We introduce iMED, the first synchronized multi-endoscope dataset for robot-assisted minimally invasive surgery (RAMIS), designed to address a fundamental limitation in surgical vision benchmarking: the absence of independent held-out viewpoints. Existing surgical datasets capture single-trajectory sequences from a single endoscope, making it impossible to distinguish geometric generalization from photometric interpolation along a narrow forward-facing path. iMED provides 340 sequences ~170K synchronized timepoints with 4 views per timepoint) recorded simultaneously from two independent stereo endoscopes across ex vivo, postmortem, and live surgical settings, spanning 14 specimens with diverse anatomical regions and motion regimes. The dataset includes calibrated camera intrinsics, ArUco-based frame-wise pose estimates with uncertainty quantification, instrument segmentation masks, and rich clinical metadata. Using a train-on-one-endoscope, test-on-another evaluation protocol, we benchmark 23 state-of-the-art methods across rigid and deformable novel view synthesis, pose estimation, feature matching, and monocular depth estimation. Our experiments show that methods relying primarily on photometric supervision degrade substantially under this held-out-endoscope setting, while methods with explicit geometric regularization are more robust across views in our benchmark. Notably, large-scale foundation models transfer surprisingly well to surgical imagery, often outperforming domain-specific models, suggesting pitfalls in current fine-tuning protocols. iMED establishes a new evaluation protocol for geometric generalization in surgical vision.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: Data platform with two stereo endoscopes (top-left), common camera trajectories (top-right), and pipeline outputs including session/anatomy/instrument/motion labels, camera intrinsics, ArUco pose estimates, inferred tool masks , stereo depth (code provided), and derived 3D geometry. See Tab. 2 for provenance.
Dataset
Dataset Attributes
Scene Types
Inferred Labels
Provided Reference Signals
Seq.
Specimens
Modality
Setting
Live
Static
Dyn. Rigid
Deform. Obj.
3D Model
Tool Masks
Camera Calib.
Multi-Camera*
EndoVis 17/18 [ 4 , 2 ]
29
29
Da Vinci Xi Da Vinci X
In vivo
✓
✓
✓
✓
MITI [ 22 ]
-
1
Karl Storz 3D Tipcam
In vivo
✓
✓
✓
STIR [ 54 ]
572
4
Da Vinci Xi
Ex vivo In vivo
✓
✓
✓
Hamlyn Centre [ 42 , 59 , 50 ]
-
-
Da Vinci Si
Phantom Ex vivo In vivo
✓
✓
✓
✓**
SERV-CT [ 16 ]
16
2
Da Vinci
Postmortem
✓
✓
✓
Table 1: Comparison of stereo-endoscopic datasets for 3D perception in minimally invasive surgery. Multi-Camera* defined as more than one stereo camera pair. **only for 2 phantom validation sequences with CT scans.
Figure 2: Example geometric reconstructions and label projection enabled by iMED. Left: synchronized stereo views from both endoscopes, stereo depth estimationo [ 67 ] , aligned point clouds from provided camera calibrations, Poisson-reconstruction, and reprojected tool masks. Right: Representative anatomical regions with surface reconstructions from ex vivo specimens (chicken, porcine, bovine), human cadaver sites, and live porcine tissue. Inference code to recreate geometry and 3D tool labels is provided.
Figure 3: A: Distribution of seqs. by anatomical region and organ type including number of timepoints per category. B: Distribution of seqs. by motion regime (camera motion vs. scene motion). Calibration-only sequences are excluded. C: Distribution of seqs. by session type. D: Distribution of seqs. by cam spatial relationships, showing inter-cam separation distance and orientation difference.
Label
Level
Provenance
Source / Method
Released
Session type
Seq.
Manual
Curator
✓
Broad anatomical region
Seq.
Manual
Clinical specialist
✓
Detailed scene caption
Scene
Manual
Clinical specialist
✓
Instrument type
Seq.
Manual
Clinical specialist
✓
Motion regime/movement type
Seq.
