This is a website about technology. High Tech. Robotic Surgery. New platforms, advanced instrumentation, clinical use, artificial intelligence, augmented reality, and all the innovations that are shaping the future of surgery. But, even in Tech, is newer always better?
Madrid is particularly hot these days, so I have just checked the air conditioning at home. I pressed the button, and immediately a cool breeze started flowing. Everything worked perfectly. But notice a detail.
The logo on the unit was one that some younger readers may not even recognize. It carried the emblem of Federal Republic of Germany… that is before the Berlin Wall came down. My Panasonic air conditioner is Japanese (Panasonic, Matsushita Electric Industrial Co.), yet it carries the BZT certification mark (Bundesamt für Zulassungen in der Telekommunikation), the Western German Federal Office for Telecommunications Approvals, whose standards were among the most demanding technical regulations in Europe at the time. The thing is that is has been working for more than 35 years. Japanese and German engineering earned its reputation for a reason. Durability, reliability, and quality were not marketing slogans; they were design principles.
Medical technology, however, follows a different path. In healthcare, it is not enough for a device to keep working. Technology evolves, and devices become better, more ergonomic, and more capable. Innovation is not simply about replacing old equipment; it is about improving patient outcomes and making procedures safer and more efficient.
The evolution of Med Tech is about improving patient outcomes and making procedures safer and more efficient.
I have been fortunate to witness this evolution personally through the development of the da Vinci Surgical System. I have worked with several generations of the platform, from the original da Vinci Standard system to the latest da Vinci 5. One particularly interesting experience took place during a dissection course we organized in Granada in June 2022. We had two dissection stations operating side by side: one equipped with a da Vinci Standard system (1999) and the other with a da Vinci Xi (2014). The Standard system was still fully functional. It could perform the tasks it was designed for (and it represented a revolutionary achievement in surgery). But after spending time on both systems, even for unexperienced surgeons, the differences were impossible to ignore. The Xi offered better ergonomics, improved vision, more intuitive instrument management, and a significantly refined user experience.
The Xi was not better simply because it was newer. It was better because engineers, surgeons, and developers had spent years identifying limitations and improving the platform.
Today, we are seeing the arrival of many new robotic systems. Some are genuinely innovative. Others are, perhaps more accurately, new versions of concepts that have existed for years. When evaluating a robotic platform, we should not focus solely on whether it is new or different. We need to assess quality. We need to assess technological maturity. We need to assess safety. And most importantly, we need to assess whether the technology actually improves the work of surgeons and the care of patients.
When evaluating a new robotic platform we need to assess whether the technology actually improves the work of surgeons and the care of patients.
Innovation matters. But innovation alone is not enough.
At the same time, there is value in remembering where we came from. Understanding the history of surgical robotics helps us appreciate the remarkable progress that has been made and provides perspective on where we want to go next. My old air conditioner reminded me of that. Some technologies become classics because they were built exceptionally well. Others become obsolete because better solutions emerge. Others were always “bad science”, If you can differentiate between Good Tech and Bad Tech, you will know the difference.
J Granell. May 31, 2026
