Bariatric Surgery Devices Market by Procedure Type (Biliopancreatic Diversion, Endoscopic Procedures, Gastric Banding), Approach (Laparoscopic, Open, Robotic), Instrument Type, Distribution Channel, End User - Global Forecast 2025-2032
Description
The Bariatric Surgery Devices Market was valued at USD 2.13 billion in 2024 and is projected to grow to USD 2.28 billion in 2025, with a CAGR of 7.84%, reaching USD 3.90 billion by 2032.
A concise yet powerful orientation to how device innovation and clinical priorities are redefining bariatric care delivery and procurement strategies
Bariatric surgery devices have evolved from niche surgical aids into pivotal enablers of multidisciplinary obesity care, transforming operative practice and post-procedural management. Contemporary device portfolios now intersect surgical technique, perioperative efficiency, and patient-centered outcomes, prompting hospitals, ambulatory centers, and clinics to reassess procurement and training priorities. As a result, stakeholders across clinical, commercial, and regulatory domains must align on product differentiation, workflow integration, and evidence generation to capture value and improve patient pathways.
Clinical teams increasingly demand devices that reduce procedure times, minimize complications, and support minimally invasive approaches. At the same time, suppliers face intensified scrutiny around device interoperability, durability, and cost of ownership. Consequently, the landscape favors technologies that demonstrably improve procedural consistency and outcomes while simplifying supply chain logistics and clinician training. Finally, the convergence of endoscopic options, advanced energy platforms, and robotic assistance is accelerating a redefinition of procedural choice, with implications for reimbursement strategies and institutional capital planning.
How advancements in minimally invasive techniques, robotics, and evidence expectations are rapidly shifting clinical preferences and supplier strategies
The past five years have seen several transformative shifts reshaping the bariatric device landscape and altering how providers select tools and techniques. First, the steady refinement of minimally invasive approaches has expanded candidate populations and shortened recovery pathways, which in turn amplifies demand for devices that support laparoscopic and endoscopic proficiency. Furthermore, the integration of robotics has introduced a hybridized workflow where precision and ergonomics become competitive differentiators for device manufacturers.
In parallel, instrument innovation has trended toward multifunctionality and modularity, enabling hospitals and ambulatory centers to standardize device platforms across procedures while controlling inventory complexity. Additionally, heightened focus on real-world evidence and post-market surveillance has raised the bar for clinical validation, encouraging collaborative studies between clinicians and manufacturers. Lastly, payer and institutional pressures to demonstrate cost-effectiveness are nudging suppliers to articulate total cost of care benefits, not just device features, creating a new dynamic where clinical value narratives and health-economic evidence are essential to commercial success.
Assessing how revised import duties and tariff dynamics can alter manufacturing decisions, procurement choices, and supply chain resilience in the U.S.
The introduction or adjustment of tariffs affecting medical devices can ripple across procurement channels, capital planning, and product lifecycles in the United States. When import duties rise, manufacturers that rely on cross-border supply chains often reassess manufacturing footprints, sourcing strategies, and pricing to protect margins while maintaining clinical availability. Conversely, providers and distributors may prioritize domestically produced devices or negotiate longer-term supply contracts to hedge against price volatility.
In practice, tariff-driven cost pressures frequently accelerate strategic responses such as nearshoring, reengineering of components, and supplier consolidation. These changes influence lead times and service-level agreements, and they can prompt hospitals and ambulatory surgical centers to revisit device standardization decisions to avoid exposure to single-source imported products. Importantly, payers and procurement teams become more attentive to total cost implications, including lifecycle maintenance and consumable usage, which can shift demand toward devices with predictable operating costs and durable warranties. Finally, manufacturers and supply chain stakeholders tend to model multiple tariff scenarios to preserve market access and to ensure continuous clinician training and post-market support regardless of trade policy fluctuations.
