top of page

Please stop saying we are only 3% penetrated in soft tissue surgical robotics - these are the numbers to care about.

Updated: May 30

Free view finsihed : please buy an annual subscription to get all the insights


So firstly, I think I’ve found the source of this urban myth about the fact “we are only 3% penetrated into surgery with surgical robotics.”

I keep seeing this nonsense and just wondering if marketing departments are actually doing their jobs anymore. Instead, it seems like some companies are just latching on to a “sound bite” that fits their narrative.


The citation often quoted is this one:


Cepolina F, Razzoli RP. An introductory review of robotically assisted surgical systems. Int J Med Robot. 2022 Aug;18(4):e2409. doi: 10.1002/rcs.2409. Epub 2022 May 4. PMID: 35476899; PMCID: PMC9540802.


Where in the introduction an unsubstantiated claim is made with no data reference that I can find:


“Globally, it is estimated that about 3% of surgeries are performed robotically, offering patients the benefits of MIS, fewer complications, shorter stay in hospital, and faster return to normal activities.”

No reference - and the clue is in “estimated.” and "Surgeries" not applicable surgeries.


I’ve now seen this “data” quoted more than 22 times in an effort to estimate the surgical robotics penetration - and I think I know exactly why this narrative works for some of the companies entering or trying to enter the surgical robotics space.


I encourage you to dig into this paper and ask if an entire industry should be basing much of its rationale of investments, hype, R&D on this data, this paper.



It is even more important to read this paper in depth - as it discusses many discontinued systems, poor data on what systems are in development, ortho robots, spine robots, needle navigation and even cardiovascular end-vascular robots. I don’t want to say it is a bad paper. I want to say it is not a paper to base a penetration of soft tissue surgical robotics upon.


So I struggle to see how this claimed  3% - can be related to the penetration of soft tissue surgical robotics. I think we need to stop using this reference for that purpose.


Why does this matter?

Want to read more?

Subscribe to howtostartupinmedtech.com to keep reading this exclusive post.

742 views0 comments

Comments

Rated 0 out of 5 stars.
Couldn’t Load Comments
It looks like there was a technical problem. Try reconnecting or refreshing the page.
bottom of page