Manual
Curator + protocol
✓
Camera intrinsics/stereo baseline
Seq.
Measured
Calibration procedure
✓
Table 2: Label provenance for iMED. We report annotation level, generation type, source method, and whether the annotation is included in the public data release. For storage reasons, stereo depth and 3D geometry are reproducible via provided code.
Figure 4: Left: ArUco calibration cube design iterations leading to our final 8 mm wooden cube design. Right: ArUco-based pose estimation pipeline: (1) marker detection, (2) PnP pose estimation, (3) relative transformation via RANSAC and refinement.
Session Type
Reproj. Err. (px) ↓
Physical Err. @5cm (mm) ↓
Ex vivo
38.33
1.88
In vivo (postmortem)
17.00
0.83
In vivo (live)
11.87
0.58
Table 3: Reference trajectory accuracy after full refinement across session types. See Supplementary Sec. 6.5 for complete ablations and 3D consistency metrics.
Method
Depth
PSNR ↑
SSIM ↑
Render (FPS) ↑
Train (FPS) ↑
Rigid Novel View Synthesis
NeRF [ 41 ]
x
17.24
0.65
0.11
0.21
NeRF [ 41 ]
DA [ 71 ]
16.29
0.55
0.11
0.19
NeRF [ 41 ]
FS [ 67 ]
15.93
0.55
0.11
0.18
3DGS [ 30 ]
x
14.82
0.59
487.62
0.59
3DGS [ 30 ]
DA [ 71 ]
14.77
0.63
509.99
0.36
Table 4: NVS benchmarks. Methods trained on Endoscope 2 and evaluated on Endoscope 1 . Rigid and deformable methods perform offline optimization vs. online methods incrementally update the scene using only the most recent observations during acquisition (see Sec. 4.1 ). FPS excludes SfM [ 55 ] preprocessing.
Figure 5: Left: Rendered test views show ghost-like artifacts in depth-supervised variants. Right: SSIM computed against the test held-out image during camera interpolation from a training (0%) to test (100%) viewpoint. NeRF (purple) improves monotonically, while depth-supervised variants degrade despite geometric convergence, suggesting transparent density surfaces rather than opaque geometry.
Figure 6: Qualitative comparison of the Deformable NVS methods.
Figure 7: Qualitative comparison of image matching methods showing correspondence quality. Green lines indicate inlier matches; red lines indicate outliers. The angle next to the method name is the average rotational error.
Method
Rot. Err.(°) ↓
Temporal Drift(°) ↓
Inlier Rate (%) ↑
Avg Inliers ↑
RoMa [ 15 ]
1.79±1.41
1.41
78.1
3905
MASt3R [ 32 ]
1.81±1.38
1.38
70.3
1676
GIM+LG [ 57 , 37 ]
1.87±1.48
0.41
43.1
264
ALIKE+LG [ 76 , 37 ]
1.91±1.52
0.64
68.2
211
LoFTR [ 60 ]
1.91±1.40
0.43
47.2
513
DISK+LG [ 64 , 37 ]
1.93±1.52
0.59
55.2
446
Table 5: Pose estimation and feature matching benchmarking results. Temporal consistency measures rot. drift across seqs. with tool-tissue deformation and static cameras.
Figure 8: Qualitative comparison of mono. depth estimation compared to inferred stereo depth [ 67 ] . Error maps show abs. depth error after median scaling of the predictions.
Method
Med. Scaled
Abs Rel ↓
RMSE ↓
RMSE log ↓
δ1↑
δ2↑
δ3↑
UniDepth-V2 [ 48 ]
Yes
0.081
0.012
0.111
0.936
0.992
0.998
MoGe-V2 [ 66 ]
Yes
0.109
0.014
0.140
0.889
0.989
0.998
EndoDAC [ 11 ]
Yes
0.119
0.017
0.164
0.854
0.968
0.994
Endo3R [ 21 ]
Yes
0.187
0.023
0.236
0.704
0.927
0.972
UniDepth-V2 [ 48 ]
No
11.573
1.098
2.465
0.000
0.000
0.000
MoGe-V2 [ 66 ]
No
14.556
1.329
2.683
0.000
0.000
0.000
Table 6: Monocular depth prediction compared to inferred stereo depth [ 67 ] . Methods that report metric-scale predictions [ 48 , 66 ] are evaluated without median scaling.
