Category Archives: surgery

topic is largely or exclusively about surgical products, technologies, markets and/or companies

Global Growth in Spine Surgery

Spine surgery is a relatively mature market — all segments of the spine can be treated, significant share has been garnered by a few major companies, and there are no radically new technologies disrupting current market positions. Yet, trends in the patient population, the active innovation by all companies (large and small), the fact that it remains an invasive procedure (even the best minimally invasive approaches have room for improvement), and the accelerating migration of advanced spine technologies to developing non-U.S. markets are all reasons why this “mature” market is anything but stagnant.

Success in applying minimally invasive approaches to spine fusion has opened up procedure volumes for more patients, resulting in the fastest growing area of spine fusion sales. Fusion devices are strong worldwide, with the non-U.S. markets lagging in volumes, but growing at markedly faster rates.

Below is illustrated the segment growth rates for major geographic regions.

Screen Shot 2015-08-27 at 8.39.15 AM

Source: MedMarket Diligence, LLC; Report #M540

The result of the faster non-U.S. growth is that the dominance of U.S. spine surgery markets will decline over the next decade. Below is the change in the share of the global spine surgery market represented by each reach from 2014. For example,  the U.S. market will lose 6% of the global market between 2014 and 2021, while Asia-Pacific will gain roughly 5%.

Screen Shot 2015-08-27 at 7.46.20 AM

Source: MedMarket Diligence, LLC; Report #M540

 

 

Global Spine Surgery Finding Double Digit Growth from Innovation, Economics, and Clinical Trends According to MedMarket Diligence Report

[August 21, 2015 — Mission Viejo  CA — MedMarket Diligence has published its 2015 global report on spine surgery. For details, see link.]

Decades of clinical research and medtech innovation have combined to offer solutions for every segment of the spine.  Economics and innovation have also made spine surgery one of the strongest growth of all medtech markets. MedMarket Diligence’s new global report on spine surgery device markets reveals opportunities for established, emerging, and potential medtech players.

Screen Shot 2015-08-24 at 2.03.50 PM

Screen Shot 2015-08-24 at 2.10.34 PMThe $9.17 billion global market for cervical fusion, thoracolumbar Implants, MIS spine fusion, interbody fusion, and orthobiologics has evolved dramatically over the last several decades as a result of significant advances in the understanding of spinal biomechanics, the proliferation of sophisticated spinal instrumentation devices, surgical advances in bone fusion techniques, refinement of anterior approaches to the spine and the emergence and development of microsurgical, minimally invasive methods and robotics. As a result of these advances it is now possible to stabilize every segment of the spine successfully, regardless of the offending pathology. The global market for spine surgery devices is detailed in the MedMarket Diligence report, “Global Market for Medical Device Technologies in Spine Surgery, 2014-2021.” See Report #M540.

“While this market may be dominated by the bigs — Medtronic, DePuy, Stryker, Zimmer-Biomet, et al. – there remains more than enough business in spine technology to attract a remarkably large number of mid-tier and smaller market participants,” says Patrick Driscoll of MedMarket Diligence. “And there are ample participants who do not accept the status quo, by aggressively innovating and introducing clinical and economic improvement in spine surgery.”

Spine fusion is the fastest growing technology in spine surgery and with growth in spine surgery being fastest in the Asia-Pacific and Central/Latin America, the growth of spine fusion in those areas is double-digit. The improvements in spine surgery and technology development have produced steady growth in volumes of surgeries, supported by reimbursement and clinical outcomes (and the increasingly active aging population). Spine surgery, with its exponential growth, has been the answer to an orthopaedic industry seeking to optimize earnings and add value for shareholders.

The MedMarket Diligence report, “Global Market for Medical Device Technologies in Spine Surgery, 2014-2021: Established and Emerging Products, Technologies and Markets in the Americas, Europe, Asia/Pacific and Rest of World,” (report #M540) is a detailed market and technology assessment and forecast of the products and technologies in the management of diseases and disorders of the spine. The report describes the diseases and disorders of the spine, characterizing the patient populations, their current clinical management, and trends in clinical management as new techniques and technologies are expected to be developed and emerge.