Strategically interpreting procedural types, clinical approaches, instrument categories, and distribution pathways to reveal high-impact opportunities
A nuanced segmentation-based approach clarifies where clinical preference and procurement pressure intersect across the procedural and device continuum. Based on Procedure Type, the landscape includes Biliopancreatic Diversion, Endoscopic Procedures, Gastric Banding, Roux-En-Y Gastric Bypass, and Sleeve Gastrectomy, each presenting distinct instrument demands and post-operative management patterns that influence device design priorities. Based on Approach, providers balance options between Laparoscopic, Open, and Robotic techniques, with laparoscopic methods still central to volume while robotic systems gain traction in complex anatomies and training programs. Based on Instrument Type, surgical portfolios encompass Balloon Systems, Dissection Devices, Energy Devices, Stapling Devices, and Suturing Devices; the Dissection Devices category breaks down into Graspers and Scissors, Energy Devices separate into Bipolar Devices and Ultrasonic Devices, Stapling Devices differentiate into Articulating Reload and Standard Reload, and Suturing Devices divide into Barbed Suture and Manual Suture, which collectively shape procurement bundles and consumable strategies. Based on End User, adoption patterns vary across Ambulatory Surgical Centers, Clinics, and Hospitals, with each setting prioritizing different combinations of capital intensity, throughput, and staff specialization. Finally, based on Distribution Channel, direct sales and third party distributor models each influence pricing transparency, training provision, and aftermarket servicing arrangements. Together, these segmentation lenses reveal where competitive advantage can be built through targeted product development, tailored training programs, and alignment of commercial models to clinical workflows.
Comparing adoption drivers, procurement behaviors, and clinical partnership models across the Americas, EMEA, and Asia-Pacific to inform regional strategies
Regional dynamics are driving differentiated adoption curves, reimbursement patterns, and partnership models across major geographies. In the Americas, institutional networks and ambulatory centers often prioritize high-throughput laparoscopic solutions and integrated service agreements that reduce per-procedure complexity, while pockets of advanced robotic adoption are concentrated in tertiary centers and systems that prioritize complex case portfolios. Conversely, Europe, Middle East & Africa exhibits heterogeneity where regulatory frameworks, national reimbursement schemes, and varying hospital capital capabilities lead to mixed uptake between established stapling and suturing platforms and newer endoscopic approaches. In many EMEA markets, strategic partnerships with regional distributors and focused clinician training programs are critical to adoption.
Moving to the Asia-Pacific region, rapid urbanization, rising surgical capacity, and growing clinician expertise are fueling demand for both minimally invasive and robotic-enabled solutions. However, procurement preferences in several APAC countries favor cost-effective consumables and modular instruments that can be adapted across procedures. Across all regions, cross-border collaboration on clinical registries and shared training initiatives is emerging as a way to accelerate evidence generation and reduce adoption friction, while regional supply chain resilience continues to influence device selection and inventory strategies.
Examining how firms combine product breadth, service models, and clinical evidence programs to establish durable commercial advantage
Competitive dynamics in the bariatric device arena are shaped by firms that combine product breadth with clinical support and service excellence. Established instrument manufacturers that provide comprehensive stapling, suturing, and energy platforms typically emphasize hospital partnerships, long-term service contracts, and evidence-based clinician training. At the same time, emerging companies focused on balloon systems, endoscopic platforms, and specialized dissection tools differentiate through modular designs, lower consumable complexity, and rapid iterative innovation cycles.
Partnership strategies often determine market penetration speed; manufacturers that invest in on-site training, proctoring programs, and real-world data collection tend to foster greater surgeon preference and hospital loyalty. Furthermore, companies that align their commercial models to the needs of ambulatory surgical centers by offering capital-light options, rental programs, or bundled consumable pricing are expanding their addressable customer set. Finally, an emphasis on interoperability-both in device integration and in data capture for outcomes measurement-positions firms to participate in multi-stakeholder care pathways and long-term value agreements with providers and payers.
Actionable strategies for device makers and providers to synchronize R&D, clinical validation, and commercial models for accelerated adoption
Industry leaders should pursue a coordinated strategy that aligns product development, clinical validation, and commercial execution to capture growth opportunities. First, prioritize modular designs that support both laparoscopic and robotic workflows, reducing inventory complexity for hospitals and ambulatory centers while accelerating clinician adoption across technique types. Second, invest in robust clinical evidence programs and post-market registries that articulate procedural safety and real-world performance, thereby strengthening reimbursement positioning and hospital purchasing committees’ confidence. Third, develop flexible commercial models-such as consumable bundles, subscription pricing, or capital-light leasing-that specifically address the operating constraints of ambulatory surgical centers and smaller clinics.
In addition, supply chain resilience must be embedded into sourcing and manufacturing decisions; nearshoring or dual-sourcing of critical components can mitigate tariff exposure and shorten lead times. Companies should also expand clinician training and proctoring offerings to ensure consistent outcomes and to support successful integration of new devices. Finally, engage early with payers and health systems to jointly define value metrics, which will facilitate adoption and support negotiations around episode-of-care arrangements and device-inclusive agreements.
