High strength medical and surgical glues, growth to 2022

High strength medical and surgical glues currently command a $1.2 billion market that will grow to $1.7 billion by 2022, representing a 6.4% compound annual growth rate. More importantly, however, is that during this time frame the market will undergo steady shifts, including the regional representation, with growth slowing in western markets relative to Asia-Pacific and the rest of the world.

Below is illustrated the size versus growth of high strength glues in the U.S., Western Europe, Asia-Pacific and Rest of World.

Source: MedMarket Diligence, LLC; Report #S290. Order online.

The resulting differential growth over this period will result in a shift in the regional market balance, as shown below.

Source: MedMarket Diligence, LLC; Report #S290. Order online.

Source: MedMarket Diligence, LLC; Report #S290. Order online.

Market fragmentation and growth, decline in wound management

The market for wound management products — as varied as negative pressure wound therapy, skin grafts, hydrogel dressings, and growth factors — is a sort of free-for-all of offerings designed to accelerate healing, reduce treatment costs, yield better outcomes, or all of these and more. With so many sectors, and with well-established ones tending toward commodity, there can be many competitors, with few having significant market shares. Yet in several areas, quite remarkable growth is still available.  Excluding traditional bandage and dressings, three companies — S&N, Acelity and Mölnlycke — control over half the worldwide market.

Global Advanced Wound Market Market Shares

Source: MedMarket Diligence, LLC; Report #S251. Order online.

Growth is coming in the advanced areas of bioengineered skin, the ever-needed antimicrobials, and the great demand for foam dressings.


Source: MedMarket Diligence, LLC; Report #S251. Order online.

 

Viewed another way, with size and growth mapped relative to each other…

 

Source: MedMarket Diligence, LLC; Report #S251. Order online.

The U.S. remains the biggest consumer of wound management products, and this is not expected to materially change. Europe is seeing relative decline, however, as Asia Pacific demand ramps up:

Source: MedMarket Diligence, LLC; Report #S251. Order online.


The MedMarket Diligence report #S251, “Worldwide Wound Management, Forecast to 2024: Established and Emerging Products, Technologies and Markets in the Americas, Europe, Asia/Pacific and Rest of World,” is detailed at link and is available for purchase and download online

Wound Hemostasis, Closure, and Sealing in the U.S. versus Asia/Pacific, 2015-2022

Sales of sealants, glues, and hemostats projected to 2022 for the U.S. and Asia/Pacific. While these products have had tremendous success in Japan, their sales in the rest of Asia/Pacific have not yet caught up to Japan, let alone to the U.S.

But that is expected to change as the most significant growth in these markets will indeed be coming from China, Korea, Australia, India, and elsewhere in these emerging markets.

Sales of Sealants, Glues, and Hemostats in the
U.S. and Asia/Pacific Markets, 2015-2022

Note: For direct comparative purposes, sales in these markets are shown on the same vertical scale.

Source: MedMarket Diligence, LLC; Report #S290. Available for purchase/download online.

Peripheral Stenting Worldwide: Arterial, Venous, BMS, DES, AAA, TAA

First introduced about two decades ago as a bailout technique for suboptimal or failed iliac angioplasty, peripheral vascular stenting gradually emerged as a valuable and versatile tool for a variety of primary and adjuvant applications outside the domain of coronary and cerebral vasculature.  Today, peripheral vascular stenting techniques are commonly employed in the management of the most prevalent occlusive circulatory disorders and other pathologies affecting the abdominal and thoracic aortic tree and lower extremity arterial bed. Stents are also increasingly used in the management of the debilitating conditions like venous outflow obstruction associated with deep venous thrombosis and chronic venous insufficiency.

Notwithstanding a relative maturity of the core technology platforms and somewhat problematic opportunities for conversion to value-adding peripheral drug-eluting systems, peripheral vascular stenting appears to have a significant room for qualitative and quantitative growth both in established and emerging peripheral indications.