Figure 9: Example ArUco marker removal for dynamic-camera sequences. When markers remain visible for continuous pose estimation, iMED releases ArUco masks [ 9 ] and inpainted frames generated with DiffuEraser [ 35 ] .
Tool Name
Num Sequences
Intuitive Surgical Da Vinci Tip-Up Fenestrated Grasper
61
Intuitive Surgical Da Vinci ProGrasp tm Forceps
30
Intuitive Surgical Da Vinci Long Bipolar Grasper
22
Intuitive Surgical Da Vinci Monopolar Curved Scissors
18
Ethicon Endopath XCEL Universal Sleeve Assist Port CB5ST
18
Intuitive Surgical Da Vinci Mega SutureCut tm Needle Driver
16
Table 7: Surgical instrument taxonomy and sequence frequency across the dataset (20 instrument types, 340 sequences total).
Figure 10: Three trajectory examples showing camera movements in iMED - Circular (left), Left and Right(middle), zoom in (right) camera movements. They are decomposed to their X, Y, and Z (cm) components; reprojection error optimization baseline in black and the filtered trajectories in red.
Method
SSIM ↑
PSNR ↑ (dB)
Temporal Var. ≈ M0 (6.69)
M0 : Baseline
0.278
9.79
6.69
M1 : Brightness Only
0.283
12.10
13.88
M2 : Frame-to-Frame
0.479
15.06
9.55
M3 : Frame-to-Seq
0.502
15.34
7.64
M4 : Seq-to-Seq
0.503
15.34
7.78
Table 8: Endoscope matching normalization strategies. SSIM and PSNR measure structural and pixel-level fidelity, while temporal variation quantifies stability across frames ( ≈ M0 baseline indicates optimal preservation of natural temporal dynamics). Methods M2-M4 evaluated with specular masking; best threshold reported. Temporal variation measures pixel stability across frames (RMS of standard deviations from 10 tracked non-specular pixels).
2D Evaluation
3D Evaluation
Method
Reproj. Err. (pixels) ↓
Physical Err. @5cm (cm) ↓
Markers/ Image Pair ↑
RMSE(cm) ↓
Chamfer Dist. (cm) ↓
Ex Vivo Sessions (n=9)
Inlier Averaging
550.23
2.697
4.18
1.5
1.8
Optimization
362.69
1.778
4.18
1.5
1.8
Outlier Rejection
362.69
1.778
4.18
1.5
1.8
Temporally Smooth
38.33
0.188
4.18
1.4
1.7
Table 9: Trajectory estimation comparison across session types on 27 sequences (9 per type, 20 frames each). 2D reprojection error converted to physical error at 5cm working distance. 3D metrics from FoundationStereo point cloud alignment. Ex vivo baseline errors (362-550 pixels) stem from early acquisition with metallic cubes and 4×4 ArUco markers; temporal smoothing yields dramatic improvement. In vivo sessions achieve lower baseline errors (12-19 pixels) due to improved marker design (wooden cubes, " ARUCP_MIP_36h12 ") and mechanical stability.
