Tuesday, October 18, 2005

Olympus Launches High-resolution Endo Capsule System in Europe

Filed under: GI

Endo Capsule by OlympusOlympus Medical Systems has announced the official European launch of its proprietary high-resolution Endo Capsule system on October 24. We have reported about the Endo Capsule system, a 26mm long and 11mm in diameter endoscope, back in May.

Some additional info:

1. High resolution imaging based on technology evolved from our well-established endoscopy systems

a. Automatic Brightness Control

- Automatic Brightness Control, applied from conventional endoscope technology, adjusts illumination to maintain optimal imaging, even under the most demanding conditions.

b. Small body (diameter:11mm, length:26mm) equipped with sophisticated micromachine technology

- Sensitive, high resolution CCD technology provides clear and vivid imaging.

- A wide depth of field (0-20mm*) provides optimal observation.

- 6 white LED lights ensure a clear field of view.

- A built-in capsule antenna transmits two images per second to the recorder unit via the antenna. Recorded images can be obtained for approximately 8 hours.

Real Time Viewer2. World first real-time observation: promotes more reliable and productive examinations Real-time observation

- Before a patient swallows the capsule, a medical practitioner can check if the capsule is operating correctly.

- With the "Real Time Viewer" with display in hand, a physician can confirm a real time imaging recorded by the capsule endoscope and then estimate the capsule position in GI tract during the procedure

The press release...

Flashback: Capsule Endoscope by Olympus

email this article to a friend      print this!           comments and peer reviews (1)






replies: 1 comments
Open comments are not moderated, although abusive and vulgar remarks may be deleted. Opinions expressed do not necessarily reflect the views of Medgadget.com. Please consult our disclaimer.

Well, it's a partially nice concept.

It relies on 1 major feature which wasn't mentioned.

The mirror.

When you brush your teeth, your hand/forearm will be blocking the "indicating" light from informing you of the pressure in which you are applying the brush with. You might want to at least rethink the placement of the light, or at least have another indicator placed somewhere where the hand won't act as a visual barrier.

Side note:

1. The croc idea is unnecessary. No need for that, the brush can easily be updated so it has the same type of feedback that the croc provides. In certain mechanical toothbrushes, they have certain timers built in via feedback that lets you know when its time to switch from the upper to lower (or vice versa) teeth.

2. The designer needs to focus on the human data factor (anthromorphic data) because if it was specifically designed for young folks, then the diameter of the handle should be redesigned so it's small enough to accommodate them. At this point. It is, visually, not.

3. The handle is shaped similar to a cone. Is there any particular reason why it's in this form? Aesthetically? Practical? Just in order to fabricate that particular shape will require a substantial investment in tooling, and what's the benefit? I don't see any that would've been substantially any better than the straightforward cylindrical shapes. In design, a lot of factors needs to be considered. Looks is only a small part of it.

4. Brush ones teeth correctly? That would require a certain device that can sense gravity at the 3 axial points. I'm not even going to try and get technical here and explain the device, but basically it's out there, used on robots to self-compensate for whatever obstacles lies ahead by keeping its motherboard in a steady n fixed axis. The concept of brushing ones teeth correctly relies on 2 subconcepts.

a. The speed of the brushing.
b. The direction of motion in which it is being brushed.

Will it address both? If not, then the concept needs to be investigated a little bit more, for any dentist would tell you that it's crucial to brush ones teeth in a up and downward motion, not sideways.

It's overall still a good idea. I suggest the designer keep on refining the product. He/She's about a year or so away from a realistic conceptual product. Keep on throwing the idea back here and I'll be more than glad to give you my feedback.


Posted by: william
on September 29, 2005 06:30 AM GMT