Technologies at Medtech Startups, December 2016

Below is a list of technologies under development at startups identified thus far in December 2016 and included in the Medtech Startups Database:

  • Nanoparticle-based imaging for the treatment of epilepsy.
  • Implantable device for continuous relief of congestive heart failure.
  • Nanofiber technology for soft tissue repair.
  • Technology to facilitate intubation.
  • Medical device to manage skin complications suffered by ileostomy patients.
  • An implant for arthritis sufferers that mimics the natural motions of the joint.
  • Embolic protection device used during TAVR procedures.
  • Glucose monitor for diabetes using low-power RF/Microwave detection in fingertips.
  • Novel disinfection and sterilization solutions.
  • Drug delivery.
  • Dental and orthopedic applications of nanomaterials.
  • Catheter and guidewire technologies.

For a comprehensive list of the technologies at medtech startups identified by month, see link.

Technologies Under Development at Medtech Startups, November 2016

Below is a list of the technologies under development at medical startups recently identified by MedMarket Diligence and included in the Medtech Startups Database.

  • Intravenous light therapy.
  • Post-op drainage device.
  • Devices for vascular access during hemodialysis.
  • Implantable, localized drug delivery for cancer.
  • Technology to facilitate ureter placement.
  • Tools to improve safety of surgery.
  • Technologies for improved tendon repair.
  • Needle guidance and analytics to facilitate spinal tap.
  • Closed-loop catheter for localized liver cancer treatment.
  • Cancer detection
  • Improved vascular access for dialysis.
  • Developing an artificial pancreas.
  • Nasogastric feeding system.

For a complete list of technologies in development at medtech startups identified since 2008, see link.

Medical, Surgical Sealants — Fibrin and Others

screen-shot-2016-10-26-at-2-23-29-pmFibrin is the result of the combination of solutions of thrombin and fibrinogen. This forms a clot just as in the body during the coagulation cascade. The thrombin then breaks the fibrinogen molecules into smaller bits of another blood protein, called fibrin. Fibrin molecules arrange themselves into a lattice with strands cross-linked by the blood component, Factor XIII. This resulting cross-linked net helps to stabilize the clot.

Numerous variants of fibrin sealant exist, including autologous products. Other, non-fibrin sealant types are thrombin, collagen & gelatin-based sealants.

Fibrin sealants are used in the US in a wide array of applications; they are used the most in orthopedic surgeries, where the penetration rate is thought to be 25-30%. Fibrin sealants can, however, be ineffective under wet surgical conditions. The penetration rate in other surgeries is estimated to be about 10-15%.

Fibrin-based sealants were originally made with bovine components. These components were judged to increase the risk of developing bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE), so second-generation commercial fibrin sealants (CSF) avoided bovine-derived materials. The antifibrinolytic tranexamic acid (TXA) was used instead of bovine aprotinin. Later, the TXA was removed, again due to safety issues. Today, Ethicon’s (JNJ) Evicel is an example of this product, which Ethicon says is the only all human, aprotinin free, fibrin sealant indicated for general hemostasis. Market growth in the sealants sector is driven by the need for improved biocompatibility and stronger sealing ability—in other words, meeting the still-unsatisfied needs of physician end-users.

The current market penetration of sealant products in the US stands at about 25% of eligible surgeries, with their largest volume of use in orthopedics.

Selected Fibrin and Other Sealant Types*

screen-shot-2016-10-26-at-2-10-21-pm

*Market status on each detailed in report S290.

Source: MedMarket Diligence, LLC; Sealants, Glues, Hemostats to 2022.

 

Technologies at Recent Medtech Startups

Below is a list of the technologies under development at medical technology startups identified in October 2016 and included in the Medtech Startups Database:

  • Neuro-stimulation via patch.
  • Epinephrine auto-injector
  • Portable ultrasound device to detect the occurrence of strokes.
  • Medication adherence device to facilitate self-injection.
  • Diagnosis of malaria and sickle cell.
  • Implant devices to fight biofilms and infection.
  • Technologies to address infection and other risk in nursing protocols.
  • Electronic bone depth gauge for use in orthopedics.
  • Peripheral chronic total occlusion device.
  • Deep learning and artificial intelligence in point of care ultrasound.
  • Quantitative transmission ultrasound.

A historical listing of technologies at medtech startups (through January 2016).

List of high growth medtech products

Below is a table with a list of the market segments demonstrating greater than 10% compound annual growth rate for the associated region through 2022, drawn from our reports on tissue engineering & cell therapy, wound management, ablation technologies, stroke, peripheral stents, and sealants/glues/hemostats. Products with over 10% CAGR in sales are shown in descending order of CAGR.

