PofoliaShared via Pofolia

Journal of Robotic Surgery· 2026Q1

Medical liability in paediatric robotic surgery – a current concept and a literature review

Ciro Esposito, Anna Gargiulo, Claudia Di Mento, Marco Castagnetti et al.

Short summary

Robotic surgery in pediatrics, despite technical advantages, presents unresolved medico-legal liability challenges, with 3.4% of 205 procedures experiencing technical robot issues (e.g., joystick latency, pedal malfunctions) that highlight potential risks, even without clinical complications.

AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.

Key points

  • 3.4% (7/205) of pediatric robotic procedures reviewed experienced technical robot issues.
  • Technical issues included joystick latency, coagulation/cutting pedal malfunctions, and system shutdowns.
  • No clinical complications resulted from these technical events in the reviewed cases.
  • Existing medico-legal frameworks lack specific guidelines for robotic surgery liability.
  • Liability in robotic surgery involves a network of stakeholders: surgeon, healthcare institution, and manufacturer.

AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.

Abstract

Abstract Robotic-assisted surgery offers significant technical advantages in pediatric procedures but presents complex, unresolved medico-legal challenges regarding liability. We retrospectively reviewed our ten-year experience comprising 205 pediatric robotic procedures. Technical issues related to the robot were encountered in 7 cases (3.4%). These included joystick latency (3/7), coagulation/cutting pedal malfunctions (2/7), and accidental power cable disconnections causing system shutdowns (2/7). A literature review was conducted to assess the current international state of the art regarding robotic medical liability. Although the technical events at our center did not result in clinical complications, they highlighted significant potential risks. The literature shows that specific guidelines governing human, product, and algorithm-related liability are still lacking. Robotic surgery shifts the focus from an exclusively fault-based liability of the surgeon to a network-based system involving multiple stakeholders: the surgeon, the healthcare institution, and the manufacturer. Determining whether an adverse event stems from human error, algorithmic malfunction, or a combination of both remains a critical challenge. Unlike open or laparoscopic surgery where liability is primarily attributed to the operator, robotic surgery involves a complex interaction between the surgeon’s console inputs and the manufacturer’s technology. Consequently, from a medico-legal standpoint, responsibility for complications should be shared among the surgeon, the hospital, and the device manufacturer.

The authors' abstract, as published at the source. Journal of Robotic Surgery, 2026 · DOI ↗

TakeawaysPremium
Ask the paperFree account

Continue with a free account

Ask the paper: 3 free questions a day about this paper; save it, get its citation, new summaries every day for your field. Takeaways are Premium.

Continue free on the web

Sign in with Google or Apple; no card needed. You come back to this paper.

On your phone:

Field: Pharmacy

PharmacyHealth Professions