Wound Care Shares: Traditional/Advanced Products, Fragmented/Dominated

Traditional wound care products (gauze, non-adherents, and adhesive dressings) encompass low innovation, commodity-like pricing and ultimately different sets of competitors than advanced wound care products.

Below illustrates the global market shares of wound care sales in traditional versus advanced  products. JNJ and S&N have swapped positions in the traditional versus advanced wound markets.

Source: Report #S254; MedMarket Diligence.

 

Among wound care’s most fragmented markets in terms of competitive activity are hydrocolloids and foam dressings, with no one competitor dominating the market. While 3M and S&N control significant shares of the hydrocolloid and foam dressings market, their aggregate share is still well under 50%.

Global Wound Management Market Shares in
Hydrocolloids and Foam Dressings, 2017

Source: Report #S254; MedMarket Diligence.

By comparison, other markets have clearly dominant players, such as in negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) and growth factors used in wound care. In each, there is clearly one dominant player and the top two players control a large majority of each market.

Global Wound Management Market Shares in
NPWT and Growth Factors, 2017

Source: Report #S254; MedMarket Diligence.

 

 

Country and Regional Variability in Growth of Wound Management Sales

As illustrated in a previous post, wound management products are a spectrum from the simple to the complex:

Source: MedMarket Diligence Report #S254.

Generally, the longer the product has been around (e.g., gauze), the less complex it is compared to emerging technologies…

…BUT simpler is easy to adopt and, with well established sales, growth on a percentage basis will be low (see area in red).

Generally, new technologies incorporate rarer materials, have more complex construction, and may cost considerably more…

…BUT complex technologies may be far more effective clinically than older technologies and may allow treatment where no older technology could, and with low initial sales (penetrated potential), growth on a percentage bases will be high (see area in green).

Country and Regional Variation in Growth Rates

While this size-to-growth dynamic exists for most product types, the dynamic varies from one geographic region to the next. The time point at which a particular product/technology starts to be more rapidly adopted — or the rate at which use of  established products are use starts to decline — can vary considerably from country to country.

As a result, there will be variability in sales growth rates for a product in one country/region versus another.

For example, the 2017 to 2026 compound annual growth rate in sales of Alginates in wound management range from a low of 5.3% in one country to a high of 24.3% in another country. (If you make alginates, in which country would YOU like to compete?)

Regionally, as in USA versus Europe versus Asia/Pacific, etc., there is less variation in growth rates for any given product in that region. For alginates:

country-to-country variation in CAGR: 19%
region-to-region variation in CAGR: 7.8%

In other words, the difference between the countries with the highest and lowest CAGRs for alginate sales is 19%, while the difference between regions shows one region with a 7.8% higher CAGR for alginates than the lowest growth region.

Source: MedMarket Diligence, LLC; Report #S254.

Before chasing after that high growth rate, it is important to know the underlying volume. (Sales of $1 in year 1 and $2 in year 2 is a 100% growth rate, but it’s absolute growth of only $1.)


See the full REPORT, “Wound Management to 2026” details or order online. Please also see the forecast and market share data available separately from the report.

 

Highest growth in wound management sales to 2026 by product, region

Here we assess the specific products and geographic areas showing the highest growth in wound management product sales, drawn from our global report and its forecasts, “Wound Management, Forecast to 2026.”  Report S254.

We assess the 10-year sales size and growth for 13 different wound product segments worldwide, in major geographic regions and individual countries — USA, Rest of N. America, Latin America, Europe, United Kingdom, Spain, France, Germany, Italy, Rest of Europe, Asia/Pacific, Japan, Korea, China, Rest of Asia/Pacific, Rest of World.

Below we show the top 15 combinations of regional market and product segments in descending order of their compound annual growth rate from 2017 to 2026.

Source: MedMarket Diligence, LLC; Report #S254.

As becomes clear, the greatest relative growth in sales in the area of wound management is in several wound care product types — bioengineered skin & skin substitutes, growth factors — and the geographic regions of Japan, Rest of World, China, Germany, Asia-Pacific.  This reflects the high level of investment and attention in Asian markets, especially China.


The complete set of wound market forecast data, from 2016 to 2026, is available at 2018 Wound Management Report #S254, published March 2018.

 

USA slipping behind Asia/Pacific markets in wound care sales

We present data from our 2016 to 2026 forecast of the global market for wound management products (report #S254, published March 2018). 