RankProductTopicRegion
1General, gastrointestinal, ob/gyn, othertissue/cellWW
2Ophthalmologytissue/cellWW
3Organ Replacement/ Repairtissue/cellWW
4Urologicaltissue/cellWW
5Neurologicaltissue/cellWW
6Autoimmune Diseasestissue/cellWW
7CV/ Vasculartissue/cellWW
8Bioengineered skin and skin substituteswoundRest of A/P
9Peripheral drug-eluting stents (A/P)peripheral interventionalA/P
10Peripheral drug eluting stentsperipheral interventionalRoW
11Peripheral drug-eluting stents (US)peripheral interventionalUS
12Negative pressure wound therapywoundGermany
13Hydrocolloid dressingswoundRest of A/P
14Cancertissue/cellWW
15Foam dressingswoundRest of A/P
16Growth factorswoundRest of A/P
17Alginate dressingswoundRest of A/P
18Dentaltissue/cellWW
19Bioengineered skin and skin substituteswoundJapan
20Hemostatssealants, glues, hemostatsA/P
21Skin/ Integumentarytissue/cellWW
22Bioengineered skin and skin substitutessealants, glues, hemostatsUS
23Bioengineered skin and skin substitutessealants, glues, hemostatsWW
24Film dressingswoundRest of A/P
25Surgical sealantssealants, glues, hemostatsA/P
26Hydrogel dressingswoundRest of A/P
27TAA Stent graftsperipheral interventionalA/P
28Negative pressure wound therapywoundRoW
29Biological gluessealants, glues, hemostatsA/P
30FoamwoundRoW
31HydrocolloidwoundGermany
32AAA Stent graftsperipheral interventionalA/P
33Cerebral thrombectomy systemsstrokeA/P
34High-strength medical gluessealants, glues, hemostatsA/P
35Carotid artery stenting systemsstrokeA/P
36Cardiac RF ablation productsablationA/P
37Alginate dressingswoundGermany
38Peripheral venous stentsperipheral interventionalA/P
39Cerebral thrombectomy systemsstrokeUS
40Left atrial appendage closure systemsstrokeA/P
41Cyanoacrylate gluessealants, glues, hemostatsA/P
42Foam dressingswoundRest of EU
43Foam dressingswoundKorea
44Cryoablation cardiac & vascular productsablationA/P
45Bioengineered skin and skin substituteswoundGermany
46Thrombin, collagen & gelatin-based sealantssealants, glues, hemostatsA/P
47Cardiac RF ablation productsablationRoW
48Bioengineered skin and skin substituteswoundRoW
49Microwave oncologic ablation productsablationA/P

Note source links: Tissue/Cell, Wound, Sealants/Glues/Hemostats, Peripheral Stents, Stroke, Ablation.

Source: MedMarket Diligence Reports

Where will medicine be in 2035?

An important determinant of “where medicine will be” in 2035 is the set of dynamics and forces behind healthcare delivery systems, including primarily the payment method, especially regarding reimbursement. It is clear that some form of reform in healthcare will result in a consolidation of the infrastructure paying for and managing patient populations. The infrastructure is bloated and expensive, unnecessarily adding to costs that neither the federal government nor individuals can sustain. This is not to say that I predict movement to a single payer system — that is just one perceived solution to the problem. There are far too many costs in healthcare that offer no benefits in terms of quality; indeed, such costs are a true impediment to quality. Funds that go to infrastructure (insurance companies and other intermediaries) and the demands they put on healthcare delivery work directly against quality of care. So, in the U.S., whether Obamacare persists (most likely) or is replaced with a single payer system, state administered healthcare (exchanges) or some other as-yet-unidentified form, there will be change in how healthcare is delivered from a cost/management perspective. 

From the clinical practice and technology side, there will be enormous changes to healthcare. Here are examples of what I see from tracking trends in clinical practice and medical technology development:

  • Cancer 5 year survival rates will, for many cancers, be well over 90%. Cancer will largely be transformed in most cases to chronic disease that can be effectively managed by surgery, immunology, chemotherapy and other interventions. Cancer and genomics, in particular, has been a lucrative study (see The Cancer Genome Atlas). Immunotherapy developments are also expected to be part of many oncology solutions. Cancer has been a tenacious foe, and remains one we will be fighting for a long time, but the fight will have changed from virtually incapacitating the patient to following protocols that keep cancer in check, if not cure/prevent it. 
  • Diabetes Type 1 (juvenile onset) will be managed in most patients by an “artificial pancreas”, a closed loop glucometer and insulin pump that will self-regulate blood glucose levels. OR, stem cell or other cell therapies may well achieve success in restoring normal insulin production and glucose metabolism in Type 1 patients. The odds are better that a practical, affordable artificial pancreas will developed than stem or other cell therapy, but both technologies are moving aggressively and will gain dramatic successes within 20 years.

