A reel mechanism-based robotic colonoscope with high safety and maneuverability
- 161 Downloads
At present, the colonoscopy is the most common method of screening for colorectal cancer. However, endoscopists still encounter difficulties with intubation, primarily due to the structural diversity (e.g., path, shape, and size) and viscoelasticity of the colon. Therefore, well-trained, skillful operators are required to overcome these factors and operate colonoscopes without harming patients.
In our previous work, we presented a reel mechanism-based robotic colonoscope designed to mitigate the difficulties of conventional colonoscopies. Although we reported excellent mobile performance with respect to the robot, we did not provide an in-depth discussion concerning patient safety. Therefore, in this article, we propose a method of improving robot safety, and this is verified by investigating the static and dynamic forces acting on the colon. In addition, the maneuverability and safety of the robot in the in vitro condition are evaluated.
The safety solution is provided by covering the robot’s legs with silicone. To evaluate the results, the reaction force according to leg deformation is measured. Then, the force transmitted to the colon is also measured when the robot moves through various environments. Finally, a mobility test on an excised porcine colon is performed to simultaneously verify the robot’s maneuverability and safety.
We verify that the static and dynamic force acting on the colon is less than the burst force of a human colon. In addition, the maneuverability of the robotic colonoscope shows reliable locomotion performance even with the soft material covering the legs; it has forward velocities of 9.552 ± 1.940 mm/s on a flat path.
Owing to the reliable locomotion mechanism with the safety-securing silicone, the robot achieves high and reliable maneuverability without any scratches or perforations to the porcine colon.
KeywordsMicrorobot Robotic colonoscope Reel mechanism High maneuverability High safety Locomotion test
Compliance with ethical standards
Dongkyu Lee, Seonggun Joe, Hyoeng-Seok Kang, Taeyoung An, and Byungkyu Kim declare no conflicts of interest.
Supplementary material 1 (WMV 32841 KB)
- 1.U.S. Cancer Statistics Working Group (2010) United States Cancer Statistics: 1999–2007 incidence and mortality web-based report. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and National Cancer Institute, AtlantaGoogle Scholar
- 6.Waye JD, Rex DK, Williams CB (eds) (2008) Colonoscopy: principles and practice. Wiley, HobokenGoogle Scholar
- 9.Dario P, Mosse CA (2003) Review of locomotion techniques for robotic colonoscopy. In: Proceedings of the ICRA’03. IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, 2003. 1:1086–1091Google Scholar
- 10.Ciuti G et al (2016) Frontiers of robotic endoscopic capsules: a review. J Microbio Robot 11(1–4):1–18Google Scholar
- 12.Alcaide JO, Pearson L, Rentschler ME (2017) Design, modeling and control of a SMA-actuated biomimetic robot with novel functional skin. In: IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), 2017, pp 4338–4345Google Scholar
- 13.Heung H, Chiu PW, Li Z (2016) Design and prototyping of a soft earthworm-like robot targeted for GI tract inspection. In: IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Biomimetics (ROBIO), 2016, pp 497–502Google Scholar
- 17.Wang K, Ge Y, Jin X (2013) A micro soft robot using inner air transferring for colonoscopy. In: IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Biomimetics (ROBIO), 2013, pp 1556–1561Google Scholar
- 19.Kim B et al (2003) Functional colonoscope robot system. In: Proceedings of the ICRA’03. IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, 2003, pp 1092–1097Google Scholar
- 27.Jeong U, In H, Lee H, Kang BB, Cho KJ (2015) Investigation on the control strategy of soft wearable robotic hand with slack enabling tendon actuator. In: IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), 2015, pp 5004–5009Google Scholar
- 29.Nisbett J, Budynas R (2008) Shingley’s mechanical engineering design. Mc- Graw-Hill, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- 30.Grijalba YL, Ramirez AJ (2015) Comparison of double torsion springs with anticorrosive coating obtained from manual production against those obtained from an automated forming prototype. In: 15th congreso nacional de ingenieria electromecanica y de sistemas (CNIES 2015) pp 19–23Google Scholar
- 31.Meshram PM, Kanojiya RG (2012) Tuning of PID controller using Ziegler-Nichols method for speed control of DC motor. In: International Conference on Advances in Engineering, Science and Management (ICAESM), 2012, pp 117–122Google Scholar
- 35.Accoto D et al (2001) Measurements of the frictional properties of the gastrointestinal tract. In: World Tribology Congress Vol 3, p 7Google Scholar