Conventional endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is performed under fluoroscopic guidance, exposing endoscopists to ionizing radiation and posing risks of work-related musculoskeletal injury. Robotic-assisted ERCP may mitigate these occupational hazards and potentially enhance procedural precision and stability. However, robust clinical evidence regarding its performance and safety remains limited. This prospective, multicenter, randomized controlled non-inferiority trial is designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of an ERCP robotic system (Electronic Endoscopic Surgery System) developed by Shanghai Aohua Photoelectricity Endoscope Co., Ltd. for common bile duct stone removal. A total of at least 200 subjects will be recruited and randomized 1:1 to either the experimental group or the control group. The experimental group will undergo robotic-assisted ERCP lithotomy using the aforementioned system, while the control group will receive conventional ERCP lithotomy using a standard duodenoscope.
Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE
Enrollment
200
This group will receive endoscopic common bile duct lithotomy using the Electronic Endoscopic Surgery System produced by Shanghai Aohua Endoscopy Co., Ltd.
This group will undergo conventional endoscopic common bile duct lithotomy with a regular electronic duodenoscope.
Nanjing Drum Tower Hospital, The Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing University Medical School
Nanjing, Jiangsu, China
Rate of bile duct stone extraction success
Stone extraction success was defined as complete clearance of the common bile duct during the same procedure.
Time frame: Baseline
Rate of adverse events
Time frame: Through study completion, an average of 1 month
Rate of biliary cannulation success
Biliary cannulation success was defined as achievement of deep biliary access.
Time frame: Baseline
Procedure time, including papilla localization time, cannulation time and stone extraction time
Papilla localization time was defined as the time required from insertion of the duodenoscope to accurate identification of the major duodenal papilla. Cannulation time was defined as the interval from first contact between the papilla and a wire-guided sphincterotome to successful deep biliary access. Stone extraction time was defined as the duration from successful biliary cannulation to complete stone removal, confirmed endoscopically and fluoroscopically. Total procedure time was measured from insertion of the duodenoscope into the esophagus to completion of all planned ERCP interventions.
Time frame: Baseline
Intraoperative radiation exposure time and radiation exposure dose of the principal operating investigator
Time frame: Baseline
Success rate of external drainage
Time frame: Baseline
Success rate of pancreatic duct stent placement
Time frame: Baseline
Rate of intraoperative conversion
It is defined as the proportion of subjects who switched from endoscopic common bile duct lithotomy using the investigational device to other treatment modalities during the operation.
Time frame: Baseline
Evaluation of System Performance
The performance of the intraoperative investigational device was evaluated by the principal operating investigators using a three-grade rating system (Excellent, Good, Fair), following the procedures below: A three-grade rating system (Excellent, Good, Fair) was adopted for the evaluation. Three principal operating investigators from 3 clinical centers conducted independent evaluations based on the Evaluation Indicators and Criteria, respectively. The evaluation results are filled in the Evaluation Form for Surgical Procedure and Device Coordination.
Time frame: Baseline
Operational Comfort and Satisfaction Scores
This score is obtained through a questionnaire-based approach, and the questionnaire is designed to collect the comfort level and satisfaction degree ratings of the principal operating investigators (10 items in total). Each item is scored on a 1-5 scale, with scores ranging from 1 to 5 from left to right. The scoring definitions are as follows: 1 point for Strongly Agree; 2 points for Agree; 3 points for Neutral; 4 points for Disagree; 5 points for Strongly Disagree. A lower score indicates a better experience and higher satisfaction of the investigators with the use of the investigational device.
Time frame: Baseline
This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.