Developments in the field of the “artificial pancreas” have recently gathered considerable pace, such that, by 2035, type 1 blood glucose management may be no more onerous than a house thermostat due to the sophistication and ease-of-use made possible with the closed loop, biofeedback capabilities of the integrated glucometer, insulin pump and the algorithms that drive it, but that will not be the end of the development of better options for type 1 diabetics. Cell therapy for type 1 diabetes, which may be readily achieved by one or more of a wide variety of cellular approaches and product forms (including cell/device hybrids) may well have progressed by 2035 to become another viable alternative for type 1 diabetics.

  • Diabetes Type 2 (adult onset) will be a significant problem governed by different dynamics than Type 1. A large body of evidence will exist that shows dramatically reduced incidence of Type 2 associated with obesity management (gastric bypass, satiety drugs, etc.) that will mitigate the growing prevalence of Type 2, but research into pharmacologic or other therapies may at best achieve only modest advances. The problem will reside in the complexity of different Type 2 manifestation, the late onset of the condition in patients who are resistant to the necessary changes in lifestyle and the global epidemic that will challenge dissemination of new technologies and clinical practices to third world populations.

Despite increasing levels of attention being raised to the burden of type 2 worldwide, including all its sequellae (vascular, retinal, kidney and other diseases), the pace of growth globally in type 2 is still such that it will represent a problem and target for pharma, biotech, medical device, and other disciplines.

  • Cell therapy and tissue engineering will offer an enormous number of solutions for conditions currently treated inadequately, if at all. Below is an illustration of the range of applications currently available or in development, a list that will expand (along with successes in each) over the next 20 years.

    Cell therapy will have deeply penetrated virtually every medical specialty by 2035. Most advanced will be those that target less complex tissues: bone, muscle, skin, and select internal organ tissues (e.g., bioengineered bladder, others). However, development will have also followed the money. Currently, development and use of conventional technologies in areas like cardiology, vascular, and neurology entails high expenditure that creates enormous investment incentive that will drive steady development of cell therapy and tissue engineering over the next 20 years, with the goal of better, long-term and/or less costly solutions.
  • Gene therapy will be an option for a majority of genetically-based diseases (especially inherited diseases) and will offer clinical options for non-inherited conditions. Advances in the analysis of inheritance and expression of genes will also enable advanced interventions to either ameliorate or actually preempt the onset of genetic disease.

    As the human genome is the engineering plans for the human body, it is a potential mother lode for the future of medicine, but it remains a complex set of plans to elucidate and exploit for the development of therapies. While genetically-based diseases may readily be addressed by gene therapies in 2035, the host of other diseases that do not have obvious genetic components will resist giving up easy gene therapy solutions. Then again, within 20 years a number of reasonable advances in understanding and intervention could open the gate to widespread “gene therapy” (in some sense) for a breadth of diseases and conditions –> Case in point, the recent emergence of the gene-editing technology, CRISPR, has set the stage for practical applications to correct genetically-based conditions.
  • Drug development will be dramatically more sophisticated, reducing the development time and cost while resulting in drugs that are far more clinically effective (and less prone to side effects). This arises from drug candidates being evaluated via distributed processing systems (or quantum computer systems) that can predict efficacy and side effect without need of expensive and exhaustive animal or human testing.The development of effective drugs will have been accelerated by both modeling systems and increases in our understanding of disease and trauma, including pharmacogenomics to predict drug response. It may not as readily follow that the costs will be reduced, something that may only happen as a result of policy decisions.
  • Most surgical procedures will achieve the ability to be virtually non-invasive. Natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) will enable highly sophisticated surgery without ever making an abdominal or other (external) incision. Technologies like “gamma knife” and similar will have the ability to destroy tumors or ablate pathological tissue via completely external, energy-based systems.

    By 2035, technologies such as these will measurably reduce inpatient stays, on a per capita basis, since a significant reason for overnight stays is the trauma requiring recovery, and eliminating trauma is a major goal and advantage of minimally invasive technologies (e.g., especially the NOTES technology platform). A wide range of other technologies (e.g., gamma knife, minimally invasive surgery/intervention, etc.) across multiple categories (device, biotech, pharma) will also have emerged and succeeded in the market by producing therapeutic benefit while minimizing or eliminating collateral damage.

Information technology will radically improve patient management. Very sophisticated electronic patient records will dramatically improve patient care via reduction of contraindications, predictive systems to proactively manage disease and disease risk, and greatly improve the decision-making of physicians tasked with diagnosing and treating patients.There are few technical hurdles to the advancement of information technology in medicine, but even in 2035, infotech is very likely to still be facing real hurdles in its use as a result of the reluctance in healthcare to give up legacy systems and the inertia against change, despite the benefits.

