Your article gives the impression that the robots are doing the surgery, what I have read indicates that the "robots are simply movement de-enhancers and eye enhancers. In other words they allow the surgeon to make finer movements by reducing the amount of each movement from the controls, ultimately allowing for finer/ more precise cutting. This is combined with magnifying cameras which allow the surgeon to see in finer detail. These are less robot surgeons than computerized remote control scalpels. Yes?

So really contrary to your statement the surgeon does see the surgical site although there is less looking on the way in, as the path is smaller.

As to the study you mentioned; you yourself pointed out one problem with the data, there was no differentiation between standard laparoscopic and robo-assisted laparoscopic procedures. In addition, although you didn’t mention it, I’d be willing to bet that there was no tracking of any difference in the severity of the condition across the surgical choices. It would IMO make sense that the more difficult/higher risk the patient are the more likely to 'go robotic'. This could certainly bias the report.

Now my assumption about the report is no more or less valid than anybody else’s but it is a good reason to take said report with a huge grain of salt. Hopefully the next study will capture these variables and actually be of use in discussing the benefits of 'robotic surgical enhancement'.