Imagine a device that can hold an endoscope and move it during an endoscopic procedure, following the surgeon’s verbal commands. That was AESOP (the Automated Endoscopic System for Optimal Positioning), developed by Computer Motion which received FDA clearance in 1993, making it one of the earliest robotic surgical devices cleared by the FDA.
So the technology was there. More than three decades ago. Why didn’t we develop it? Perhaps because surgeons simply didn’t want it. There is an uncomfortable truth behind many technologies that promise to replace the surgical roles: surgery is a collaborative activity. A good assistant does much more than hold the camera. They anticipate, adapt, retract, expose, communicate and occasionally save you from yourself.
And although we may all have preferences about which colleagues we would choose to operate with, the idea that the ideal solution is to operate alone is. at least, questionable.
This is where SpeedPAL, from Fulbright Medical, enters the picture. Fulbright describes it as a robotic surgical assistant designed to give the surgeon direct control of the camera, with a six-degree-of-freedom camera arm compatible with 10 mm endoscopes and multiple control options, including voice commands and joysticks.
The concept, certainly, is not new. And the question remains: do we really need another surgical assistant?
J Granell. Sep 13, 2026
One thought on “Do we really need another surgical assistant?”