Evaluation of a new motorized endoscope versus conventional endoscopy: a single-center, single-blind, randomized controlled trial

Despite advances in gastrointestinal endoscopy, the core mechanical principle remains unchanged. This single-center, single-blind, randomized controlled non-inferiority trial compared a novel motorized endoscope (ME) with a conventional endoscope (CE) in 178 adults undergoing screening esophagogastroduodenoscopy. Participants were randomized 1:1 and blinded by pre-procedure sedation. 78 patients received ME and 84 received CE procedures. ME was non-inferior to CE in the primary outcome of total operability score (no biopsy: 95% CI - 1.77 to 0.59, margin - 3; biopsy: - 2.65 to 1.39, margin - 4) and significantly reduced physical fatigue (1.35 ± 0.48 vs. 1.63 ± 0.62; p = 0.002) and improved lens cleanliness (1.83 ± 0.59 vs. 2.17 ± 0.87; p = 0.004) in individual operability items, while lowering physical demand (1.39 ± 0.49 vs. 1.67 ± 0.63; p = 0.002) in NASA-TLX score. CE achieved superior image quality in overall assessment, view, and resolution (all p < 0.05). Patient satisfaction and safety were comparable. ME provided ergonomic benefits without compromising safety or patient experience, achieving non-inferior operability.Trial registration. Clinical Research Information Service (CRIS), TRN: KCT0010918, Registration date: 19/08/2025.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Scientific Reports
Published
2025-12-04
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-31427-x
Primary Topic
Medical Device Sterilization and Disinfection
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Evaluation of a new motorized endoscope versus conventional endoscopy: a single-center, single-blind, randomized controlled trial

Mi Jin Oh, Hyunsoo Chung, Seo Yeon Lee, Gihong Park et al.
Scientific Reports
Medical Device Sterilization and Disinfection
article

Evaluation of a new motorized endoscope versus conventional endoscopy: a single-center, single-blind, randomized controlled trial

Mi Jin Oh, Hyunsoo Chung, Seo Yeon Lee, Gihong Park, Ji Kon Ryu
article en

Abstract

Despite advances in gastrointestinal endoscopy, the core mechanical principle remains unchanged. This single-center, single-blind, randomized controlled non-inferiority trial compared a novel motorized endoscope (ME) with a conventional endoscope (CE) in 178 adults undergoing screening esophagogastroduodenoscopy. Participants were randomized 1:1 and blinded by pre-procedure sedation. 78 patients received ME and 84 received CE procedures. ME was non-inferior to CE in the primary outcome of total operability score (no biopsy: 95% CI - 1.77 to 0.59, margin - 3; biopsy: - 2.65 to 1.39, margin - 4) and significantly reduced physical fatigue (1.35 ± 0.48 vs. 1.63 ± 0.62; p = 0.002) and improved lens cleanliness (1.83 ± 0.59 vs. 2.17 ± 0.87; p = 0.004) in individual operability items, while lowering physical demand (1.39 ± 0.49 vs. 1.67 ± 0.63; p = 0.002) in NASA-TLX score. CE achieved superior image quality in overall assessment, view, and resolution (all p < 0.05). Patient satisfaction and safety were comparable. ME provided ergonomic benefits without compromising safety or patient experience, achieving non-inferior operability.Trial registration. Clinical Research Information Service (CRIS), TRN: KCT0010918, Registration date: 19/08/2025.

Scientific ReportsVol. 16(1)
New Generation University College (ET), Seoul National University Hospital (KR), National University College (PR)
Korea Medical Device Development Fund, Ministry of Trade, Industry and Energy, Ministry of Food and Drug Safety, Ministry of Science and ICT, South Korea
Openalex Percentile: Top 63%
Medical Device Sterilization and Disinfection
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.