The report details the currently available products and technologies, and the manufacturers offering them. The report details the products and technologies under development and markets for each in spine surgery. The report provides a current and forecast assessment by region/country of procedures and manufacturer revenues for, specifically, Americas (United States, Rest of North America, Latin America), European Union (United Kingdom, Germany, France, Italy, Spain, Rest of Europe), Asia-Pacific (Japan, China, India, Rest of Asia/Pacific) and Rest of World. The forecast addresses the product- and country-specific impacts in the market of new technologies through the coming decade.

The report profiles 38 of the most notable current and emerging companies in this industry, providing data on their current products, current market position and products under development. The products and activities of numerous additional startup and emerging companies are also detailed in the report.

The report is described in detail at http://www.mediligence.com/rpt/rpt-m540.htm and may be ordered for immediate download from https://www.mediligence.com/store/page51.html.


Until August 28, 2015, Report #M540 is available for $500 off the list price. See Spine Surgery 2015 (M540) $500 off early release

Global Markets for Medical Devices in Spine Surgery, Forecast to 2021

The market for spinal implants and associated spinal fusion products has evolved dramatically over the last several decades as a result of significant advances in the understanding of spinal biomechanics, the proliferation of sophisticated spinal instrumentation devices, surgical advances in bone fusion techniques, refinement of anterior approaches to the spine and the emergence and development of microsurgical, minimally invasive methods and robotics. As a result of these advances it is now possible to stabilize every segment of the spine successfully, regardless of the offending pathology.

Prior to these developments, the orthopedic industry had traditionally regarded spinal surgery as a “Cinderella” segment that — far from being a major market segment — was almost regarded as a service area supporting a relatively small number of highly specialized surgeons focusing on the clinical issues associated with the vertebral column. In contrast, by the beginning of the new millennia it became clear that an orthopaedic industry seeking to provide optimized earnings and value to share holders had identified this area as a major unmet need in which the demand to resolve an increasingly wide range of spinal conditions was growing exponentially.

In response to these developments, and in recognition that the market for spinal implants and associated spinal fusion products was and is growing, orthopedic companies have realigned their strategic approach by:

  • Providing greater resources to further product development.
  • Expanding of sales and marketing resources
  • Growing new and emerging geographic regions

It is anticipated that, collectively, these elements will further open the door to the development of implantable devices that can identically reproduce the elements of the spine that need to be reinforced or replaced by artificial. Accordingly, use of spinal fusion and instrumentation is anticipated to increase in the foreseeable future and continue to represent a better than average growth area in medtech.

 

 

Screen Shot 2015-08-18 at 8.20.21 AM

Source: MedMarket Diligence, LLC; Report #M540


MedMarket Diligence, LLC, has completed an analysis entitled, “Global Market For Medical Device Technologies in Spine Surgery, 2014-2020”. The report (#M540) will be published August 21, 2015, and will be downloadable in PDF and available in print for single, site, and global licenses. The report is described in detail, with a complete table of contents and list of exhibits, at link.

Where will medicine be in 2035?

(This question was originally posed to me on Quora.com. I initially answered this in mid 2014 and am revisiting and updating the answers now, in mid 2015.)

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, whether it is Obamacare, 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.
    [View Aug. 2015: 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.
    [View Aug. 2015: 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. See pending report.]
  • 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.
    [View Aug. 2015: 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. See pending report.]
  • 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.

    [View Aug. 2015: 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. See Smithers Apex report.]
  • 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.
    [View Aug. 2015: It’s a double-edged sword with the human genome. As the human blueprint, It is the 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.]
  • 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.
    [View Aug. 2015: The development of effective drugs will have been accelerated by both modeling systems and increases in our understanding of disease and trauma. 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.
    [View Aug. 2015: By 2035, technologies such as these will have measurably reduced 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 the NOTES technology platform. A wide range of other technologies (e.g., “gamma knife”) across multiple categories (device, biotech, pharma) will also have emerged and succeeded in the market by producing therapeutic benefit without 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.
    [View Aug. 2015: 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.]
  • 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.
    [View Aug. 2015: 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.]

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. 