At a glimpse, you can see the overall trend in global wound management, including the relative size of each market. (The four regional sales charts are shown on the same scale to illustrate this.)  Most notably, the USA dominance of this global market is fading, as aggregate Asia/Pacific sales of all wound products will eclipse USA sales within the forecast period.

 

 

 

 

 

 


Source: MedMarket Diligence, LLC; Report #S254.

Looking at just the aggregate of all wound product types, Asia/Pacific relative sales are squeezing out shares in every other region.Source: MedMarket Diligence, LLC; Report #S254.

When we then look specifically at the USA versus Asia/Pacific, it illustrates that by 2020, Asia/Pacific’s sales of wound management products will eclipse those of the U.S., making it the largest regional wound management market.

Source: MedMarket Diligence, LLC; Report #S254.

Changes in Fortunes for Wound Management Products

Over the 2017 to 2026 period, the compound annual growth rate for the entire wound management market will approach 6%, a respectable rate of growth for an established market, though not quite high enough to encourage investment in the market as a whole.

Of course, the total wound market is comprised of a number of VERY large, slow-growing segments, like traditional adhesive dressings, gauze dressings, and non-adherent dressings, which have annual sales at $3.8 billion, $3.2 billion, and $1.3 billion, respectively.

The large volume, slow growth of the aggregate masks growth in the following segments:

  • Bioengineered skin and skin substitutes
  • Alginates
  • Foam dressings
  • Growth factors

These wound care segments have had, and will continue to have, annual growth rates at or near double-digit through 2026.

The end result of variable growth rates is that the 2026 Wound Care Market (worldwide), by comparison to 2017, will show the following changes (up/down) in each segment’s share of the total market.

Source: MedMarket Diligence, LLC; Report #S254 (publishing Mar. 2018).

Bioengineered skin, alginates lead wound market growth

Big revenues, as in $ billions, are turned over every year in traditional wound dressings and gauze, while emerging technologies designed to have far more impact on wound management are driving the fastest percentage revenue growth. Data from “Wound Management to 2026” (report S254) shows the size-to-growth distribution of wound product revenue streams over the 2017 to 2026 period.

Source: MedMarket Diligence, LLC; Report #S254.

Six key trends in the market for surgical sealants

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.

 Source: Report #S290. “Worldwide Markets for Medical and Surgical Sealants, Glues, and Hemostats, 2015-2022.”

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”.

What’s next in sealants, glue, hemostats…and why?

From July 2016 published Report #S290.

Here are six key trends we see in the global market next in 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 rise and fall of medical technologies

When does one recognize that horse-and-buggy whips are in decline and auto-mobiles are on the rise?

When does one recognize that a new technology is a definite advance over established ones in the treatment of particular disease, in cost or quality?

Technologies go through life cycles.

A medical technology is introduced that is found effective in the management of a disease. Over time, the technology is improved upon marginally, but eventually a new technology, often radically different, emerges that is more effective or better (cheaper, less invasive, easier to use). It enters the market, takes market share and grows, only to be later eclipsed by a new (apologies) paradigm. Each new technology, marginal or otherwise, advances the limit of what is possible in care.

Predicting the marginal and the more radical innovation is necessary to illustrate where medicine is headed, and its impact. Many stakeholders have interest in this — insurance companies (reimbursing technologies or covering the liabilities), venture capitalists, healthcare providers, patients, and the medical technology companies themselves.

S-curves illustrate the rise in performance or demand over time for new technologies and show the timing and relative impact of newer technologies when they emerge. Importantly, the relative timing and impact of emerging technologies can be qualitatively and quantitatively predicted. Historic data is extremely useful predicting the rise and fall of specific medical technologies in specific disease treatment.

Following are two examples of diseases with multiple technologies arcing through patient demand over time.

  • Ischemic Heart Disease Past, Current, and Future Technologies
    • Open bypass
    • Percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty
    • Minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass (MIDCAB)
    • Percutaneous CABG
    • Stem-cell impregnated heart patches

The treatment of ischemic heart disease, given the seriousness of the disease and its prevalence, has a long history in medicine and within the past fifty years has a remarkable timeline of innovations. Ischemia is condition in which inadequate blood flow to an area due to constriction of blood vessels from inflammation or atherosclerosis can cause cell death. In the case of cardiac ischemia, in which the coronary arteries that supply the heart itself with blood are occluded, the overall cell death can result in myocardial infarction and death.

