Category Archives: market data

blog contains data on market size, growth and/or competitor shares

Global trends in spine surgery, 2015 to 2021

The global spine surgery market, which is largely stable in terms of technologies and the dominance of the U.S. market, will demonstrate the most significant change through 2021 through an increasing share of spine surgeries done minimally invasively and a noticeable shift of sales to OUS, especially to China, Japan, and India.

See the relative growth from 2015 to 2021 in the charts below (the proprietary data in axes values omitted, but the sales for North America and Asia-Pacific are presented on the same vertical scale for comparison purposes).

Source: MedMarket Diligence, LLC; Report #M540.


Technologies Gaining Nearly $600M Fundings in Medtech for October 2015

Fundings for medical technology reached $594 million for the month of October 2015. These are the technologies gaining funding In October 2015:

  • Tissue engineering in blood vessels, including for acellular vessels use for vascular access in ESRD
  • Magnetically adjustable spinal bracing system
  • Technologies to reduce the risk of stroke in transcarotid artery revascularization
  • Technologies to treat hearing loss
  • Surgical adhesives and sealants
  • Drug-device for novel treatment of urologic diseases
  • Drug delivery device technology
  • Minimally invasive device for the treatment of acute decompensated heart failure
  • Diagnostics for acute kidney injury
  • Catheter-based, minimally invasive treatment of endovascular arteriovenous fistula
  • Minimally invasive, non-surgical technology for circulatory support
  • Endovascular aortic aneurysm repair
  • Non-invasive intracranial pressure measurement
  • Implantable pump technology for fluid management
  • Intraoperative imaging and navigation
  • Devices for dry eye, glaucoma, others.
  • Nonsurgical device for the treatment of chronic nasal obstruction
  • Focused ultrasonic surgical devices for hemostasis, cauterization, and ablation
  • Technology for drug delivery to brain
  • Technologies for robotically-assisted minimally invasive surgery
  • Catheter based therapeutic devices for the treatment of cerebral aneurysms
  • Neuromodulation technologies
  • Renal denervation
  • Device to provide rapid allergy relief and device to monitor neonatal end-tidal carbon monoxide

For details on these, including the companies and their funding amounts, see link.

The future of medtech demands more and better imagination

I frequently see conclusions about the the future of medtech derived by analysts who are walking backward looking at their feet — living by the tenet of “past is prologue”. This type of “foresight” presumes an unchanging set of forces, leading (at best) to a conclusion that the future will hold more of the same.

Yet, the future of medtech is dictated far more significantly not by what has already happened, or as a result of past trends continuing as future trends, but by what has not happened yet. The major thrust of any significant growth (and isn’t growth most interests us?) comes primarily from events that do not as clearly follow from past events:

  • Surgical device sales forecasts are uprooted by introduction of laparoscopy
  • Tissue engineering preempts conventional treatments in wound, orthopedics, cardiology…
  • Success in type 1 diabetes treatment will be determined by device advances as well as cell therapy advances
  • Systems biology reveals risks and opportunities previously unseen

If you view your markets myopically, then you consider your competitors to be limited to those whose products most resemble your own. If you have a long view, you consider what might be possible based on available/emerging technology to tap into untapped demand or simply create latent demand that no company has yet been sufficiently visionary or innovative to seize. What patient populations, clinical practice patterns and their trends are the pulse that you monitor (or are you even monitoring these)?  There is a gap between what is available and a whole set of patients virtually untreated, physicians unsatisfied, and third party payers struggling.  Are you an angioplasty catheter manufacturer — or a coronary artery disease solution?  Do you make devices — or outcomes?

Source: Yann Girard

Look at staid “device” companies like Baxter International and see that they have “biosurgery” divisions.  Look at Medtronic and appreciate that they are as sensitive to developments in glucose monitoring and insulin pump technologies as they are to the litany of cell therapy approaches under pursuit. (These companies are fundamentally aware of technology “S-curves” — see graphic at right.)

