Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
International Journal of Computer Assisted Radiology and Surgery
Published in: International Journal of Computer Assisted Radiology and Surgery 3/2016

Open Access 01-03-2016 | Original Article

Feasibility of automated target centralization in colonoscopy

Authors: N. van der Stap, E. D. Rozeboom, H. J. M. Pullens, F. van der Heijden, I. A. M. J. Broeders

Published in: International Journal of Computer Assisted Radiology and Surgery | Issue 3/2016

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose

Early detection of colorectal cancer is key to full recovery. This urged governments to start population screening programs for colorectal cancer, often using flexible endoscopes. Flexible endoscopy is difficult to learn and time-consuming. Automation of flexible endoscopes may increase the capacity for the screening programs. The goal of this pilot study is to investigate the clinical and technical feasibility of an assisting automated navigation algorithm for a colonoscopy procedure.

Methods

Automated navigation (lumen centralization) was implemented in a robotized system designed for conventional flexible endoscopes. Ten novice and eight expert users were asked to perform a diagnostic colonoscopy on a colon model twice: once using the conventional and once using the robotic system. Feasibility was evaluated using time and location data as measures of the system’s added value.

Results

Automated target centralization (ATC) was turned on by the novices for a median of 4.2 % of the time during insertion and 0.3 % during retraction. Experts turned ATC on for 4.0 % of the time during insertion and 11.6 % during retraction. Novices and experts showed comparable times to reach the cecum with the conventional or the robotic setup with ATC.

