Robotic surgical systems promised greater precision and faster recovery, but robot-assisted procedures have caused serious injuries and deaths when equipment malfunctions, surgeons lack adequate training, or complications arise that the robotic system cannot handle. Patients injured during robotic surgery face complex legal claims that may involve the robot manufacturer, hospital, and surgical team.
Understanding Robotic Surgery Systems
The da Vinci Surgical System manufactured by Intuitive Surgical dominates the robotic surgery market, with thousands of units installed in hospitals worldwide. The system translates a surgeon's hand movements into precise instrument movements inside the patient's body, using a console, patient cart with robotic arms, and specialized instruments.
Robotic surgery is used for prostatectomy, hysterectomy, cardiac procedures, colorectal surgery, and various other operations. Hospitals have invested heavily in robotic programs, sometimes pushing surgeons to use robots even when traditional approaches might be safer for specific patients.
Types of Robotic Surgery Injuries
Robotic surgery complications can be categorized as equipment-related or surgeon-related:
Equipment malfunctions include instrument breakage inside the patient, electrical arcing that burns tissue, imaging system failures, and mechanical problems with robotic arms. When instruments break during surgery, fragments may be left inside patients or cause immediate organ damage.
Electrical and thermal burns occur when robotic instruments arc electrical current to unintended areas or generate excessive heat, damaging bowel, blood vessels, or other structures outside the surgical field.
Unrecognized injuries happen when the robotic system's limited tactile feedback prevents surgeons from detecting bowel perforations, blood vessel nicks, or other injuries that would be apparent in open surgery. These injuries may not be diagnosed until days later when patients develop serious infections or bleeding.
Conversion complications occur when emergency situations require rapid conversion from robotic to open surgery. The time required to undock the robot and access the patient directly can prove fatal in cases of sudden hemorrhage.
Legal Theories in Robotic Surgery Cases
Robotic surgery lawsuits may proceed against multiple defendants under different legal theories:
Product liability claims against Intuitive Surgical or other manufacturers allege design defects, manufacturing defects, or failure to adequately warn about risks. These claims must overcome the sophisticated defense that surgeons, not robots, control procedures.
Medical malpractice claims against surgeons allege inadequate training, failure to properly supervise the procedure, or negligent decisions about which patients are appropriate robotic surgery candidates.
Hospital negligence claims allege that institutions failed to properly credential surgeons for robotic procedures, pushed surgeons to use robots inappropriately, or failed to ensure adequate training and oversight.
The Training and Credentialing Issue
A significant concern in robotic surgery litigation involves inadequate surgeon training. Unlike traditional surgical training that occurs over years of residency, robotic surgery training may consist of brief manufacturer courses followed by proctored cases. Some lawsuits allege that:
Hospitals credentialed surgeons for robotic procedures after minimal training to increase robot utilization and justify equipment purchases.
Manufacturers provided inadequate training and downplayed the learning curve required to perform robotic procedures safely.
Surgeons performed complex robotic procedures without sufficient experience, using patients as training subjects.
Pursuing Robotic Surgery Claims
Patients injured during robotic surgery should preserve all medical records including operative reports, which detail whether the robot was used and any complications encountered. Expert medical testimony is essential to establish whether injuries resulted from equipment malfunction, surgeon error, or a combination of factors.
Consultation with an attorney experienced in both medical malpractice and product liability is important because these cases often involve complex questions about which defendants bear responsibility for injuries.