The clinical demand for options to treat spine trauma and disease remain high, well supported by reimbursement , and is therefore an active target of continued development by manufacturers in spine surgery technologies.
The clinical demand for options to treat spine trauma and disease remain high, well supported by reimbursement , and is therefore an active target of continued development by manufacturers in spine surgery technologies.
A number of advanced technologies are in development (with products also on the market) for spine surgery, but a considerable number of companies are active in the most well established area of spine surgery, and that is in spinal fusion. Arguably, given the downward trend in spine fusion, driven in that direction by dynamic stabilization, artificial discs and other approaches, it is in the best interest of manufacturers to pursue non-fusion alternatives, but as has been (and always wiil be) the case in the management of disease, the “any solution is better than no perfect solution” governs what products and technologies are accepted by third party payers, healthcare systems, clinicians and, ultimately, patients. For this reason, fusion technologies have a tenacious, though weakening hold on a significant volume of spine trauma and disease patients.
Below is illustrated both the number of spine fusion technologies in which companies are active. Separately is illustrated the number of companies active in each major spine fusion technology area.
Source: MedMarket Diligence, LLC; Spine Surgery Worldwide, Reports #M510 and #520.