Conclusion

The ATC algorithm combined with the robotized endoscope setup works in an experimental setup that closely resembles the clinical environment and is considered feasible, although ATC use was lower than expected. For novices, it was unclear whether the low usage was due to unfamiliarity with the system or because they did not need ATC. Experts used ATC also during the retraction phase of the procedure. This was an unexpected finding and may indicate an added value of the system.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
Siegel R, Desantis C, Jemal A (2014) Colorectal cancer statistics, 2014. CA Cancer J Clin 64(2):104–117CrossRefPubMed
2.
3.
Pedrosa MC, Farraye FA, Shergill AK, Banerjee S, Desilets D, Diehl DL, Kaul V, Kwon RS, Mamula P, Rodriguez SA, Varadarajulu S, Song L-MWK, Tierney WM (2010) Minimizing occupational hazards in endoscopy: personal protective equipment, radiation safety, and ergonomics. Gastrointest Endosc 72(2):227–235CrossRefPubMed
4.
Geers G, van der Vlis-Vester E (2012) Screen: special darmkanker. DRD Support BV, Amsterdam
5.
van Veldhuizen-Eshuis H, Carpay MEM, van Delden JA, Grievink L, Hoebee B, Lock AJJ, Reij R (2011) Uitvoeringstoets bevolkingsonderzoek naar darmkanker. Rijksinstituut voor Volksgezondheid en Milieu (RIVM), Den Haag
6.
Vargo JJ (2010) North of 100 and south of 500: where does the ‘sweet spot’ of colonoscopic competence lie? Gastrointest Endosc 71(2):325–326CrossRefPubMed
7.
Waye JD, Rex DK, Williams CB (2009) Colonoscopy: principles and practice, 2nd edn. Blackwell Publishing Ltd, ChichesterCrossRef
8.
Shergill AK, McQuaid KR, Rempel D (2009) Ergonomics and GI endoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc 70(1):145–153CrossRefPubMed
9.
Barclay RL, Vicari JJ, Doughty AS, Johanson JF, Greenlaw RL (2006) Colonoscopic withdrawal times and adenoma detection during screening colonoscopy. N Engl J Med 355(24):2533–2541CrossRefPubMed
10.
11.
Rozeboom E, Ruiter J, Franken M, Broeders I (2014) Intuitive user interfaces increase efficiency in endoscope tip control. Surg Endosc 28(9):2600–2605CrossRefPubMed
12.
van der Stap N, van der Heijden F, Broeders IAMJ (2013) Towards automated visual flexible endoscope navigation. Surg Endosc 27(10):3539–3547CrossRefPubMed
13.
Krishnan SM, Tan CS, Chan KL (1994) Closed-boundary extraction of large intestinal lumen. In: Proceedings of the 16th annual international conference of the IEEE. Engineering in medicine and biology society, pp 610–611
14.
Xia S, Krishnan SM, Tjoa MP, Goh PMY (2003) A novel methodology for extracting colon’s lumen from colonoscopic images. J Syst Cybern Inform 1(2):7–12
15.
Zhiyun X (2000) Computerized detection of abnormalities in endoscopic oesophageal images. Nanyang Technological University, Singapore
16.
Asari KV (2000) A fast and accurate segmentation technique for the extraction of gastrointestinal lumen from endoscopic images. Med Eng Phys 22(2):89–96CrossRefPubMed
17.
Gillies D, Khan G (1996) Vision based navigation system for an endoscope. Image Vis Comput 14:763–772CrossRef
18.
Hansel SL, Prechel Ja, Horn B, Crowell MD, DiBaise JK (2009) Observational study of the frequency of use and perceived usefulness of ancillary manoeuvres to facilitate colonoscopy completion. Dig Liver Dis 41(11):812–816CrossRefPubMed
19.
Shah SG, Saunders BP, Brooker JC, Williams CB (2000) Magnetic imaging of colonoscopy: an audit of looping, accuracy and ancillary maneuvers. Gastrointest Endosc 52(1):1–8CrossRefPubMed
20.
van der Stap N, Slump CH, Broeders IAMJ, van der Heijden F (2014) Image-based navigation for a robotized flexible endoscope. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 8899. Springer, Switzerland, pp 77–87
21.
Ruiter J, Rozeboom E, Van Der Voort M, Bonnema M, Broeders I (2012) Design and evaluation of robotic steering of a flexible endoscope. In: IEEE BioRob, pp 761–767
22.
Ruiter JG, Van Der Voort MC, Bonnema GM (2013) User-centred system design approach applied on a robotic flexible endoscope. In: Conference on systems engineering research (CSER’13)
23.
Pullens HJM, Van Der Stap N, Rozeboom ED, Schwartz MP, Van Der Heijden F, Van Oijen MGH, Siersema PD, Broeders IAMJ (2015) Colonoscopy with robotic steering and automated lumen centralization: a feasibility study in a colon model. Endoscopy, Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart, New York. doi:10.​1055/​s-0034-1392550
24.
25.
Rozeboom ED, Ruiter JG, Franken M, Schwartz MP, Stramigioli S, Broeders IAMJ (2014) Single-handed controller reduces the workload of flexible endoscopy. J Robot Surg 8(4):319–324CrossRef
26.
Kuperij N, Reilink R, Schwartz MP, Stramigioli S, Misra S, Broeders IAMJ (2011) Design of a user interface for intuitive colonoscope control. In: IEEE international conference on intelligent robots and systems 2011,pp 2076–2082
27.
Reilink R, Stramigioli S, Misra S (2010) Image-based flexible endoscope steering. In: IEEE/RSJ international conference on intelligent robots and systems, no i, p 6
28.
Plooy AM, Hill A, Horswill MS, Cresp ASG, Watson MO, Ooi S-Y, Riek S, Wallis GM, Burgess-Limerick R, Hewett DG (2012) Construct validation of a physical model colonoscopy simulator. Gastrointest Endosc 76(1):144–150CrossRefPubMed
29.
Gralnek IM, Carr-Locke DL, Segol O, Halpern Z, Siersema PD, Sloyer A, Fenster J, Lewis BS, Santo E, Suissa A, Segev M (2013) Comparison of standard forward-viewing mode versus ultrawide-viewing mode of a novel colonoscopy platform: a prospective, multicenter study in the detection of simulated polyps in an in vitro colon model (with video). Gastrointest Endosc 77(3):472–479CrossRefPubMed
30.
31.
Metadata
Title
Feasibility of automated target centralization in colonoscopy
Authors
N. van der Stap
E. D. Rozeboom
H. J. M. Pullens
F. van der Heijden
I. A. M. J. Broeders
Publication date
01-03-2016
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
International Journal of Computer Assisted Radiology and Surgery / Issue 3/2016
Print ISSN: 1861-6410
Electronic ISSN: 1861-6429
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11548-015-1301-3

Other articles of this Issue 3/2016

International Journal of Computer Assisted Radiology and Surgery 3/2016 Go to the issue

Original Article

Configuration optimization and experimental accuracy evaluation of a bone-attached, parallel robot for skull surgery

Original Article

A geometric method for the detection and correction of segmentation leaks of anatomical structures in volumetric medical images

Original Article

Automated segmentation of the injured spleen

Original Article

Image-based laparoscopic bowel measurement

Original Article

Shading correction for endoscopic images using principal color components

Original Article

Intra-operative adjustment of standard planes in C-arm CT image data