Clinical Trials Directory

Trials / Not Yet Recruiting

Not Yet RecruitingNCT07354867

Effect of Simplified Robot (FASTER) Assisted Versus Conventional Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection (ESD) for Colorectal Lesions

Effect of Simplified Robot (FASTER) Assisted Versus Conventional Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection (ESD) for Colorectal Lesions: A Prospective, Randomized, Controlled Trial

Status
Not Yet Recruiting
Phase
N/A
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
40 (estimated)
Sponsor
Kaiyun Liu · Academic / Other
Sex
All
Age
18 Years – 80 Years
Healthy volunteers
Not accepted

Summary

This study aims to compare the outcomes of Simplified Robot (FASTER) assisted Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection (ESD) with conventional ESD in the treatment of colorectal lesions. Using a prospective, single-center, randomized controlled design, the investigators will systematically evaluate differences between the two approaches in terms of total procedure time, mucosal dissection time and speed, resection quality (R0 resection rate and en bloc resection rate), incidence of complications (bleeding, perforation, muscularis injury), and the flexibility and clinical feasibility of robotic operation. The clinical significance of this study lies in assessing the value of robotic assistance in colorectal ESD, optimizing intraoperative workflow, reducing complication risks, improving patient outcomes and procedural efficiency, and providing evidence to support individualized therapeutic strategies in clinical practice.This study aims to compare the outcomes of Simplified Robot (FASTER) assisted Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection (ESD) with conventional ESD in the treatment of colorectal lesions. Using a prospective, single-center, randomized controlled design, the investigators will systematically evaluate differences between the two approaches in terms of total procedure time, mucosal dissection time and speed, resection quality (R0 resection rate and en bloc resection rate), incidence of complications (bleeding, perforation, muscularis injury), and the flexibility and clinical feasibility of robotic operation. The clinical significance of this study lies in assessing the value of robotic assistance in colorectal ESD, optimizing intraoperative workflow, reducing complication risks, improving patient outcomes and procedural efficiency, and providing evidence to support individualized therapeutic strategies in clinical practice.

Detailed description

This study is a prospective, single-center, randomized controlled trial enrolling patients scheduled to undergo endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for colorectal lesions. Eligible subjects will be screened according to predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria and, after providing written informed consent, randomized 1:1 to the experimental group (FASTER robot-assisted ESD) or the control group (conventional ESD). All participants will undergo standardized ESD performed by experienced endoscopists. In the experimental group, after a circumferential incision is completed, the FASTER robotic arm will be used; its end-effector grasper will apply multidirectional traction to the lesion margins to optimize the submucosal field before completing the dissection. The control group will undergo mucosal-submucosal dissection using conventional ESD techniques. Postoperatively, all participants will receive routine acid-suppression therapy and begin a warm, cool liquid diet 6 hours after the procedure. If no intolerance occurs within 24 hours, the diet will be advanced stepwise to semi-liquid and then soft foods until discharge. During treatment, the following parameters will be recorded and evaluated: total procedure time, mucosal dissection time and dissection speed, resection quality (R0 resection rate and en-bloc resection rate), complication rates (bleeding, perforation, muscularis propria injury), procedural stability, and robotic maneuverability. All participants will be followed during the postoperative hospitalization period, with collection of clinical status, laboratory results, and device-related information. The study team will conduct statistical analyses to compare the two approaches in terms of efficacy and safety, evaluate their clinical applicability, and provide scientific evidence to support optimization of colorectal ESD workflows and the broader adoption of robot-assisted technology.

Conditions

Interventions

TypeNameDescription
OTHERFASTER robot-assisted ESD groupIn the experimental group, the FASTER robotic arm will be attached to the tip of the endoscope at the beginning of the procedure. ESD will then be performed according to the standard steps of conventional ESD: (1) lesion marking; (2) submucosal injection with normal saline mixed with indigo carmine; and (3) circumferential incision. After completion of the submucosal injection and circumferential incision, the robotic arm will be deployed, and the end-effector grasper will grasp and lift the mucosal edge to provide a clear view of the dissection plane, after which submucosal dissection will be performed. Finally, the resected specimen will be retrieved using the FASTER system through the endoscope or via suction. Throughout the procedure, patients' vital signs and any procedure-related serious adverse events will be recorded for statistical analysis
OTHERConventional ESD groupIn the control group, a transparent distal attachment cap will be mounted onto the tip of the endoscope at the beginning of the procedure. ESD will then be performed following the standard steps of conventional ESD, including: (1) lesion marking; (2) submucosal injection using normal saline mixed with indigo carmine; (3) circumferential incision; (4) submucosal dissection; and (5) retrieval of the resected specimen via suction. Throughout the procedure, patients' vital signs and any procedure-related serious adverse events will be recorded for statistical analysis.

Timeline

Start date
2026-01-06
Primary completion
2026-07-30
Completion
2026-11-30
First posted
2026-01-21
Last updated
2026-01-21

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov record NCT07354867. Inclusion in this directory is not an endorsement.