A panoply of stenting systems are available for the management of occlusive disorders and other pathologies affecting peripheral arterial and venous vasculature. Systems include lower extremity bare metal and drug-eluting stents for treatment of symptomatic PAD and critical limb ischemia resulting from iliac, femoropopliteal and infrapopliteal occlusive disease; stent-grafting devices used in endovascular repair of abdominal and thoracic aortic aneurysms; as well as a subset of indication-specific and multipurpose peripheral stents used in recanalization of iliofemoral and iliocaval occlusions resulting in CVI.

In 2015, these peripheral stenting systems were employed in approximately 1.565 million revascularization procedures worldwide, of which the lower extremity arterial stenting accounted for almost 1.252 million interventions (or 80.9%), followed by AAA and TAA endovascular repairs with 162.4 thousand interventions (or 10.5%) and peripheral venous stenting used in an estimated 132.6 thousand patients (or 8.6% of the total).

The U.S. clinical practices performed almost 528 thousand covered peripheral arterial and venous procedures (or 34.1% of the worldwide total), followed by the largest Western European states with over 511 thousand interventions (or 33.1%), major Asian-Pacific states with close to 377 thousand interventions (or 24.4%), and the rest-of-the-world with about 131 thousand peripheral stent-based interventions (or 8.4%).

Below is illustrated the global market for peripheral stenting by region in 2016 and by segment from 2014 to 2020.

Source: MedMarket Diligence, LLC; Report #V201. Available online.

 

Source: MedMarket Diligence, LLC; Report #V201. Available online.

Medical and Surgical Sealants, Glues, and Hemostats, to 2022

There are several different classes of surgical sealants, glues and hemostatic products used to prevent or stop bleeding, or to close a wound or reinforce a suture line. These include fibrin sealants, surgical sealants, mechanical hemostats, active hemostats, flowable hemostats, and glues. Both sealants and medical glues are increasingly used either as an adjunct to sutures or to replace sutures.

Medical Sealants

Fibrin sealants are made of a combination of thrombin and fibrinogen. These sealants may be sprayed on the bleeding surface, or applied using a patch. Surgical sealants might be made of glutaraldehyde and bovine serum albumin, polyethylene glycol polymers, and cyanoacrylates.

Sealants are most often used to stop bleeding over a large area. If the surgeon wishes to fasten down a flap without using sutures, or in addition to using sutures, then the product used is usually a medical glue.

Source: MedMarket Diligence, LLC; Report #S290.

Hemostatic Products

The surgeon and the perioperative nurse have a variety of hemostats from which to choose, as they are not all alike in their applications and efficacy. Selection of the most appropriate hemostat requires training and experience, and can affect the clinical outcome, as well as decrease treatment costs. Some of the factors that enter into the decision-making process include the size of the wound, the amount of hemorrhaging, potential adverse effects, whether the procedure is MIS or open surgery, and others.

Active hemostats contain thrombin products which may be derived from several sources, such as bovine pooled plasma purification, human pooled plasma purification, or through human recombinant manufacturing processes. Flowable-type hemostats are made of a granular bovine or porcine gelatin that is combined with saline or reconstituted thrombin, forming a flowable putty that may be applied to the bleeding area.
Mechanical hemostats, such as absorbable gelatin sponge, collagen, cellulose, or polysaccharide-based hemostats applied as sponges, fleeces, bandages, or microspheres, are not included in this analysis.

Source: MedMarket Diligence, LLC; Report #S290.

Medical Glues

Sealants and glues are terms which are often used interchangeably, which can be confusing. In this report, a medical glue is defined as a product used to bond two surfaces together securely. Surgeons are increasingly reaching for medical glues to either help secure a suture line, or to replace sutures entirely in the repair of soft tissues. Medical glues are also utilized in repairing bone fractures, especially for highly comminuted fractures that often involve many small fragments. This helps to spread out the force-bearing surface, rather than focusing weight-bearing on spots where a pin has been inserted.

Thus, the surgeon has a fairly wide array of products from which to choose. The choice of which surgical hemostat or sealant to use depends on several factors, including the procedure being conducted, the type of bleeding, severity of the hemorrhage, the surgeon’s experience with the products, the surgeon’s preference, the price of the product and availability at the time of surgery. For example, a product which has a long shelf life and does not require refrigeration or other special storage, and which requires no special preparation, usually holds advantages over a product which must be mixed before use, or held in a refrigerator during storage, then allowed to warm up to room temperature before use.

