ac.jp
Telephone: +81-93-603-1611 Fax: +81-93-692-0107
Received: February 28, 2010
Revised: June 22, 2011
Accepted: July 1, 2011
Published online: July 16, 2011
Abstract

AIM: To develop and evaluate the endoscopic operation robot (EOR). The EOR is a robot system designed specifically for remote manipulation of the scope during gastrointestinal endoscopy by a seated endoscopist.

METHODS: Total colonoscopy examinations using a colonoscopy training model were performed compared conventional insertion by manual manipulation and remote-controlled insertion, using the EOR. The author investigated the time taken for each of the 50 examinations.

RESULTS: The median insertion time (in minutes) for each 10 examinations (EOR vs manual manipulation) was 73.70 ± 25.37 vs 3.77 ± 1.34 in the first group, 38.40 ± 6.24 vs 3.40 ± 0.97 in the second group, 27.6 ± 4.01 vs 2.70 ± 0.95 in the third group, 23.8 ± 3.65 vs 3.10 ± 0.88 in the fourth group, and 22.9 ± 5.02 vs 2.60 ± 1.08 in the fifth group.

CONCLUSION: The study suggested the possibility of the clinical application of the EOR.

Keywords: Hepatitis B; Hepatocellular cancer; Hepatitis B surveillance; Vaccination; Screening