  • Personalized medicine. Perfect matches between a condition and its treatment are the goal of personalized medicine, since patient-to-patient variation can reduce the efficacy of off-the-shelf treatment. The thinking behind gender-specific joint replacement has led to custom-printed 3D implants. The use of personalized medicine will also be manifested by testing to reveal potential emerging diseases or conditions, whose symptoms may be ameliorated or prevented by intervention before onset.
  • Systems biology will underlie the biology of most future medical advances in the next 20 years. Systems biology is a discipline focused on an integrated understanding of cell biology, physiology, genetics, chemistry, and a wide range of other individual medical and scientific disciplines. It represents an implicit recognition of an organism as an embodiment of multiple, interdependent organ systems and its processes, such that both pathology and wellness are understood from the perspective of the sum total of both the problem and the impact of possible solutions.This orientation will be intrinsic to the development of medical technologies, and will increasingly be represented by clinical trials that throw a much wider and longer-term net around relevant data, staff expertise encompassing more medical/scientific disciplines, and unforeseen solutions that present themselves as a result of this approach.Other technologies being developed aggressively now will have an impact over the next twenty years, including medical/surgical robots (or even biobots), neurotechnologies to diagnose, monitor, and treat a wide range of conditions (e.g., spinal cord injury, Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s etc.).

The breadth and depth of advances in medicine over the next 20 years will be extraordinary, since many doors have been recently opened as a result of advances in genetics, cell biology, materials science, systems biology and others — with the collective advances further stimulating both learning and new product development. 


See the 2016 report #290, “Worldwide Markets for Medical and Surgical Sealants, Glues, and Hemostats, 2015-2022.”

Six Key Trends in Sealants, Glues, Hemostats Markets to 2022

From July 2016 published Report #S290.

Here are six key trends we see in the global market for surgical sealants, glues, and hemostats:

  1. Aggressive development of products (including by universities, startups, established competitors), regulatory approvals, and new product introductions continues in the U.S., Europe, and Asia/Pacific (mostly Japan, Korea) to satisfy the growing volume of surgical procedures globally.
  2. Rapid adoption of sealants, glues, hemostats in China will drive much of the global market for these products, but other nations in the region are also big consumers, with more of the potential caseload already tapped than the rising economic China giant. Japan is a big developer and user of wound product consumer. Per capital demand is also higher in some countries like Japan.
  3. Flattening markets in the U.S. and Europe (where home-based manufacturers are looking more at emerging markets), with Europe in particular focused intently on lowering healthcare costs.
  4. The M&A, and deal-making that has taken place over the past few years (Bristol-Myers Squibb, The Medicines Company, Cohera Medical, Medafor, CR Bard, Tenaxis, Mallinckrodt, Xcede Technologies, etc.) will continue as market penetration turns to consolidation.
  5. Growing development on two fronts: (1) clinical specialty and/or application specific product formulation, and (2) all purpose products that provide faster sealing, hemostasis, or closure for general wound applications for internal and external use.
  6. Bioglues already hold the lead in global medical glue sales, and more are being developed, but there are also numerous biologically-inspired, though not -derived, glues in the starting blocks that will displace bioglue shares. Nanotech also has its tiny fingers in this pie, as well.

See Report #S290, “Worldwide Sealants, Glues, and Hemostats Markets, 2015-2022”.

The Demand for Sealants, Glues, and Hemostats in 2016

The following is drawn from “Worldwide Markets for Medical and Surgical Sealants, Glues, and Hemostats, 2015-2022.” Report #S290.

The need for surgical sealants, glues and hemostats is directly related to the clinical caseload and procedure volumes, as well as to the adoption of these products for multiple uses, such as the use of one product for sealing, hemostasis and anti-adhesion. It is fair to say that use of these products has become routine in the surgical suite and in other clinical locations. Procedure volumes are in turn driven by demographic forces, including global aging populations, while regulatory changes will continue to influence uptake of these products.

wound-prevalance

Source: MedMarket Diligence, LLC; Report #S290.

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.

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.

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.

 

USA and Asia/Pacific Size Versus Growth in Sealants, Glues, Hemostats

The market dynamics in Asia/Pacific stand apart from those in the U.S. In the case of surgical sealants, glues, and hemostats, what stands out is the Size versus Growth metric.

Much of the potential in China, in particular, remains untapped (low volume, high growth), while in the U.S., these markets are more well established and, therefore, more penetrated.

Below are the size/growth “bubbles” for, alternating, the U.S. and Asia/Pacific.

output_dYHN2K

Source: MedMarket Diligence, LLC; Report #S290.

Medtech fundings for July 2016

Medtech fundings for July 2016 stand at $612 million, led by the $183 million IPO of Bioventus, followed by the $49 million Series C funding of VytronUS, the $32 million funding of Endotronix and the $30 million funding of Senseonics.

Below are the top fundings for the month thus far. Check back before month end to see updates.

Screen Shot 2016-07-29 at 8.38.14 AM

For a complete list of fundings in July 2016, see link.