Global Market For Medical Device Technologies in Spine Surgery, 2014-2021

MedMarket Diligence is completing a global analysis of spine surgery technologies, scheduled for publication in August/September:

Global Market For Medical Device Technologies in Spine Surgery, 2014-2021:
Established and Emerging Products, Technologies and Markets in the Americas, Europe, Asia/Pacific and Rest of World.” See link.

This report is a detailed market and technology assessment and forecast of the products and technologies in the management of diseases and disorders of the spine. The report describes the diseases and disorders of the spine, characterizing the patient populations, their current clinical management, and trends in clinical management as new techniques and technologies are expected to be developed and emerge. The report details the currently available products and technologies, and the manufacturers offering them. The report details the products and technologies under development and markets for each in spine surgery.The report provides a current and forecast to 2021 by region/country of procedures and manufacturer revenues for, specifically, Americas (United States, Rest of North America, Latin America), European Union (United Kingdom, Germany, France, Italy, Spain, Rest of Europe), Asia-Pacific (Japan, China, India, Rest of Asia/Pacific) and Rest of World. The forecast addresses the product- and country-specific impacts in the market of new technologies through the coming decade. The report profiles 75 of the most notable current and emerging companies in this industry, providing data on their current products, current market position and products under development.

See the full description and table of contents at Report #M540.

Growth in Sealants, Glues, Hemostats, and Wound Closure is Absolute, Relative

Of late, I have needed to re-emphasize the difference between absolute and relative growth in medtech markets (and its importance). So, here it is again, this time regarding surgical sealants and other wound closure products.

The lowest relative rate of growth in this industry is the well-established sutures and staples segment. Sales of these products globally, even supported by innovations in bioresorbables and laparoscopic delivery technologies, are only growing at a 5.6% compound annual growth rate from 2013 to 2018. By comparison, growth of sales of surgical glues and sealants is at 9.4% for 2013-2018.

But from an absolute sales growth point of view, sales of sutures and staples will go from $5.2 billion to $6.9 billion, or absolute growth of $1.7 billion. Simultaneously, the relatively high growth in surgical glues and sealants translates to the absolute growth from 2013 to 2018 of only $0.9 billion.

Obviously, both absolute and relative growth are of interest.

Screen Shot 2015-07-23 at 2.31.03 PM

Source: MedMarket Diligence, LLC; Report #S192.

Bioactive Agents in Wound Sealing and Closure

Excerpt from Report #S192, “Worldwide Surgical Sealants, Glues, and Wound Closure 2013-2018”.

Screen Shot 2015-03-30 at 10.14.59 AMBiologically active sealants typically contain various formulations of fibrin and/or thrombin, either of human or animal origin, which mimic or facilitate the final stages of the coagulation cascade. The most common consist of a liquid fibrin sealant product in which fibrinogen and thrombin are stored separately as a frozen liquid or lyophilized powder. Before use, both components need to be reconstituted or thawed and loaded into a two-compartment applicator device that allows mixing of the two components just prior to delivery to the wound. Because of the laborious preparation process, these products are not easy to use. However, manufacturers have been developing some new formulations designed to make the process more user friendly.