Source: MedMarket Diligence, LLC; Report #S290.


From “Worldwide Market for Medical and Surgical Sealants, Glues, and Hemostats, 2015-2022.” See details at link. Order online.

Hemostat Sales to 2022

Owing to their ease of use, ease of handling, and general clinical utility, hemostat sales will almost double worldwide between 2016 and 2022:

Source: MedMarket Diligence, LLC; Report #S290. Order online.

Hemostat sales are exceptionally strong in the well developed economies (Japan, Australia, Korea) of Asia, and will continue to expand there with the rapidly growing contribution of China’s hemostat sales.

Source: MedMarket Diligence, LLC; Report #S290. Order online.

[icegram campaigns=”9993″]

 

Cardiovascular Surgical and Interventional Procedures Worldwide, 2015-2022

In 2016, the cumulative worldwide volume of the the following CVD procedures is projected to approach 15.05 million surgical and transcatheter interventions:

  • roughly 4.73 million coronary revascularization procedures via CABG and PCI (or about 31.4% of the total),
  • close to 4 million percutaneous and surgical peripheral artery revascularization procedures (or 26.5% of the total);
  • about 2.12 million cardiac rhythm management procedures via implantable pulse generator placement and arrhythmia ablation (or 14.1% of the total);
  • over 1.65 million CVI, DVT, and PE targeting venous interventions (representing 11.0% of the total);
  • more than 992 thousand surgical and transcatheter heart defect repairs and valvular interventions (or 6.6% of the total);
  • close to 931 thousand acute stroke prophylaxis and treatment procedures (contributing 6.2% of the total);
  • over 374 thousand abdominal and thoracic aortic aneurysm endovascular and surgical repairs (or 2.5% of the total); and
  • almost 254 thousand placements of temporary and permanent mechanical cardiac support devices in bridge to recovery, bridge to transplant, and destination therapy indications (accounting for about 1.7% of total procedure volume).

screen-shot-2016-11-07-at-7-26-38-am

CABG: Coronary artery bypass graft; PCI: Percutaneous coronary intervention; AAA: Abdominal aortic aneurysm; TAA: Thoracic abdominal aneurysm; CVI: Chronic venous insufficiency; DVT: Deep vein thrombosis; PE: Pulmonary embolectomy.

Source: MedMarket Diligence, LLC; Report #C500, “Global Dynamics of Surgical and Interventional Cardiovascular Procedures, 2015-2022.” (To request report excerpts, click here.)

The Evolution of Coronary Revascularization Markets

Coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) is the most common type of cardiovascular surgical intervention, which “bypasses” acute or chronic coronary artery obstructions via a newly created vascular conduit and thus reinstate normal or sufficient blood flow to the ischemic but still viable areas of the myocardium.

The majority of CABG surgeries (up to 75%) are still performed on the fully arrested heart which is accessed via a foot-long incision over the sternum and completely separated patient’s rib cage. Following a full sternotomy, the CABG patient is typically placed on extracorporeal cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) with a heart-lung machine, which allows the surgeon to operate on a still and bloodless field. Simultaneously, the patient’s greater saphenous vein or internal mammary artery, or both are harvested (mobilized) for use as a bypass conduit in the ongoing procedure. Depending on the location, character and number of the coronary artery occlusions, the surgery might involve between one and seven coronary bypasses.

Once the bypasses are completed, the heart is restarted and, if it functions normally, the patient is removed from the heart-lung machine and the chest is closed up, the sternum is stabilized with stainless steel wire, and the chest and leg wounds are closed with sutures or clips. Patient’s recovery from a routine uncomplicated CABG usually involves seven to ten days of hospital stay, including two to three days spent in the cardiac intensive care unit.