A transparent mixed-methods research approach combining clinician interviews, procurement case studies, and regulatory and technical document review to validate insights
The research underpinning this analysis applied a mixed-methods approach combining primary interviews with clinical leaders, procurement executives, and device manufacturers, alongside secondary review of clinical literature, regulatory filings, and public policy documents. Primary engagement prioritized diverse end-user perspectives across hospitals, ambulatory surgical centers, and clinics to capture differences in procurement criteria, procedural volume profiles, and training capabilities. Interviews were structured to probe device selection drivers, consumable economics, and post-operative outcome priorities, and responses were synthesized to identify recurring patterns and divergent practices.
Secondary research encompassed peer-reviewed clinical studies, device labeling and instructions for use, regulatory guidance, and trade policy analyses to frame technological trends and supply chain considerations. Qualitative data were triangulated with procurement case studies and manufacturer product specifications to validate assertions regarding device interoperability, maintenance models, and training requirements. Throughout the methodology, emphasis was placed on transparency, reproducibility, and the use of multiple independent sources to corroborate findings and reduce bias, while ensuring that conclusions reflect practical considerations faced by clinicians, supply chain leaders, and commercial teams.
Concluding synthesis on how aligned innovation, evidence generation, and commercial flexibility will determine long-term success in bariatric devices
The convergence of clinical innovation, procurement pressures, and supply chain dynamics is creating a pivotal moment for bariatric device stakeholders. Devices that succeed will be those that deliver measurable procedural benefits while fitting seamlessly into institutional workflows, offering predictable costs and robust clinician support. Equally important, adaptability to regional reimbursement realities and responsiveness to tariff or trade-policy shifts will determine commercial resilience.
Looking ahead, manufacturers that couple modular, interoperable device platforms with strong clinical evidence and flexible commercial models will be best positioned to capture demand across hospitals, ambulatory surgical centers, and clinics. Providers, meanwhile, will increasingly evaluate devices not only on upfront cost but on total procedural impact, including training burden, consumable consumption, and outcome consistency. In this environment, strategic alignment among manufacturers, clinicians, and purchasing teams will be essential to translate device innovation into improved patient outcomes and sustainable organizational performance.
Please Note: PDF & Excel + Online Access - 1 Year
A concise yet powerful orientation to how device innovation and clinical priorities are redefining bariatric care delivery and procurement strategies
Bariatric surgery devices have evolved from niche surgical aids into pivotal enablers of multidisciplinary obesity care, transforming operative practice and post-procedural management. Contemporary device portfolios now intersect surgical technique, perioperative efficiency, and patient-centered outcomes, prompting hospitals, ambulatory centers, and clinics to reassess procurement and training priorities. As a result, stakeholders across clinical, commercial, and regulatory domains must align on product differentiation, workflow integration, and evidence generation to capture value and improve patient pathways.
Clinical teams increasingly demand devices that reduce procedure times, minimize complications, and support minimally invasive approaches. At the same time, suppliers face intensified scrutiny around device interoperability, durability, and cost of ownership. Consequently, the landscape favors technologies that demonstrably improve procedural consistency and outcomes while simplifying supply chain logistics and clinician training. Finally, the convergence of endoscopic options, advanced energy platforms, and robotic assistance is accelerating a redefinition of procedural choice, with implications for reimbursement strategies and institutional capital planning.
How advancements in minimally invasive techniques, robotics, and evidence expectations are rapidly shifting clinical preferences and supplier strategies
The past five years have seen several transformative shifts reshaping the bariatric device landscape and altering how providers select tools and techniques. First, the steady refinement of minimally invasive approaches has expanded candidate populations and shortened recovery pathways, which in turn amplifies demand for devices that support laparoscopic and endoscopic proficiency. Furthermore, the integration of robotics has introduced a hybridized workflow where precision and ergonomics become competitive differentiators for device manufacturers.
In parallel, instrument innovation has trended toward multifunctionality and modularity, enabling hospitals and ambulatory centers to standardize device platforms across procedures while controlling inventory complexity. Additionally, heightened focus on real-world evidence and post-market surveillance has raised the bar for clinical validation, encouraging collaborative studies between clinicians and manufacturers. Lastly, payer and institutional pressures to demonstrate cost-effectiveness are nudging suppliers to articulate total cost of care benefits, not just device features, creating a new dynamic where clinical value narratives and health-economic evidence are essential to commercial success.
