Unlock Editor’s Digest Lock for Free
There is a spectacular view of Ely Cathedral, crossing the fields from the outside of the Cambridgeshire factory of a major British surgical robotics company. Inside the clean building, 13,000 parts are assembled into each Velvelus system, which the surgeon uses with four robotic arms and a 3D vision console for keyhole surgery.
This is an exciting time in surgical robotics. The technology is widely used in the United States and spreads around the world as surgeons and hospitals see medical and economic benefits. Last week, National Health Service announced that it would accelerate its use of robotic systems. It announced that there will be 10 technology-supported keyhole procedures within 10 years.
It also has promising promise for CMR Surgical, a startup that emerged from life sciences around Cambridge in 2014, attracting nearly $1 billion in investments from private equitybackers, including SoftBank at a $3 billion valuation. CMR intuitively acquires the Dominant Da Vinci robotic system produced by a US company with Versius.
According to consultant Oliver Wyman, it was disappointing to learn that CMR could hire advisors and pursue independently and intuitively, rather than independently and intuitively, strategic acquirers. This will be another sale of the promising UK technology company that follows Oxford Ionics and Spectris.
I went to Ely to investigate and found that there was still hope that CMRs would remain independent, but there are broader lessons in the competition for surgical robotics. This shows that UK companies are trying to beat current companies in the world’s largest technologically sophisticated healthcare market.
Surgeons use systems such as Da Vinci, Versius, and other companies to facilitate accurate surgery for patients. The robot is used in keyhole operations where a rod with a surgical instrument is inserted through a small incision. The surgeon operates these robotic arms remotely while sitting in a nearby electronic console.
The idea came from the US Department of Defense project to investigate whether surgeons could operate far from the battlefield, but was established 30 years ago in Silicon Valley, intuitively adapted to intuition. Around 10,000 Da Vinci systems are installed globally as hospitals invest in robots to reduce surgeries and discharge patients faster.
This is an intimidating number, as there were under 200 Velvelius systems installed by the end of last year. Intuitive people have gained greater leads than other companies, giving many surgeons the advantage of training Da Vinci robots in areas such as prostate cancer. The system is expensive and sold for an average of $1.6 million last year, but it’s familiar.
However, the five founders of CMR saw a clever way to bulk up Da Vinci’s weakness. The Velves robotic arm is modular rather than a Da Vinci integrated unit and can be operated separately in driving theatres and hospitals. The system is no better than the latest Da Vinci 5 models, but offers a versatile alternative.
The UK company is currently in a tough stage of expanding from a promising start-up to a global company. There was a bump. The revenue fell last year as senior managers shaking. New CEO Massimiliano Cholera said that he lost £130 million in 2024, but “a clear path to profitability, not far.”
His investors then have “all options.” It’s either to keep the company, float publicly, or sell it. Meanwhile, it faces another question: how much will Versius commit to invading the US market with approval for gallbladder surgery? It’s a great opportunity, but deploying Versius to thousands of US hospitals requires a significant investment.
My fear is that, given the choice to accept immediate rewards or take risks to transformative success, they settle for the former. This is reasonable. It was CMR to achieve a whispered selling price of $4 billion, or it would be a very good result for Cambridge startups. It’s also a wise choice: take victory and don’t flirt with hubrism.
But that would be another case in which the UK’s technical imagination cannot rival business ambitions. It is easier to start a company in the United States and conquer other parts of the world later than the other way around. But if UK companies don’t believe in themselves, who else would do so?
john.gapper@ft.com