The effort to re-establish adequate blood flow to heart muscle has evolved from highly invasive surgery in which coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) requires cutting through the patient’s sternum and other tissues to access the heart, then graft arteries and/or veins to flow to the poorly supplied tissue, to (2) minimally invasive, endoscope procedures that do not require cutting the sternum to access the heart and perform the graft and significantly improve healing times and reduced complications, to as illustrated, multiple technologies rise and fall over time with their impacts and their timing considered.

Technology S-Curves in the Management of Ischemic Heart Disease

(Note: These curves are generally for illustrative purposes only; some likely dynamics may not be well represented in the above. Also note that, in practice, demand for old technologies doesn’t cease, but declines at a rate connected to the rise of competing technologies, so after peaking, the S-curves start a descent at various rates toward zero. Also, separately note that the “PTCA” labeled curve corresponds to percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty, encompassing the percutaneous category of approaches to ischemic heart disease. PTCA itself has evolved from balloon angioplasty alone to the adjunctive use of stents of multiple material types with or without drug elution and even bioabsorbable stents.)
Source: MedMarket Diligence, LLC

Resulting Technology Shifts

Falling: Open surgical instrumentation, bare metal stents.
Rising and leveling: thoracoscopic instrumentation, monitors
Rising later: stem-cells, extracellular matrices, atherosclerosis-reducing drugs
Rising even later: gene therapy

The minimally invasive technologies enabled by thoracoscopy (used in MIDCAB) and catheterization pulled just about all the demand out of open coronary artery bypass grafting, though the bare metal stents used initially alongside angioplasty have also been largely replaced by drug-eluting stents, which also may be replaced by drug-eluting balloon angioplasty. Stem cells and related technologies used to deliver them will later represent new growth in treatment of ischemia, at least to some degree at the expense of catheterization (PTCA and percutaneous CABG). Eventually, gene therapy may prove able to prevent the ischemia to develop in the first place.

  • Wound Management Past, Current, and Future Technologies
    • Gauze bandages/dressings
    • Hydrogel, alginate, and antimicrobial dressings
    • Negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT)
    • Bioengineered skin substitutes
    • Growth factors

Another great example of a disease or condition treated by multiple evolving technologies over time is wound management, which has evolved from simple gauze dressings to advanced dressings, to systems like negative pressure wound therapy, hyperbaric oxygen and others, to biological growth factors to bioengineered skin and skin substitutes.

Technology S-Curves in Wound Management

Source: MedMarket Diligence, LLC (Report S254)

Resulting Technology Shifts

Falling: Traditional gauze and other simple dressings
Falling: NPWT, hyperbaric oxygen
Rising: Advanced wound dressings, bioengineered skin, growth factors

Wound management has multiple technologies concurrently available, rather than sequential (when one largely replaces the other) over time. Unsurprisingly, traditional dressings are in decline. Equipment-related technologies like NPWT and hyperbaric oxygen are on the wane as well. While wound management is not a high growth area, advanced dressings are rising due to their ability to heal wounds faster, an important factor considering that chronic, slow-healing wounds are a significant contributor to high costs. Bioengineered skin is patient-specific, characterized by faster healing and, therefore, rising.

Wound Forecast to 2026
© 2017, MedMarket Diligence, LLC.

Market positions in sealants, glues, hemostats fluid in U.S., Europe, Asia/Pacific

Market shares for sales of sealants, glues, and hemostats vary considerably from region to region globally due to the significant variations in the local market demand, rate of adoption of specific manufacturers’ products, the regulatory climate, local economies, and other factors. Consequently, manufacturers with significant share of sales in the U.S. or Europe or Asia/Pacific may have considerably lower or higher shares in other regions.

In the U.S., Ethicon and Baxter have dominant positions in sales of surgical sealants. However, in Europe and Asia/Pacific, Baxter has substantially smaller position, particularly relative to competitors like Takeda Pharmaceuticals and The Medicines Company.

Source: Report #S290, MedMarket Diligence, LLC

In the market for hemostats, similarly, Ethicon and Baxter have dominant position in the U.S. market, but in Asia/Pacific and Europe, Baxter is subordinate to Takeda Pharmaceuticals, CryoLife, and others.

Source: Report #S290, MedMarket Diligence, LLC

In medical glues, CryoLife has risen to the fore with its BioGlue, such that it has a global leading position as well as specifically in the U.S., Europe, and Asia/Pacific.

Source: Report #S290, MedMarket Diligence, LLC