Assessing how revised import duties and tariff dynamics can alter manufacturing decisions, procurement choices, and supply chain resilience in the U.S.
The introduction or adjustment of tariffs affecting medical devices can ripple across procurement channels, capital planning, and product lifecycles in the United States. When import duties rise, manufacturers that rely on cross-border supply chains often reassess manufacturing footprints, sourcing strategies, and pricing to protect margins while maintaining clinical availability. Conversely, providers and distributors may prioritize domestically produced devices or negotiate longer-term supply contracts to hedge against price volatility.
In practice, tariff-driven cost pressures frequently accelerate strategic responses such as nearshoring, reengineering of components, and supplier consolidation. These changes influence lead times and service-level agreements, and they can prompt hospitals and ambulatory surgical centers to revisit device standardization decisions to avoid exposure to single-source imported products. Importantly, payers and procurement teams become more attentive to total cost implications, including lifecycle maintenance and consumable usage, which can shift demand toward devices with predictable operating costs and durable warranties. Finally, manufacturers and supply chain stakeholders tend to model multiple tariff scenarios to preserve market access and to ensure continuous clinician training and post-market support regardless of trade policy fluctuations.
Strategically interpreting procedural types, clinical approaches, instrument categories, and distribution pathways to reveal high-impact opportunities
A nuanced segmentation-based approach clarifies where clinical preference and procurement pressure intersect across the procedural and device continuum. Based on Procedure Type, the landscape includes Biliopancreatic Diversion, Endoscopic Procedures, Gastric Banding, Roux-En-Y Gastric Bypass, and Sleeve Gastrectomy, each presenting distinct instrument demands and post-operative management patterns that influence device design priorities. Based on Approach, providers balance options between Laparoscopic, Open, and Robotic techniques, with laparoscopic methods still central to volume while robotic systems gain traction in complex anatomies and training programs. Based on Instrument Type, surgical portfolios encompass Balloon Systems, Dissection Devices, Energy Devices, Stapling Devices, and Suturing Devices; the Dissection Devices category breaks down into Graspers and Scissors, Energy Devices separate into Bipolar Devices and Ultrasonic Devices, Stapling Devices differentiate into Articulating Reload and Standard Reload, and Suturing Devices divide into Barbed Suture and Manual Suture, which collectively shape procurement bundles and consumable strategies. Based on End User, adoption patterns vary across Ambulatory Surgical Centers, Clinics, and Hospitals, with each setting prioritizing different combinations of capital intensity, throughput, and staff specialization. Finally, based on Distribution Channel, direct sales and third party distributor models each influence pricing transparency, training provision, and aftermarket servicing arrangements. Together, these segmentation lenses reveal where competitive advantage can be built through targeted product development, tailored training programs, and alignment of commercial models to clinical workflows.
Comparing adoption drivers, procurement behaviors, and clinical partnership models across the Americas, EMEA, and Asia-Pacific to inform regional strategies
Regional dynamics are driving differentiated adoption curves, reimbursement patterns, and partnership models across major geographies. In the Americas, institutional networks and ambulatory centers often prioritize high-throughput laparoscopic solutions and integrated service agreements that reduce per-procedure complexity, while pockets of advanced robotic adoption are concentrated in tertiary centers and systems that prioritize complex case portfolios. Conversely, Europe, Middle East & Africa exhibits heterogeneity where regulatory frameworks, national reimbursement schemes, and varying hospital capital capabilities lead to mixed uptake between established stapling and suturing platforms and newer endoscopic approaches. In many EMEA markets, strategic partnerships with regional distributors and focused clinician training programs are critical to adoption.
Moving to the Asia-Pacific region, rapid urbanization, rising surgical capacity, and growing clinician expertise are fueling demand for both minimally invasive and robotic-enabled solutions. However, procurement preferences in several APAC countries favor cost-effective consumables and modular instruments that can be adapted across procedures. Across all regions, cross-border collaboration on clinical registries and shared training initiatives is emerging as a way to accelerate evidence generation and reduce adoption friction, while regional supply chain resilience continues to influence device selection and inventory strategies.