Less Invasive CABG

Over the past decade, several less-invasive versions of the CABG were developed with the view of reducing morbidity and potentially serious complications associated with extensive surgical trauma and the use of aortic clamping and CPB. The current arsenal of less-invasive coronary artery bypass techniques includes minimally-invasive direct CABG (MIDCAB), full-sternotomy “off-pump” CABG (OPCAB), port-access CABG (P-CAB) with peripheral cannulation and endoclamping of aorta, and endoscopic computer (robotics)-assisted CABG (C-CAB).

Designed to limit surgical trauma of conventional CABG, the MIDCAB procedure is best suited for patients with occluding lesions either in the left anterior descending (LAD) artery, or the right coronary artery (RCA). In contrast to conventional CABG, it is performed on a beating heart without the use of CPB. In MIDCAB surgery, access to targeted arteries is achieved through a limited left anterior thoracotomy in the case of occluded LAD, and right thoracotomy or limited lateral thoracotomy in cases involving diseased proximal RCA or circumflex artery. Because of the smaller surgical trauma and off-pump performance (without aorta clamping), the MIDCAB procedure typically results in fewer complications, lower morbidity and shorter hospital stays compared to conventional CABG. However, its utility is limited to a subset of patients with one or two coronary vascular targets, which constitute a small fraction (<3%) of the total caseloads referred for CABG.

The OPCAB procedure is performed on a beating heart after reduction of cardiac motion with a variety of pharmacological and mechanical devices. These include slowing the heart rate with ß-blockers and calcium channel blockers and the use of special mechanical devices intended to stabilize the myocardium and mobilize target vessels. The use of various retraction techniques allows to gain access to vessels on the lateral and inferior surfaces of the heart. Because the OPCAB technique also involves surgical access via median sternotomy, its primary benefit is the avoidance of complications resulting from the use of cardiopulmonary bypass, not surgical trauma.

Over the past decade, the OPCAB surgery emerged as the most popular form of less-invasive coronary artery bypass procedures in the U.S, and Western Europe. By the beginning of this decade, an estimated 25% of all CABGs performed in these geographies were done without the use of CPB. However, in recent years, the relative usage of OPCAB techniques remained largely unchanged. In the view of many cardiac surgeons, the latter was predicated by the increasing morphological complexity of cases referred for CABG (rather than PCI) and generally superior immediate and longer-term bypass graft patency and patient outcomes obtainable with technically less-demanding on-pump CABG surgery.

In contrast to that, the relative usage of “neurological complications sparing” OPCAB techniques is significantly higher in major Asia-Pacific states reaching over 60% of all CABG procedures in China, India, and Japan.

The rarely used P-CAB procedure involves the use of cardiopulmonary bypass and cardioplegia of a globally arrested heart. Vascular access for CPB is achieved via the femoral artery and vein. Compared to the MIDCAB technique, the use of multiple ports allow access to different areas of the heart, thus facilitating more complete revascularization, and the motionless heart may allow a more accurate and reliable anastomosis. In distinction from conventional CABG, median sternotomy is avoided, which reduces trauma and complications. However, potential morbidity of the port-access operation includes multiple wounds at port sites, the limited thoracotomy, and the groin dissection for femoral-femoral bypass. The procedure is also technically difficult and time consuming and therefore has not achieved widespread popularity.

The Hybrid CABG-PCI procedure combines the use of surgical bypass (typically MIDCAB) and percutaneous coronary interventional techniques (angioplasty and stenting) for optimal management of multi-vessel coronary occlusions in high risk patients. The main rationale behind the utilization of hybrid procedure is to achieve maximally possible myocardial revascularization with minimally possible trauma and reduced probability of post-procedural complications. The most common variation of the hybrid revascularization involves MIDCAB-based radial anastomosis between the left anterior descending artery and left internal thoracic artery accompanied by the PTCA/stenting-based recanalization of less critical coronary artery occlusions.

