Skip to main content

Robotic control of a traditional flexible endoscope for therapy

Journal of Robotic Surgery volume 7, pages 227–234 (2013)Cite this article

Abstract

In therapeutic flexible endoscopy a team of physician and assistant(s) is required to control all independent translations and rotations of the flexible endoscope and its instruments. As a consequence the physician lacks valuable force feedback information on tissue interaction, communication errors easily occur, and procedures are not cost-effective. Current tools are not suitable for performing therapeutic procedures in an intuitive and user-friendly way by one person. A shift from more invasive surgical procedures that require external incisions to endoluminal procedures that use the natural body openings could be expected if enabling techniques were available. This paper describes the design and evaluation of a robotic system which interacts with traditional flexible endoscopes to perform therapeutic procedures that require advanced maneuverability. The physician uses one multi-degree-of-freedom input device to control camera steering as well as shaft manipulation of the motorized flexible endoscope, while the other hand is able to manipulate instruments. We identified critical use aspects that need to be addressed in the robotic setup. A proof-of-principle setup was built and evaluated to judge the usability of our system. Results show that robotic endoscope control increases efficiency and satisfaction. Participants valued its intuitiveness, its accuracy, the feeling of being in control, and its single-person setup. Future work will concentrate on the design of a system that is fully functional and takes safety, cleanability, and easy positioning close to the patient into account.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

43,34 €

Price includes VAT (Finland)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

References

  1. Dunkin B et al (2009) Position statement on endoluminal therapies for gastrointestinal diseases. Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons (SAGES). http://www.sages.org/publications/guidelines/position-statement-on-endolumenal-therapies-for-gastrointestinal-diseases/

  2. Rattner D, Kalloo A, ASGE/SAGES Working Group (2006) Natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery, white paper. Surg Endosc 20(9):329–333

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Swanstrom LL (2009) Novel endoscopic platforms for endoluminal and NOTES Surgery. In: Proceedings of the Hamlyn symposium on medical robotics, London, pp 5–6

  4. Williams CB (2009) Insertion technique. In: Waye JD et al (eds) Colonoscopy: principles and practice, 2nd edn. Chichester, Wiley-Blackwell, pp 537–559

    Google Scholar 

  5. Malik A et al (2006) Endoluminal and transluminal surgery: current status and future possibilities. J Surg Endosc 20(8):1179–1192

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Man Yeung BP, Gourlay T (2012) A technical review of flexible endoscopic multitasking platforms. Int J Surg 10(7):345–354

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Guthart GS, Salisbury JK (2000) The Intuitive™ Telesurgery System: overview and application. In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, San Francisco, pp 618–621

  8. Marescaux J et al (2007) Surgery without scars. Arch Surg 142(9):823–827

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Canes D et al (2009) The future of NOTES instrumentation: flexible robotics and in vivo minirobots. J Endourol 23(5):787–792

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Ruiter JG, Rozeboom ED, van der Voort MC, Bonnema GM, Broeders IAMJ (2012) Design and evaluation of robotic steering of a flexible endoscope. In: Proceedings of International Conference on Biomedical Robotics and Biomechatronics, Rome, pp 761–767

  11. Kume K et al (2011) Development of a novel endoscopic manipulation system: the endoscopic operation robot. World J Gastrointest Endosc 3(7):145–150

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Groth S et al (2011) High cecal intubation rates with a new computer-assisted colonoscope: a feasibility study. Am J Gastroenterol 106(6):1075–1080

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Dykes CA (2009) The gastrointestinal assistant during colonoscopy. In: Waye JD et al (eds) Colonoscopy: principles and practice, 2nd edn. Chichester, Wiley-Blackwell, pp 59–60

    Google Scholar 

  14. Gerloff C, Andres FG (2002) Bimanual coordination and interhemispheric interaction. Acta Psychol 110(2–3):161–186

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Zhai S (1995) Human performance in six degree of freedom input control. PhD Dissertation, Department of Industrial Engineering, University of Toronto, Canada

  16. Waye JD (2009) Polypectomy: basic principles. In: Waye JD et al (eds) Colonoscopy: principles and practice, 2nd edn. Chichester, Wiley-Blackwell, pp 572–581

    Google Scholar 

  17. Korman LY et al (2012) Segmental increases in force application during colonoscope insertion: quantitative analysis using force monitoring technology. Gastrointest Endosc 76(4):867–872

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Ergonomic requirements for office work with visual display terminals (VDTs)—Part 11: Guidance on usability, ISO 9241-11:1998(E)

  19. Hart SG, Staveland LE (1988) Development of NASA-TLX (Task Load Index): Results of empirical and theoretical research. In: Hancock PA, Meshkati N (eds) Human mental workload. North Holland Press, Amsterdam, pp 239–250

    Google Scholar 

  20. Bowman DA et al (2001) An introduction to 3-D user interface design. Presence: teleoperators and virtual environments 10(1):96–108

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Peña C, Aracil R, Saltaren R (2008) Teleoperation of a robot using a haptic device with different kinematics. In: Proceedings of EuroHaptics, Madrid, pp 181–186

Download references

Acknowledgments

This research is funded by the Dutch Ministry of Economic Affairs and the Province of Overijssel, within the Pieken in de Delta (PIDON) initiative.

Conflict of interest

None.

Author information

Affiliations

  1. Laboratory of Design, Production and Management, Faculty of Engineering Technology, University of Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands

    J. G. Ruiter, G. M. Bonnema & M. C. van der Voort

  2. DEMCON Advanced Mechatronics, Oldenzaal, The Netherlands

    J. G. Ruiter

  3. Laboratory of Minimal Invasive Surgery and Robotics, Faculty of Technical Medicine, University of Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands

    I. A. M. J. Broeders

  4. Meander Medical Centre, Amersfoort, The Netherlands

    I. A. M. J. Broeders

Authors
  1. J. G. Ruiter
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. G. M. Bonnema
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. M. C. van der Voort
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. I. A. M. J. Broeders
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to J. G. Ruiter.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Ruiter, J.G., Bonnema, G.M., van der Voort, M.C. et al. Robotic control of a traditional flexible endoscope for therapy. J Robotic Surg 7, 227–234 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-013-0405-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-013-0405-4

Keywords

  • Robotics
  • Flexible endoscopy
  • Multi-degree-of-freedom input device
  • Surgery