Browse through all publications from the Institute of Global Health Innovation, which our Patient Safety Research Collaboration is part of. This feed includes reports and research papers from our Centre. 

Citation

BibTex format

@article{Alyacoubi:2026:10.1007/s00464-026-12980-6,
author = {Alyacoubi, S and Rajput, K and Runciman, M and Darzi, A and Peters, CJ and Mylonas, G},
doi = {10.1007/s00464-026-12980-6},
journal = {Surg Endosc},
title = {Robotic-assisted endoscopic submucosal dissection: a scoping review of preclinical and early clinical evidence.},
url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00464-026-12980-6},
year = {2026}
}
Download

RIS format (EndNote, RefMan)

TY  - JOUR
AB  - BACKGROUND: Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is technically demanding and associated with a steep learning curve and increased complication risk. Constraints of conventional endoscopes, together with the observed benefits of robotic assistance in selected surgical procedures, have driven development of robotic systems for advanced endoscopic applications. This review maps the landscape of robotic endoscopic systems in the context of ESD. METHODS: A PRISMA-ScR-compliant scoping review was conducted. Six databases were searched in 2025. Studies evaluating robotic endoscopic platforms for ESD in preclinical or clinical settings were included. Two reviewers independently screened studies. Data were extracted on study characteristics, platform features, experimental design, and outcomes. Findings were synthesised descriptively. RESULTS: Twenty-seven studies were published between 2010 and 2025, with most from 2019 onwards (22; 82%), and mainly from East Asia (23; 85%). Most studies were preclinical (21; 78%), corresponding to mid-level technological readiness (TRL 4-7). Six studies (22%) reported early clinical evaluation (TRL 8), including one multicentre randomised trial. The most frequently studied site was the stomach (18; 67%). Over half of the studies were comparative (15; 56%), including 14 comparing robotic-assisted ESD (R-ESD) with conventional ESD (C-ESD). In preclinical comparisons (n = 13), R-ESD was associated with shorter submucosal dissection times and higher dissection speeds. En bloc resection rates were high overall, with lower rates observed mainly in novice-performed C-ESD. Perforation was uncommon overall, with higher rates concentrated in novice-performed C-ESD. Early clinical studies (IDEAL 1-3) demonstrated high en bloc resection rates with acceptable safety. CONCLUSION: Preclinical comparative evidence suggests improved procedural efficiency with robotic assistance, particularly in novice-operated settings. Early clinical evid
AU  - Alyacoubi,S
AU  - Rajput,K
AU  - Runciman,M
AU  - Darzi,A
AU  - Peters,CJ
AU  - Mylonas,G
DO  - 10.1007/s00464-026-12980-6
PY  - 2026///
TI  - Robotic-assisted endoscopic submucosal dissection: a scoping review of preclinical and early clinical evidence.
T2  - Surg Endosc
UR  - http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00464-026-12980-6
UR  - https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/42390802
ER  -
Download