Robotic-assisted surgery has moved from novelty to routine. Intuitive Surgical reported that surgeons performed approximately 3.15 million da Vinci procedures in 2025, an 18% increase over 2024. The company ended the year with about 11,100 da Vinci systems installed worldwide. Its Ion lung biopsy platform added another 144,000 procedures, up 51%.
Those figures show how fast medical robotics companies are scaling, but they do not show that every robotic procedure improves outcomes. The field includes surgeon-controlled consoles, orthopedic systems that guide bone cuts, endovascular robots, rehabilitation exoskeletons and hospital logistics machines. Each category solves a different problem.
Clear terms help. Robotic assistance means a surgeon controls every movement through a robotic interface. Teleoperation means the surgeon operates from a console, sometimes at a distance. Autonomy means the system performs a task without moment-to-moment human control. Nearly all authorized surgical robots today are surgeon-controlled, with narrow automated functions such as boundary enforcement. The 20 companies below are technology developers, and they do not offer comparable clinical benefits.
What Are Medical Robots and How Do They Work?
Medical robots are machines that assist clinicians in diagnosis, surgery, rehabilitation or hospital operations. A typical surgical system includes robotic arms, instruments with wristed joints, a camera, a surgeon console or planning workstation, and software. Sensors track position and force. Imaging integration lets some systems map anatomy before or during a procedure.
Control architecture varies. In a master-slave design, the surgeon moves handles and the arms replicate the motion, often with tremor filtering and motion scaling. In a semi-autonomous orthopedic system, the surgeon guides a tool within a virtual boundary built from a CT scan or intraoperative mapping. Fully autonomous soft tissue surgery remains experimental.
Main Categories of Medical Robotics
| Robot category | Clinical task | Human oversight | Healthcare setting | Key limitations |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Soft tissue surgical | Laparoscopic general, urologic, gynecologic surgery | Surgeon controls all motion | Operating room | Cost, training |
| Orthopedic | Knee, hip, shoulder, spine | Surgeon guides within boundaries | Operating room | Planning time, unclear long-term benefit |
| Endoscopic and bronchoscopic | Lung biopsy, endoluminal navigation | Physician controlled | Procedure suite | Specific indications |
| Endovascular | Catheter and guidewire manipulation | Physician controlled | Cath lab | Early adoption |
| Rehabilitation and exoskeleton | Gait and movement therapy | Therapist supervised | Clinic, home | Cost, limited evidence in some conditions |
| Pharmacy automation | Compounding, dispensing | Pharmacist verifies | Pharmacy | Capital cost |
| Logistics | Deliveries and supply runs | Staff supervision | Hospital | Navigation, staffing integration |
| Diagnostic | Ultrasound, imaging assistance | Clinician supervised | Clinic | Early stage |
Robotic Assistance Versus Autonomous Surgery
Today’s authorized systems keep the surgeon in command. Automation appears as subtasks, such as holding a camera steady, keeping instruments inside a safe zone or repeating a cutting path. Researchers have demonstrated autonomous suturing in animal tissue and limited autonomous tasks, but those remain research prototypes.
Safety depends on layered controls: human oversight, fail-safe design, cybersecurity and clinical validation. Regulators evaluate intended use, and a device cleared for one procedure cannot be marketed for others without new evidence.
20 Medical Robotics Companies Advancing Healthcare
The companies below were selected for active products or documented development programs. Several candidates changed status. Mako is a Stryker product line and is covered under Stryker, and Titan Medical now operates as Conavi Medical. Regulatory clearance is not the same as proof of better outcomes.
Soft Tissue Surgical Robotics
1. Intuitive Surgical (Sunnyvale, California).
Intuitive pioneered the market with the da Vinci system. The latest da Vinci 5 platform added force feedback, and 870 da Vinci 5 systems were placed in 2025. Intuitive reports more than 11,100 da Vinci systems installed, utilization of about 300 procedures per system per year and revenue of roughly $10.1 billion for 2025. The company dominates soft tissue robotics, and it has the most published clinical evidence of any vendor.
2. Medtronic (Dublin, Ireland).
Medtronic’s Hugo robotic-assisted surgery system is authorized in Europe and other markets. The company reported US clearance for urologic procedures after a clinical study. Medtronic’s scale in hospital supply could help adoption, but it enters a market where Intuitive has a long head start.
3. Johnson and Johnson MedTech (New Brunswick, New Jersey).
J&J MedTech operates the Monarch platform for bronchoscopy and urology, the Velys system for knee surgery and is developing the Ottava soft tissue system, which entered clinical study in 2024. Ottava should not be described as commercially available until it receives authorization.
