Status of robotic and manual devices for advanced colonoscopy: Trends and applications of robotics in colonoscopy

Table 1 Comparison of manual and robotic assistive devices in colonoscopy

	Category	Propulsion/navigation	Therapy capable	Clinical performance	Study design	Regulatory status
ScopeGuide	Manual assistive	Electromagnetic shape-sensing	Yes (via standard endoscope)	96.8% CIR[13]	RCT	FDA-cleared & CE-marked
Third Eye Retroscope	Manual assistive	Retrograde visualization (insertable catheter)	No (blocks working channel)	ADR ↑ by 11%-23%[16-18]	RCT; prospective	Not commercially available
NaviAid G-EYE	Manual assistive	Balloon (withdrawal phase)	Yes	ADR 48% vs 37.5%[20]	RCT	FDA-cleared & CE-marked
Invendoscope	Robotic	Inverted sleeve + joystick control	Yes	CIR: 82-98.4%[22,24]	Prospective; pilot	FDA-cleared (SC20); Discontinued & replaced by SC210 (manual)
Endotics	Robotic	Inchworm, self-propelled	Limited (biopsy)	27%-93.1% CIR[25,26]	Prospective; retrospective	FDA-cleared & CE-marked
Aer-O-Scope	Robotic	Pneumatic balloon system (self-propelled)	No (diagnostic only)	CIR: 83%-98.2%; Cecal time: 11-14 minutes[28,29]	Prospective; pilot	FDA-cleared & CE-marked; Limited adoption
NeoGuide	Robotic	Segmental, shape-sensing	Yes	100% (n = 10)[30]	Prospective; feasibility	Not commercially available
Endoo MFE	Robotic	Magnetic + robotic arm	No	100% completion (n = 5), 1st-in-human trial[34]	Preclinical; experimental	Investigational

CIR: Cecal intubation rate; ADR: Adenoma detection rate; FDA: Food and Drug Administration; CE: European Conformity.