Chichi Menakaya: How Nigeria Can Achieve Excellence in Robotic Surgery

Miss Chichi Menakaya is a UK-based Consultant Trauma and Orthopaedic Surgeon specialising in robotic-assisted hip and knee surgery, with independent operative expertise across five robotic surgical platforms. She holds a Master’s degree in Surgical Technology and is the Founder of Annomo Health. Her expertise extends beyond clinical practice to healthcare management, surgical innovation, specialist education and strategic healthcare development. She has however, developed a particular interest in advancing surgical excellence through clinical readiness, institutional partnerships, workforce development and the establishment of sustainable, high-quality healthcare systems, particularly across Africa. She speaks with Bennett Oghifo on how best Nigeria can achieve excellence in robotic surgery, the pitfalls and her experience in clinical practice, amongst other issues. Excepts:

Nigeria is entering a defining moment in surgical innovation. In a landmark demonstration of remote robotic surgery, a surgeon operating from Ogun State performed a procedure on a patient in Abuja. In Imo State, robotic-assisted urological surgery is becoming a reality. How significant are they?

They deserve recognition. These achievements demonstrate surgical ambition, institutional commitment and the ability to deliver sophisticated procedures in Nigeria. I am equally encouraged by the investment in local robotic surgery training. The breakthrough is not just performing the first operation; it is building a service capable of delivering safe, consistent care long after the first. The real measures are patient outcomes, trained teams and continuity.

Do you think Africa is ready for robotic surgery?

Parts of Africa are ready. Readiness is determined by the institution, not the continent. We have highly capable surgeons and emerging centres with advanced capabilities, but a robotic programme also needs theatre teams, anaesthesia, maintenance, reliable infrastructure and clinical governance. The question is no longer whether we can adopt robotic surgery. It is where we can deliver it safely, for whom, and with what measurable benefit.

What does a surgical robot actually do?

It assists the surgeon; it does not replace the surgeon’s judgement. Depending on the platform, robotics can support enhanced visualisation, instrument control, anatomical planning or precision-guided preparation. In hip and knee replacement, these tools may help execute a patient-specific plan more accurately. Having operated independently across five robotic platforms, I know that their capabilities and limitations differ substantially. The right technology is the one that serves the patient and the procedure, not the other way around.

Does robotic surgery produce better outcomes?

Not automatically. Benefits depend on the specialty, procedure, platform and outcome measured. In the 2026 RACER-Knee randomised trial, the Mako-assisted knee replacement approach was more precise but offered no clinically meaningful patient-reported benefit at one year and cost more than conventional surgery. That finding does not apply to every robotic system or specialty. Precision is a technical achievement; patient benefit is the clinical test.

With pressing basic healthcare needs, should African governments invest in robots?

Essential services and advanced surgery should not be treated as mutually exclusive. A strong health system needs both, but public money must be allocated against clear clinical priorities, realistic demand and opportunity costs. Where robotic technology provides demonstrable value, investment may be justified. Where it does not, resources may achieve more elsewhere. Innovation deserves investment; it does not deserve exemption from scrutiny.

If a governor wanted to establish a robotic surgery centre, where would you begin?

With an independent readiness assessment, not a purchase order. I would examine patient demand, specialty needs, existing expertise, infrastructure, equipment options, full lifecycle costs and safety arrangements. Only then should a phased clinical programme, workforce plan and outcome framework be agreed. A credible strategy determines whether a robot is needed and which platform fits the service. It should not be written after the equipment has been bought.

What contribution can the African medical diaspora make?

The diaspora can accelerate locally led development through supervised training, faculty partnerships, research, proctoring and mentorship. Nigeria’s emerging academies are important foundations on which to build. Visiting expertise is valuable, but lasting impact requires competent local trainers and multidisciplinary teams. The success of knowledge transfer is measured by the capability that remains, not the profile of the visiting expert.

Can robotics reduce medical tourism?

It can help in selected specialties, but patients do not travel solely for a machine. They travel for expertise, safety, dependable clinical systems and confidence in the full course of treatment. Nigerian centres must be able to offer those standards from diagnosis through surgery, rehabilitation and follow-up. Technology may attract a patient’s attention. Trust is what brings that patient into the operating theatre.

What national approach would you recommend?

I would propose a National Robotic Surgery Readiness and Training Framework built on four tests: institutional readiness, independently assessed workforce competence, transparent patient outcomes and long-term financial and technical sustainability. It should support specialty-specific standards and identify suitable regional centres, rather than assume that every hospital needs a robot. Nigeria has already begun developing surgical and training capability; the opportunity is to align expansion with consistent standards and credible evidence.

Where could you contribute personally?

My perspective combines independent operative experience across five robotic platforms with a commitment to surgical education and health-system development. I can contribute to technology-neutral clinical assessments, programme design, training partnerships and evaluation of surgical outcomes. These decisions should always be multidisciplinary and evidence-led. I am interested in helping institutions and governments build lasting capability, not simply acquire equipment.

What would success look like in ten years?

I would look for African-led training programmes, robust clinical registries, credible research, established biomedical engineering expertise and surgical centres reporting outcomes that withstand international scrutiny. I would also want African institutions contributing to the design and evaluation of new technology. Success is when Africa is not only using surgical innovation, but helping to define its standards.

What is your message to governments and healthcare leaders?

Be ambitious and insist on discipline. Invest in people alongside platforms, build safe services around the equipment and measure results rather than announcements. The future of robotic surgery in Africa should be judged by patients treated well, teams trained competently and institutions made stronger. A robot can be purchased. Surgical excellence must be built.