4. CMR Surgical (Cambridge, United Kingdom).
CMR’s Versius is a modular, portable system. The FDA granted De Novo authorization in 2024 for cholecystectomy, and the company reports use in more than 30,000 procedures worldwide. CMR is privately held and was reported to be exploring a sale in 2025, so ownership may change.
5. Asensus Surgical (Durham, North Carolina; now part of Karl Storz).
Asensus developed the Senhance system with haptic feedback and eye-tracking camera control. Karl Storz acquired the company in 2024. Senhance continues under the Karl Storz umbrella.
6. Moon Surgical (Paris, France, and San Francisco).
Moon’s Maestro system acts as a robotic assistant that holds the laparoscope and retractors, working alongside the surgeon’s existing instruments. The design aims to lower capital requirements. It has FDA clearance for specified indications.
7. Distalmotion (Lausanne, Switzerland).
Distalmotion’s Dexter is a robotic system with a bedside surgeon design, allowing switching between laparoscopic and robotic work. It has FDA clearance for specified gynecologic, urologic and general procedures and targets ambulatory surgery centers.
8. Vicarious Surgical (Waltham, Massachusetts).
Vicarious is developing a single-port system with virtual reality visualization. It is a development-stage company that has faced financing pressure, and it should not be described as an established product vendor.
Orthopedic and Neuro Navigation Robotics
9. Stryker (Kalamazoo, Michigan).
Stryker’s Mako system supports knee, hip, shoulder and spine procedures through CT-based planning and haptic boundaries. Stryker reports large Mako installed bases in the United States. Studies show improved implant positioning accuracy. Long-term survivorship benefit is less clear.
10. Zimmer Biomet (Warsaw, Indiana).
Zimmer’s ROSA platform supports knee, hip, shoulder and brain procedures. The company agreed to acquire Monogram Technologies in 2025 to add an autonomous knee robot candidate.
11. Smith and Nephew (Watford, United Kingdom).
The CORI handheld robotic system uses a robotic burr that retracts outside the planned boundary. Its smaller footprint targets ambulatory surgery centers.
12. Monogram Technologies (Austin, Texas; acquired by Zimmer Biomet).
Monogram developed the mBôs system, designed for semi-autonomous knee procedures. Its integration into Zimmer means availability depends on the parent company’s roadmap.
13. Globus Medical (Audubon, Pennsylvania).
Globus makes ExcelsiusGPS and ExcelsiusFlex for spine and joint procedures. Globus replaces the duplicated Mako entry in the candidate list.
14. Brainlab (Munich, Germany).
Brainlab provides surgical navigation and robotic arm systems for cranial and spine surgery, along with planning software. It is a navigation specialist, and its systems are used in neurosurgery centers.
Specialty Procedures and Endovascular Robotics
15. PROCEPT BioRobotics (Redwood City, California).
PROCEPT’s Aquablation system performs robotic waterjet resection of prostate tissue for benign prostatic hyperplasia under ultrasound guidance. Randomized trial data support its use for symptom relief. It is a narrow indication but a strong evidence profile.
16. Microbot Medical (Hingham, Massachusetts).
Microbot develops the Liberty remote robotic system for peripheral endovascular procedures. The company announced FDA clearance for Liberty in 2025. Real-world adoption is still being demonstrated.
17. Robocath (Rouen, France).
Robocath’s R-One robot assists in coronary angioplasty by moving guidewires and stents. It is CE marked. US authorization status should be confirmed, because the company has focused on Europe and Asia.
18. Conavi Medical (Toronto, Canada; formerly Titan Medical).
Titan Medical combined with Conavi in 2025 and now operates as Conavi Medical, focusing on intravascular imaging rather than the earlier Enos surgical robot. Titan’s robotic system should not be described as a current product.
Rehabilitation and Hospital Robotics
19. Ekso Bionics (Richmond, California).
Ekso makes wearable exoskeletons for rehabilitation after stroke and spinal cord injury. Therapists use them to support walking practice. Evidence shows safety and feasibility. Outcome benefits over conventional therapy remain mixed.