Virtually every area of current clinical practice is subject to change when considering drug/device hybrids, biomaterials, nanotechnology/MEMs devices and coatings, biotechnology, pharmaceutical (and its growing sophistication in drug development), western medicine and eastern medicine, healthcare reform, cost containment, RFIDs, 3D printing, information technology  — it is imperative to see the upside and downside of these.

These are some of the forces that less characteristic of the past that are leading to startling new success in medtech developments:

  • Materials technologies are redefining the nature and functional limits of medical devices
  • Technologies more closely aligned with cure than symptomatic treatment gain rapid acceptance
  • The practice of considering outcomes measures of highly diverse technology solutions to disease has ascended to prominence in the mindsets of healthcare systems and payers
  • The use of information technologies and cross-medical discipline initiatives enables rapid determination of likely success and failures in whole new ways

Aside from the demands for operational efficiency and managing cash flows, the success or failure of medical technology companies has become a reflection of how well these companies position themselves now and in the future with an imaginative long view. Companies must consider the revenue streams in Year 1, Year 5 and Year 10.


Medtech Fundings for October 2015

Medtech fundings for October 2015 totaled $618 million, led by the $150 million Series B funding of Humacyte, followed by the $75 million IPO filed by Eclipse Technologies, the $57 million funding of Silk Road Medical, and the  $52 million Series A funding of Decibel Therapeutics.

Below (with the full list at link) are the top fundings for the month.

Source: MedMarket Diligence, LLC

For the complete list of medtech fundings in October 2015, see link.

For a historical list of the individual fundings in medtech, by month, since 2009, see link.

Growth in endovascular thrombectomy accelerating globally

First generation thrombectomy systems, despite their allure, have not fared well against standard medical (and tPA) therapy, since the endovascular retrieval of clots did not result in improved patient outcomes.

However, clinical trials of second generation systems and interviews with clinicians and industry support the common perception that the cumulative worldwide volume of cerebral thrombectomy procedures is projected to experience accelerated growth through 2019, resulting in an 10.8% overall average annual expansion of corresponding interventions in the to an estimated 56.2 thousand total procedures worldwide in 2019.

The fastest cerebral thrombectomy procedural gains (11.4% and 11.7% annually) are likely to be registered in major Asian state and the U.S., followed by largest Western European countries and rest of the world (9.9% and 7.8% annually).

See incidence of ischemic stroke and compound growth in thrombectomy in the major global markets.
Screen Shot 2015-10-19 at 9.06.29 AM

Source: MedMarket Diligence, LLC; Report #C310.

Screen Shot 2015-10-19 at 9.06.43 AM

Source: MedMarket Diligence, LLC; Report #C310.

Cerebral Aneurysm and AVM Embolization System Suppliers

In recent years, transcatheter embolization techniques have emerged as a mainstay treatment modality in repair of rupture-prone cerebral aneurysms and indispensable pre-surgical adjunct in treatment of intracranial AVMs.

Aside from the ongoing (but gradually moderating in the U.S. Europe and Japan) migration of patients from open surgical to minimally invasive neurovascular embolization techniques, consistent and robust growth in this market was driven by the introduction of improved and premium-priced embolic coil designs, launch of coil containing stents and flow diversion devices for wide neck aneurysms, and increasing utilization of user-friendly liquid embolics in AVM (and selected wide neck aneurysm) applications. In the forthcoming years, the cited growth factors are likely to stay in place supporting further expansion of cerebral aneurysm and AVM transcatheter embolization business.

In 2014, endovascular embolization techniques were employed in approximately 90.5 thousand cerebral aneurysm and AVM repair procedures worldwide, of which aneurysm targeting interventions accounted for about 89.2%, with the rest contributed by AVMs hemoisolation.

Screen Shot 2015-10-12 at 4.07.21 PM

Source: MedMarket Diligence, LLC; Report #C310.

Medtech Startups, 2010-2015

From 2010 to present (Oct 2015), as included in the Medtech Startups Database, MedMarket Diligence identified 442 new (under one year old) medical technology startups whose businesses encompass, alone or in combination, medical devices, diagnostics, biomaterials, and the subset of both biotech and pharma that is in direct competition with medical devices, including tissue engineering and cell therapy. Of these, 74% were founded in the U.S., 5% were founded in Israel, and the rest were founded in 18 other countries.