Reconstructing surgical scenes from monocular endoscopic video is critical for advancing robotic-assisted surgery. However, the application of state-of-the-art general-purpose reconstruction models is constrained by two key challenges: the lack of supervised training data and performance degradation over long video sequences. To overcome these limitations, we propose SurgCUT3R, a systematic framework that adapts unified 3D reconstruction models to the surgical domain. Our contributions are threefold. First, we develop a data generation pipeline that exploits public stereo surgical datasets to produce large-scale, metric-scale pseudo-ground-truth depth maps, effectively bridging the data gap. Second, we propose a hybrid supervision strategy that couples our pseudo-ground-truth with geometric self-correction to enhance robustness against inherent data imperfections. Third, we introduce a hierarchical inference framework that employs two specialized models to effectively mitigate accumulated pose drift over long surgical videos: one for global stability and one for local accuracy. Experiments on the SCARED and StereoMIS datasets demonstrate that our method achieves a competitive balance between accuracy and efficiency, delivering near state-of-the-art but substantially faster pose estimation and offering a practical and effective solution for robust reconstruction in surgical environments. Project page: https://chumo-xu.github.io/SurgCUT3R-ICRA26/.
Kaiyuan Xu, Fangzhou Hong, Daniel Elson +1
The Hamlyn Centre for Robotic Surgery, Imperial College London, SW7 2AZ, UK. · S-Lab, College of Computing and Data Science, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore 639798. · Department of Computer Science, University of Liverpool, L69 7ZX, UK.
Geometric understanding supports endoscopic navigation and robotic assistance, but learning reliable endoscopic geometry faces two challenges: scarce geometric annotations and ambiguity between camera motion and tissue deformation. We present SCOPE-4D, an endoscopic 4D geometry foundation model that jointly predicts camera parameters, dense geometry, and 3D tissue trajectories from monocular RGB video in a single forward pass. Our curation and annotation pipeline constructs SCOPE-5K, a collection of approximately 5,000 clips spanning real and synthetic gastrointestinal endoscopy and laparoscopy. The collection provides rich geometric supervision and includes newly collected phantom and real-colonoscopy evaluation sets. Geometric supervised fine-tuning on SCOPE-5K learns endoscopic priors that improve camera and depth estimation. Common--Residual Motion (CRM) further constrains local deformation relative to common tissue movement. Together with geometric supervision, CRM and trajectory supervision further improve camera and depth estimation over geometric fine-tuning alone while enabling dense 3D tissue tracking. Evaluations on public and newly collected benchmarks demonstrate strong in-domain and out-of-domain geometry, superior 3D tracking, and more stable long-sequence colon reconstruction. A blinded user study further supports the perceived reconstruction quality on real clinical video. Together, these results demonstrate the value of large-scale endoscopic supervision and motion constraints for joint geometry estimation and tissue tracking.
Chaoyi Zhou, Zhongpai Gao, Anwesa Choudhuri +6
United Imaging Intelligence, Boston, MA, USA · Clemson University, Clemson, SC, USA
Achieving 3D spatial awareness is crucial for surgical robotic manipulation, where precise and delicate operations are required. Existing methods either explicitly reconstruct the surgical scene prior to manipulation, or enhance multi-view features by adding wrist-mounted cameras to supplement the default stereo endoscopes. However, both paradigms suffer from notable limitations: the former easily leads to error accumulation and prevents end-to-end optimization due to its multi-stage nature, while the latter is rarely adopted in clinical practice since wrist-mounted cameras can interfere with the motion of surgical robot arms. In this work, we introduce the Spatial Surgical Transformer (SST), an end-to-end visuomotor policy that empowers surgical robots with 3D spatial awareness by directly exploring 3D spatial cues embedded in endoscopic images. First, we build Surgical3D, a large-scale photorealistic dataset containing 30K stereo endoscopic image pairs with accurate 3D geometry, addressing the scarcity of 3D data in surgical scenes. Based on Surgical3D, we finetune a powerful geometric transformer to extract robust 3D latent representations from stereo endoscopes images. These representations are then seamlessly aligned with the robot's action space via a lightweight multi-level spatial feature connector (MSFC), all within an endoscope-centric coordinate frame. Extensive real-robot experiments demonstrate that SST achieves state-of-the-art performance and strong spatial generalization on complex surgical tasks such as knot tying and ex-vivo organ dissection, representing a significant step toward practical clinical deployment. The dataset and code will be released.
Yu Sheng, Lidian Wang, Xiaomeng Chu +6
University of Science and Technology of China · Tuodao Medical · Yale University