20. Diligent Robotics (Austin, Texas).
Diligent’s Moxi robot performs non-patient tasks in hospitals such as delivering supplies and lab specimens. It is a logistics aid, designed to free nurses from fetch tasks. Deployment results come mainly from the company and participating health systems.
| Company | Headquarters | Robotic system | Clinical specialty | Deployment status |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Intuitive Surgical | California | da Vinci, Ion | General, urology, gynecology, lung | Widely deployed |
| Medtronic | Ireland | Hugo | Urology, gynecology, general | Authorized in multiple markets |
| J&J MedTech | New Jersey | Monarch, Velys, Ottava | Lung, urology, orthopedics | Mixed; Ottava in study |
| CMR Surgical | UK | Versius | General, colorectal, gynecology | FDA authorized 2024 |
| Asensus (Karl Storz) | North Carolina | Senhance | General, gynecology | Commercial |
| Moon Surgical | France, US | Maestro | Laparoscopic assistance | Commercial |
| Distalmotion | Switzerland | Dexter | Gynecology, urology, general | Commercial |
| Vicarious Surgical | Massachusetts | Single-port system | General | Development |
| Stryker | Michigan | Mako | Orthopedics, spine | Widely deployed |
| Zimmer Biomet | Indiana | ROSA | Orthopedics, brain | Commercial |
| Smith and Nephew | UK | CORI | Orthopedics | Commercial |
| Monogram (Zimmer) | Texas | mBôs | Knee | Acquired; development |
| Globus Medical | Pennsylvania | ExcelsiusGPS | Spine | Commercial |
| Brainlab | Germany | Navigation, robotic arm | Cranial, spine | Commercial |
| PROCEPT | California | Aquablation | Prostate | Commercial |
| Microbot | Massachusetts | Liberty | Endovascular | Early commercial |
| Robocath | France | R-One | Coronary | CE marked |
| Conavi Medical | Canada | Imaging focus | Intravascular | Pivoted |
| Ekso Bionics | California | Ekso exoskeletons | Rehabilitation | Commercial |
| Diligent Robotics | Texas | Moxi | Hospital logistics | Deployed in hospitals |
How Surgical Robotics Is Changing Operating Rooms
Robotic systems improve visualization with magnified 3D views, allow wristed instruments to turn in tight spaces and reduce surgeon strain. These advantages help in pelvic and deep cavity surgery where straight laparoscopic tools are awkward.
The clinical evidence is more nuanced. In prostate cancer surgery, randomized trials such as the one led by Yaxley and published in The Lancet in 2016 found similar early functional outcomes between robotic and open surgery, with less blood loss and shorter hospital stay for robotic surgery. In rectal cancer, the ROLARR randomized trial in JAMA found no significant difference in conversion to open surgery between robotic and conventional laparoscopy.
Outcomes vary by procedure, surgeon experience, patient selection and institution. A high-volume surgeon may achieve good results with any approach, so comparing methods requires careful study design.
| Outcome | Robotic assisted approach | Conventional approach | Evidence type | Qualification |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Blood loss | Often lower than open | Higher in open surgery | Randomized trials, registries | Not always lower than laparoscopy |
| Hospital stay | Often shorter than open | Longer in open surgery | Trials and registries | Depends on procedure |
| Conversion to open | Similar to laparoscopy in rectal cancer | Similar | ROLARR trial | Surgeon-specific |
| Operating time | Often longer | Shorter in many laparoscopic cases | Systematic reviews | Improves with experience |
| Cost | Higher | Lower | Economic analyses | Varies by volume |
| Long-term cancer outcomes | Generally comparable | Generally comparable | Trials in prostate and others | Limited long-term data in some cancers |
Orthopedic and Joint Replacement Robotics
Orthopedic robots help plan implant size and alignment from CT or mapping. During surgery, they limit bone removal to the plan. Multiple studies show more accurate implant positioning with robotics. The harder question is whether that accuracy lowers revision rates and improves pain and function over years. Registry data are mixed, and long-term trials are limited. Technical precision does not automatically produce better patient outcomes.
Urology, Gynecology and General Surgery
Urology and gynecology were the first specialties to adopt robotics at scale. Hysterectomy, prostatectomy and kidney procedures are common examples. General surgery, including hernia repair and cholecystectomy, is now the largest growth area at Intuitive, where US general surgery procedures grew 18% in 2025. For common, simple operations, studies often show similar clinical outcomes with higher cost, so evidence of added value is still needed.
Robotics Beyond Surgery
Rehabilitation exoskeletons let therapists increase repetitions of walking practice for stroke and spinal cord injury patients. Evidence suggests safety and functional gains in specific groups, though high cost and limited access remain barriers.
