The field of clinically recognized endovascular robots encompasses notable systems, such as the Corindus CorPath, Robocath's R-One, Hansen Medical's Magellan Robotic System, and the upcoming Liberty System (1, 2, 3, 4, 5). These systems were specifically designed to enable precise navigation of endovascular catheters through challenging anatomical structures, thereby enhancing the success of procedures in both coronary and peripheral vasculature (3).

The primary rationale behind these "master-slave robots" in the vascular domain is to reduce radiation exposure and physical strain on operators and medical staff. They aim to improve the efficiency and accuracy of intravascular navigation, decrease contrast utilization, standardize procedures for less experienced operators, mitigate the risk of vascular trauma, and even enable remote procedure performance (3,6). Additional goals include minimizing or eliminating catheter exchanges, enhancing catheter manipulation in the presence of complex and tortuous anatomy, and achieving improved procedural outcomes with fewer complications. Furthermore, efforts have been made to integrate robotic technology with advanced localization, imaging techniques, and AI algorithms to further enhance performance and achieve the ultimate objective of semi- or fully-automated endovascular navigation and therapy (7, 8, 9).

Intravascular robotics not only level the playing field by providing consistent procedural performance among physicians with varying amounts of endovascular training, but also facilitate the execution of more complex procedures (10). While the aforementioned objectives of robotic technology hold great promise, it is crucial for these potential benefits to be substantiated through empirical evidence.