Evolution of Sutures and Other Physical Wound Closure, and Companies

Closing surgical, traumatic and other wounds has become the focus of multiple alternative technologies, from traditional staples to clips, staples, sealants, glues and other types. Technology development has evolved steadily to create new, novel wound closure types as well as to create new forms of established closure types.  While there is a distinct difference between physical wound closure (embodied by traditional sutures) and novel wound closure (embodied by chemically or biological active adhesives like sealants), manufacturers of physical wound closure types are aggressively developing and marketing product types that extend their performance and utility to make them increasingly competitive against alternative wound closure types:

  • Clips and staples, which simplify the closure process, especially for integration in laparoscopic and other endoscopic formats
  • Resorbable sutures, which seek to marry the best of both worlds between strong, physical wound closure (sutures) and closure with a minimal long-term “footprint” at the closure site (glues).
  • Other mechanical closure types that provide effective closure in challenging operative sites (e.g., anastomoses) or sites with demanding performance of wound closure (e.g., arterial puncture as in femoral artery in interventional cardiology).

The range of wound closure types that are in demand in clinical practice have driven manufacturers to compete on as many fronts as possible. Consequently, many manufacturers market multiple wound closure types and, conversely, there are multiple manufacturers offering any given type of wound closure. Below is illustrated, first, the number of companies active in each physical wound closure area and, second, the number of different wound closure types marketed by each company.


Source:  Report #S190; MedMarket Diligence, LLC


Source:  Report #S190; MedMarket Diligence, LLC

Leave a Reply