CABG Utilization Trends and Procedure Volumes

Since the advent of coronary angioplasty in the late 1970s, the relative role and share of CABG procedures in myocardial revascularization have been steadily declining due to a continuing penetration of treated patient caseloads by a less invasive PTCA. This general trend was further expedited by the advent of coronary stents. At the very end of the past decade, the rate of transition towards percutaneous coronary interventions in myocardial revascularization started tapering off, primarily due to growing maturity of PTCA/stenting technology and nearly full coverage of patient caseloads with one- or uncomplicated two-vessel disease amendable through angioplasty and stenting. At the same time, a growing popularity of the less-invasive CABG regimens resulted in some additional influx into CABG caseloads from a no-option patient cohort. A less-invasive surgical coronary bypass also emerged as a preferred treatment option for some gray-area patients that were previously referred for sub-optimal PTCA and stenting to avoid potential complications of conventional CABG.

In 2006 – for the first time in about two decades – the U.S. and European volumes of CABG procedures experienced a visible increase, which was repeated in 2007 and reproduced on a smaller and diminishing scale in the following two years.

The cited unexpected reversal of a long established downward procedural trend reflected an acute (and, probably, somewhat overblown) end-users’ concern about long-term safety (AMI-prone late thrombosis) of drug-eluting stents (DES), which prompted a steep decline in utilization of DES in 2006, 2007, followed by a smaller and tapering decreases in 2008 and 2009 with corresponding migration of advanced CHD patients referred for radical intervention to bare metal stenting and CABG surgery.

In 2010 – 2015 the volume of CABG surgeries remained relatively unchanged, notwithstanding a visible decline in percutaneous coronary interventions and overall myocardial revascularization procedures.

In the forthcoming years, the cumulative global volume of CABG procedures is unlikely to experience any significant changes, while their relative share in coronary revascularization can be expected to decline from about 15.4% in 2015 to roughly 12.3% by the end of the forecast period (2022). The cited assertion is based on the expectation of eventual stabilization and renewal of nominal growth in utilization of PCI in the U.S. and Europe coupled with continuation of robust expansion in the usage of percutaneous revascularization techniques in Asia-Pacific (especially India and China, where PCI volumes were growing by 20% and 10% annually over the past half decade, according to local healthcare authorities).

In 2016, the worldwide volume of CABG surgeries leveled at approximately 702.5 thousand procedures, of which roughly 35.2% involved the use of less-invasive OPCAB techniques. During the forecast period, the global number of CABG procedures is projected to experience a nominal 0.1% average annual increase to about 705.9 corresponding surgical interventions in the year 2022. Within the same time frame, the relative share of less-invasive bypass surgeries is expected to register modest gains expanding to approximately 36.7% of the total in 2022.

Coronary Revascularization Procedures, 2015-2022 
(Figures in thousands)

screen-shot-2016-11-02-at-11-17-58-am
CABG and Primary PCI in Coronary Revascularization to 2022.

In, “Global Dynamics of Surgical and Interventional Cardiovascular Procedures, 2015-2022”, Report #C500, we forecast cardiovascular procedure utilization, caseload, technology trends, and device market impacts, for the U.S., Western Europe, Asia/Pacific, and Rest of World.

Cardiac Rhythm Disorders and Implantable, Device-based Treatments

Cardiac rhythm disorders, also called arrhythmias or dysrhythmias, encompass a variety of relatively common acute and chronic conditions characterized by recurrent distortions in the electrical and contractile activity of the heart, which may cause clinically significant and progressive hemodynamic deficits and cardiopulmonary impairment.

According to the available statistics from the American Heart Association (AHA) and Heart Rhythm Society, symptomatic cardiac arrhythmias effect over 10 million Americans and account for approximately 20% of all chronic conditions treated by cardiologists in the United States.

The rate and rhythm of the heart are determined by the intrinsic rhythmicity of special tissues and structures within the heart wall muscle generated by the heart’s natural electrophysiological mechanism. Normal cardiac rate and rhythm ensure continued uninterrupted blood flow an associated supply of oxygen and nutrients to the brain and other vital organs. Irregularities in the rate, rhythm, or origin of a stimulus leading to myocardial contraction can potentially interrupt normal blood circulation, causing inadequate function of important body systems, stroke or sudden cardiac arrest and death. Heart pacing disorders usually degenerate and worsen over time.