Pharmacy automation reduces errors in compounding and dispensing, and pharmacists still verify. Hospital logistics robots carry supplies, specimens and linens. They address staffing pressure by freeing nurses from fetch tasks. Real deployments exist in US health systems, but independent evaluations of staffing and safety effects remain limited. Patient safety, infection control and staff acceptance determine success.
AI, Computer Vision and the Next Generation of Medical Robots
AI supports surgical planning by segmenting anatomy in CT and MRI. Computer vision can identify instruments and structures in endoscopic video, and navigation systems use real-time tracking to register patient anatomy. Haptic feedback, which gives surgeons a sense of touch, is emerging in newer platforms.
Robotic learning from surgical video is an active research area. Autonomous suturing and tissue tracking have been shown in laboratory settings. The difference between a research prototype and a regulated, commercially available system is large, and a published demonstration is not a clinical product.
Costs, Training, Safety and Adoption Challenges
Costs add up. A surgical robot commonly costs roughly $1 million to $2.5 million to buy, according to hospital finance reports and industry sources, with annual service contracts in the low six figures and per-procedure instruments costing thousands of dollars. Operating room space, sterilization and staff time add more. Orthopedic robots usually cost less.
| Cost category | Training requirement | Infrastructure | Maintenance | Safety requirement |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Capital purchase or lease | Surgeon and team training | OR space, power, networking | Annual service contracts | Device validation |
| Instruments and consumables | Credentialing | Sterile processing | Replacement per use limits | Reprocessing standards |
| Software and imaging | Planning workflow training | IT integration | Updates | Cybersecurity |
| Staff time | Simulation, proctoring | Scheduling | Downtime management | Emergency conversion plans |
Training involves simulation, proctored cases and credentialing. Learning curves vary, from tens of cases for simpler procedures to well over a hundred for complex ones. Early cases may take longer.
Safety issues include system failures, software faults and cybersecurity risk. Liability questions arise when device malfunction and surgeon error overlap. Patient consent should explain the robotic approach and the surgeon’s experience. Access is uneven, with systems concentrated in large urban hospitals.
Economic evidence differs across procedures. High volume and efficient room turnover improve the cost case. Low volume sites may struggle to justify the capital.
The Future of Medical Robotics
Remote surgery over long distances has been demonstrated in trials, but latency, regulation and liability limit routine use. Autonomous subtasks, such as suturing and camera control, may arrive gradually under human supervision. Miniature and magnetic robots for endovascular and endoscopic work are in development. Image-guided interventions may merge imaging and robotics.
Regulation must adapt to software that learns. Clinical validation should show patient benefit, not just technical performance. Lower-resource settings need affordable, rugged systems.
Research priorities include long-term safety, comparative effectiveness against laparoscopy and open surgery, and cost-effectiveness. Adoption will depend on demonstrated patient benefit, affordability, clinician training and integration into hospital workflows.
Frequently Asked Questions
Q: What are medical robotics companies?
A: Medical robotics companies develop robotic systems for surgery, rehabilitation, diagnostics and hospital operations. They range from large device makers to small startups. Products differ widely in purpose and evidence.
Q: What are medical robots used for?
A: Medical robots assist in minimally invasive surgery, joint replacement, lung biopsy, rehabilitation and hospital logistics. Most are controlled by clinicians. Some automate narrow tasks.
Q: Which companies manufacture surgical robots?
A: Major makers include Intuitive Surgical, Medtronic, Stryker, Johnson and Johnson MedTech, Zimmer Biomet, Smith and Nephew, CMR Surgical and Globus Medical. Many startups also compete.
Q: How does robotic assisted surgery work?
A: A surgeon sits at a console and moves controls that guide robotic arms holding instruments and a camera. The system filters tremor and scales movement. The surgeon stays in control.
Q: Are robotic surgeries safer than traditional surgeries?
A: Evidence varies by procedure. Robotic surgery often reduces blood loss and hospital stay compared with open surgery. Compared with laparoscopy, results are often similar.
Q: How much does a medical surgical robot cost?
A: Purchase prices are commonly estimated between roughly $1 million and $2.5 million. Service contracts and instruments add recurring costs. Actual prices depend on contracts.
Q: Can medical robots perform surgery autonomously?
A: Not in routine practice. Authorized soft tissue robots are surgeon-controlled. Autonomous suturing has been shown in research settings only.
Q: How are AI and robotics being combined in healthcare?
A: AI supports planning, image segmentation, navigation and workflow analytics. Future systems may automate small tasks. Each use needs validation and regulatory review.