Robotics Business Review | Dr. Paul MacKoul Says Robots Are Not Always The Answer


“The OBGYN still has a great influence on what patients do and where they go. If the OB is going to use a robot for a hysterectomy and the patient has been in their practice for many years, that patient is going to get a robotic surgery. That isn’t fair to the patients, as they are not getting the best option available.” – Paul MacKoul MD.

Robotics Business Review has featured Dr. Paul MacKoul in a Whitepaper on the surgical robotics market. In this Q&A, Dr. MacKoul discusses how the robot is being marketed to physicians, and the unnecessary use in gynecologic surgery, despite higher cost and associated risks.  Minimally invasive surgery without the use of a robot provides superior patient outcomes at a lower cost, as research supports. The surgical techniques developed by CIGC specialists allow women to get back to work and their regular activities in a matter of days after surgery for complex GYN conditions.


As more surgical robotics systems get developed to treat different procedures around the human body, at least one doctor is suggesting that robotics is not a cure-all approach when it comes to some of those procedures. Dr. MacKoul and Dr. Natalya Danilyants, another co-founder of CIGC, recently presented an analysis that showed laparascopic-assisted myomectomy (LAM) was just as effective as open surgery or robotic procedures.

“It is CIGC’s mission as an innovative gynecological surgical practice to provide access to these types of treatments for as many women in need as possible and equip patients with the knowledge to help them make the best gynecological decisions for themselves,” said Dr. Louise van der DOES, director of research and public policy at CIGC. “Many women continue to undergo open surgery or costly robotic procedures despite clear evidence showing that minimally invasive procedures provide better outcomes and quality of life after surgery.”