Although cardiac arrhythmias may be triggered by congenital heart defects, in which the electrical system of the heart does not develop properly, non-congenital heart disorders are believed to be the most common causes of chronic arrhythmias. The latter is particularly true for ischemic heart disease, which results in reduced blood flow and oxygen delivery to heart tissue, and heart tissue scarring typically caused by myocardial infarction. Other causes of arrhythmia include abnormal blood and tissue concentrations of certain minerals; abnormalities of the autonomic nervous system, which is involved in cardiovascular regulation; stress; and use of alcohol, caffeine, illicit drugs, and tobacco, as well as diet pills and some other medications.

Cardiac arrhythmias are generally categorized according to their impact on heart rates. Bradycardia is an abnormally slow resting heart rate, whereas tachycardia is an abnormally high resting heart rate. Bradycardias are most commonly associated with SA node disease and/or various forms of heart block.

Tachycardias are usually classified by their origination site and may be subdivided into two broad categories, specifically, supraventricular tachycardias (SVTs) and ventricular tachycardias (VTs).

Below are shown the projected implantable pump generator placements by region from 2015 to 2022. These include pacemaker placements, implantable cardioverter defibrillator placements, and cardiac resynchronization therapy placements.

screen-shot-2016-10-06-at-10-08-17-am

Source: MedMarket Diligence LLC (Report #C500).

Requirements for acceptance of new peripheral stents in clinical practice

Stents are implantable devices designed as endoluminal scaffolds to maintain patency following recanalization of occluded or structurally compromised vascular (and non-vascular) circulatory conduits that enable energy supply and metabolic exchange in various organs and tissues of the human body. Palliative stenting has been routinely used for decades in the management of acute and chronic obstructions of gastro-intestinal, pulmonary and urinary tracts secondary to benign or malignant neoplasms or other cite-specific or systemic pathologies. However, a real explosion in utilization of stents was triggered in the early 1990s by the advent of vascular stenting devices, which allowed radically improved clinical outcomes of balloon angioplasty and supported its emergence as the first choice treatment modality for occlusive peripheral and coronary artery disease (PAD and CAD). By the end of 2014, more than three quarters of patients with acute and chronic arterial occlusions warranting intervention were referred for angioplasty-based therapy, which entailed placement of stenting devices in over 80% of commonly performed peripheral revascularization procedures.

To be accepted in clinical practices, stenting implants should satisfy a number of general and application-specific requirements relating to device biocompatibility, functional performance, and end-user and patient friendliness which are summarized in the exhibit below. In very general terms, stenting device biocompatibility refers to minimization of hostile immune responses (and other local and systemic adverse reactions) that are inevitably triggered by a direct contact of any implantable medical device with living tissues and bodily fluids in situ. For understandable reasons, biocompatibility depends primarily on the implant surface material, including such characteristics as chemical inertness and stability, corrosion resistance, etc. The stenting device biocompatibility can also be effected somewhat by the duration of its presence in situ and specifics of the deployment site and occlusion causing pathology.

The stent’s functional performance (or ability to maintain adequate scaffolding support and lumen patency for a desired period of time) represents a complex function of the device design/architecture and the relative static and dynamic strength of its base material. The chosen stenting device’s architecture and structural material predetermine it radial strength, longitudinal flexibility, conformability and foreshortening, as well as relative lesion coverage, fatigue and kinking resistance, circulatory flow obstruction, etc.

Finally, the stent’s end-user and patient friendliness are predicated both by the design concept of the delivery system and stenting device and refers to procedural convenience, predictability, safety, morbidity, availability of bail-out options, etc. The commonly acknowledged stenting system characteristics relating to the end-user/patient friendliness include low profile, flexibility, traceability, high radiopacity, compatibility with established transcatheter tools and techniques, ease of use and short learning curve, simplicity of retrieval in case of procedural failure, possibility of emergent /elective conversion to surgery, etc.

Selected Biomedical, Clinical and Technical Requirements
for Stenting Implants

screen-shot-2016-10-04-at-2-36-22-pm

Source: MedMarket Diligence, LLC; Report #V201.