Companies in the database have been categorized by clinical and/or technology area of focus, with multiple categories possible (e.g., minimally invasive and orthomusculoskeletal and surgery). Below is the composition of the companies identified from Jan. 2010 to Oct. 2015.

Screen Shot 2015-10-06 at 4.50.10 PM

Source: Medtech Startups Database

Below is a graphic on the companies by country. The U.S. (not shown) led with 327 companies.

Screen Shot 2015-10-06 at 4.17.30 PM

Source: Medtech Startups Database

In the U.S., the breakdown by state, other than California and its 466 companies (excluded only to show states with significantly lower numbers), is as follows:

Screen Shot 2015-10-06 at 5.13.08 PM

Source: Medtech Startups Database


Double-digit sales growth rates in spine surgery products

In many Western markets, spine surgery represents a mature market, with significant penetration of potential patients and caseload. Manufacturers have been able to produce innovations that have been able to command respectable premiums for a long time, and while they still represent some of the strongest growth rates in medical technology, overall revenue growth rates in spine surgery have been squeezed by procedure limitations and pressure on pricing.

Not so much the case in Asia/Pacific, Central/Latin America, and markets elsewhere in the world, where double digit spine surgery growth rates are the evident now, and will continue for the near future.

Below is illustrated the top growth (2014-2021) combinations of technologies and regional markets in spine surgery, in descending order.

Screen Shot 2015-10-06 at 11.10.30 AM

Source: MedMarket Diligence, LLC; Report #M540.

Wound Sealing and Closure Markets by Country: Germany and United Kingdom

Population differences represent a major difference between countries in the relative demand for medical products, but there remain many other differences in drivers and limiters of sales.

The markets for wound closure encompassing sutures & staples, vascular closure devices, surgical hemostats, surgical tapes, and surgical sealants & glues show distinct sensitivities country-by-country as a result of differences in:

  • Practice patterns
  • Cultural differences in perception of “wounds”
  • Reimbursement
  • Regulatory
  • Perception of new technology
  • Economics

For example, the two graphics below illustrate the wound closure markets in Germany and the United Kingdom. To have fully compared the markets in these two countries aside from differences in population, we might have presented per capita values in the sales, but even without doing so it is clear that relative sizes and growth rates in the two countries are sufficiently different to warrant attention in local efforts to market these products.

Screen Shot 2015-10-06 at 8.13.22 AM

Source: “Worldwide Surgical Sealants, Glues, and Wound Closure Markets, 2013-2018”, Report #S192; published by MedMarket Diligence, LLC

Cerebral Endovascular Embolization Cases, Procedures Growth

In 2014, endovascular embolization techniques were employed in approximately 90.5 thousand cerebral aneurysm and AVM repair procedures worldwide, of which aneurysm targeting interventions accounted for about 89.2%, with the rest contributed by AVMs hemoisolation.

During the forecast period, the total global volume of transcatheter neurovascular embolization procedures is projected to grow 4% per annum to an estimated 109.9 thousand interventions in the year 2019. The largest absolute and relative gains in cerebral embolization procedure volumes are expected in the largest Asian-Pacific states (mostly China) and the Rest-of-the-World, where low relative usage of endovascular techniques (30-35% versus 65-75% in the U.S. and Europe) will continue to support their increasing penetration of clinical practices and serve as the primary locomotive of growth in the corresponding global product market.

Largely mature U.S. and West European market geographies are likely to register considerably more modest advances in cerebral embolization procedure volumes.  Below is compared the growth rates to 2019 for cerebral endovascular embolization in the major Asia-Pacific countries (Japan, India, and China) to the same in Western Europe.

Screen Shot 2015-10-05 at 9.41.24 AM

Source: MedMarket Diligence, LLC; Report #C310, “Emerging Global Market for Neurointerventional Technologies in Stroke, 2014-2019”.