Selected Biologically Active Sealants, Glues, and Hemostats 

CompanyProduct NameDescription/
(Status*)
Asahi Kasei MedicalCryoSeal FS SystemFibrin sealant system comprising an automated device and sterile blood processing disposables that enable autologous fibrin sealant to be prepared from a patient's own blood plasma in about an hour.
BaxterArtissFibrin sealant spray
BaxterTisseelBiodegradable fibrin sealant made of human fibrinogen and human thrombin. For oozing and diffuse bleeding.
BaxterFloSealHemostatic bioresorbable sealant/glue containing human thrombin and bovine-derived, glutaraldehyde-crosslinked proprietary gelatin matrix. For moderate to severe bleeding.
BaxterGelFoam PlusHemostatic sponge comprising Pfizer's Gelfoam hemostatic sponge, made of porcine skin and gelatin, packaged with human plasma-derived thrombin powder.
Behring/NycomedTachoCombFleece-type collagen hemostat coated with fibrin glue components.
Bristol-Myers Squibb/ZymoGenetics (Sold by The Medicines Company in the US and Canada)RecothromFirst recombinant, plasma-free thrombin hemostat.
CSL BehringBeriplast P/Beriplast P Combi-SetFreeze dried fibrin sealant. Comprised of human fibrinogen-factor XIII and thrombin in aprotinin and calcium chloride solution.
CSL BehringHaemocomplettan P, RiaSTAPFreeze-dried human fibrinogen concentrate. Haemocomplettan (US) and RiaSTAP (Europe).
J&J/EthiconEvicelEvicel is a new formulation of the previously available fibrin sealant Quixil (EU)/Crosseal (US). Does not contain the antifibrinolytic agent tranexamic acid, which is potentially neurotoxic, nor does it contain synthetic or bovine aprotinin, which reduces potential for hypersensitivity reactions.
J&J/EthiconEvarrestAbsorbable fibrin sealant patch comprised of flexible matrix of oxidized, regenerated cellulose backing under a layer of polyglactin 910 non-woven fibers and coated on one side with human fibrinogen and thrombin.
J&J/EthiconBIOSEAL Fibrin SealantLow-cost porcine-derived surgical sealant manufactured in China by J&J company Bioseal Biotechnology and targeted to emerging markets.
J&J/EthiconEvithromHuman thrombin for topical use as hemostat. Made of pooled human blood.
Pfizer/King PharmaceuticalsThrombin JMIBovine-derived topical thrombin hemostat.
Stryker/OrthovitaVitagel SurgicalBovine collagen and thrombin hemostat.
Takeda/NycomedTachoSilAbsorbable surgical patch made of collagen sponge matrix combined with human fibrinogen and thrombin.
Teijin Pharma Ltd/Teijin Group (Tokyo, Japan)KTF-374Company is working with Chemo-Sero-Therapeutic Research Institute (KAKETSUKEN) to develop a sheet-type surgical fibrin sealant. Product combines KAKETSUKEN's recombinant thrombin and fibrinogen technology with Teijin's high-performance fiber technology to create the world's first recombinant fibrin sealant on a bioabsorbable, flexible, nonwoven electrospun fiber sheet.
The Medicines Company (TMC)Raplixa (formerly Fibrocaps)Sprayable dry-powder formulation of fibrinogen and thrombin to aid in hemostasis during surgery to control mild or moderate bleeding.
The Medicines Company (TMC)In development: Fibropad patchFDA accepted company's BLA application for Fibrocaps in April 2014 and set an action date (PDUFA) in 2015. In November 2013, the European Medicines Agency agreed to review the firm's EU marketing authorization application. Status update in report #S192.
Vascular SolutionsD-Stat FlowableThick, but flowable, thrombin-based mixture to prevent bleeding in the subcutaneous pectoral pockets created during pacemaker and ICD implantations.

Note: Status of products detailed in Report #S192.

Source: MedMarket Diligence, LLC

What is spine surgery?

What is spine surgery? Specifically it’s:

  • Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion (ALIF)
  • Anterior Cervical Corpectomy
  • Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion (ACDF)
  • Axial Lumbar Interbody Fusion (AXiaLIF)
  • Cervical Laminaplasty
  • Cervical Posterior Foraminotomy
  • Direct Lateral Interbody Fusion (DLIF)
  • Discectomy
  • Endoscopic Surgery
  • eXtreme Lateral Interbody Fusion (XLIF)
  • Foraminotomy and Foraminectomy
  • Intradiscal Electrothermal Therapy (IDET)
  • Kyphoplasty
  • Laminectomy
  • Laminoplasty
  • Laminotomy
  • LASER Surgery
  • Microdiscectomy (Minimally Invasive Technique)
  • Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion (PLIF)
  • Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion (PLIF)
  • Scoliosis Correction
  • Spinal Decompression
  • Spinal Fusion
  • Spinal Instrumentation
  • Spinal Osteotomy
  • Thoracoscopic Release
  • Transforamenal Lumbar Interbody Fusion (TLIF)

These represent the range of options to address diseases and trauma of the spine. To varying degrees, these procedures can require multiple instruments and/or implants and other products, which encompass the following:

  • Cervical interbody cages or spacers
  • Anterior cervical plates
  • Artificial cervical discs
  • Thoracolumbar plate systems
  • Interbody fusion devices
  • Thoracolumbar screw/rod systems
  • Minimally invasive implants
  • Artificial disc replacement implants
  • Interspinous implants
  • Demineralized bone matrix
  • Synthetic bone graft substitutes

See pending Report #M540.

Wound Sealant and Securement Procedure Volumes by Clinical Area and End-Point

Sealants, glues, hemostats, and other products in wound closure and securement offer benefits that vary by clinical area, but the nature of that benefit also varies by the type of end-point (benefit) the product achieves — does it provide a life-saving benefit? A time-saving? Cost-savings? A cosmetic or aesthetic benefit?

Accordingly, by examining the volume of procedures for which closure and securement products provide which kind of benefit is crucial to understanding demand, especially between competitive products.

Below is a categorization of benefits ranging from the critical (I) to the aesthetic (IV).

Criteria for Adjunctive Use of Hemostats, Sealants, Glues and Adhesion Prevention Products in Surgery

Screen Shot 2015-06-23 at 7.24.29 AM

Source: MedMarket Diligence, LLC (Report #S192)

Considering these different categories, below are the volumes of procedures distributed by category across each of the major clinical disciplines.

Surgical Procedures with Potential for the Use of Hemostats, Sealants, Glues and Wound Closure Products, Worldwide (Millions), 2014

 

 

 

 

Screen Shot 2015-06-23 at 7.28.36 AM

Source: MedMarket Diligence, LLC (Report #S192)

Manufacturers of sealants, glues, hemostats

Sealants and glues also are emerging as important adjunctive tools for sealing staple and suture lines, and some of these products also are being employed as general hemostatic agents to control bleeding in the surgical field. Manufacturers have also developed surgical sealants and glues that are designed for specific procedures – particularly those in which staples and sutures are difficult to employ or where additional reinforcement of the internal suture/staple line provides an important safety advantage.

Surgical sealants are made of synthetic or naturally occurring materials and are commonly used with staples or sutures to help completely seal internal and external incisions after surgery. In this capacity, they are particularly important for lung, spinal, and gastrointestinal operations, where leaks of air, cerebrospinal fluid, or blood through the anastomosis can cause numerous complications. Limiting these leaks results in reduced mortality rates, less post-operative pain, shorter hospital stays for patients, and decreased health care costs.

Although some form of suturing wounds has been used for thousands of years, sutures and staples can be troublesome. There are procedures in which sutures are too large or clumsy to place effectively, and locations in which it is difficult for the surgeon to suture. Moreover, sutures can lead to complications, such as intimal hyperplasia, in which cells respond to the trauma of the needle and thread by proliferating on the inside wall of the blood vessel, causing it to narrow at that point. This increases the risk of a blood clot forming and obstructing blood flow. In addition, sutures and staples may trigger an immune response, leading to inflamed tissue that also increases the risk of a blockage. Finally, as mentioned above, sutured and stapled internal incisions may leak, leading to dangerous post-surgical complications.

These are some of the reasons why surgical adhesives are becoming increasingly popular, both for use in conjunction with suture and staples and on a stand-alone basis. As a logical derivative, surgeons want a sealant product that is strong, easy-to-use and affordable, while being biocompatible and resorbable. In reality, it is difficult for manufacturers to meet all of these requirements, particularly with biologically active sealants, which tend to be pricey. Thus, for physicians, there is usually a trade-off to consider when deciding whether or not to employ these products.

Surgical sealants, glues, and hemostats can be divided into several different categories based on their primary components and/or their intended use. For the purposes of this analysis, the market is broken down by composition into products containing biologically active agents, products made from natural and synthetic (nonactive) components, and nonactive scaffolds, patches, sponges, putties, powders, and matrices used as surgical hemostats. The market for sealants, glues, and hemostats, while largely controlled by J&J/Ethicon and Baxter, nonetheless has many active players, many of whom have demonstrated staying power (and growing share) in the global market.

Below is illustrated the manufacturers in bioactive products, non-active natural or synthetic agents, and non-active materials.
Hemostats

Source: MedMarket Diligence, LLC; Report #S192.