Examining how firms combine product breadth, service models, and clinical evidence programs to establish durable commercial advantage
Competitive dynamics in the bariatric device arena are shaped by firms that combine product breadth with clinical support and service excellence. Established instrument manufacturers that provide comprehensive stapling, suturing, and energy platforms typically emphasize hospital partnerships, long-term service contracts, and evidence-based clinician training. At the same time, emerging companies focused on balloon systems, endoscopic platforms, and specialized dissection tools differentiate through modular designs, lower consumable complexity, and rapid iterative innovation cycles.
Partnership strategies often determine market penetration speed; manufacturers that invest in on-site training, proctoring programs, and real-world data collection tend to foster greater surgeon preference and hospital loyalty. Furthermore, companies that align their commercial models to the needs of ambulatory surgical centers by offering capital-light options, rental programs, or bundled consumable pricing are expanding their addressable customer set. Finally, an emphasis on interoperability-both in device integration and in data capture for outcomes measurement-positions firms to participate in multi-stakeholder care pathways and long-term value agreements with providers and payers.
Actionable strategies for device makers and providers to synchronize R&D, clinical validation, and commercial models for accelerated adoption
Industry leaders should pursue a coordinated strategy that aligns product development, clinical validation, and commercial execution to capture growth opportunities. First, prioritize modular designs that support both laparoscopic and robotic workflows, reducing inventory complexity for hospitals and ambulatory centers while accelerating clinician adoption across technique types. Second, invest in robust clinical evidence programs and post-market registries that articulate procedural safety and real-world performance, thereby strengthening reimbursement positioning and hospital purchasing committees’ confidence. Third, develop flexible commercial models-such as consumable bundles, subscription pricing, or capital-light leasing-that specifically address the operating constraints of ambulatory surgical centers and smaller clinics.
In addition, supply chain resilience must be embedded into sourcing and manufacturing decisions; nearshoring or dual-sourcing of critical components can mitigate tariff exposure and shorten lead times. Companies should also expand clinician training and proctoring offerings to ensure consistent outcomes and to support successful integration of new devices. Finally, engage early with payers and health systems to jointly define value metrics, which will facilitate adoption and support negotiations around episode-of-care arrangements and device-inclusive agreements.
A transparent mixed-methods research approach combining clinician interviews, procurement case studies, and regulatory and technical document review to validate insights
The research underpinning this analysis applied a mixed-methods approach combining primary interviews with clinical leaders, procurement executives, and device manufacturers, alongside secondary review of clinical literature, regulatory filings, and public policy documents. Primary engagement prioritized diverse end-user perspectives across hospitals, ambulatory surgical centers, and clinics to capture differences in procurement criteria, procedural volume profiles, and training capabilities. Interviews were structured to probe device selection drivers, consumable economics, and post-operative outcome priorities, and responses were synthesized to identify recurring patterns and divergent practices.
Secondary research encompassed peer-reviewed clinical studies, device labeling and instructions for use, regulatory guidance, and trade policy analyses to frame technological trends and supply chain considerations. Qualitative data were triangulated with procurement case studies and manufacturer product specifications to validate assertions regarding device interoperability, maintenance models, and training requirements. Throughout the methodology, emphasis was placed on transparency, reproducibility, and the use of multiple independent sources to corroborate findings and reduce bias, while ensuring that conclusions reflect practical considerations faced by clinicians, supply chain leaders, and commercial teams.
Concluding synthesis on how aligned innovation, evidence generation, and commercial flexibility will determine long-term success in bariatric devices
The convergence of clinical innovation, procurement pressures, and supply chain dynamics is creating a pivotal moment for bariatric device stakeholders. Devices that succeed will be those that deliver measurable procedural benefits while fitting seamlessly into institutional workflows, offering predictable costs and robust clinician support. Equally important, adaptability to regional reimbursement realities and responsiveness to tariff or trade-policy shifts will determine commercial resilience.
Looking ahead, manufacturers that couple modular, interoperable device platforms with strong clinical evidence and flexible commercial models will be best positioned to capture demand across hospitals, ambulatory surgical centers, and clinics. Providers, meanwhile, will increasingly evaluate devices not only on upfront cost but on total procedural impact, including training burden, consumable consumption, and outcome consistency. In this environment, strategic alignment among manufacturers, clinicians, and purchasing teams will be essential to translate device innovation into improved patient outcomes and sustainable organizational performance.
Please Note: PDF & Excel + Online Access - 1 Year
Table of Contents
180 Pages
- 1. Preface
- 1.1. Objectives of the Study
- 1.2. Market Segmentation & Coverage
- 1.3. Years Considered for the Study
- 1.4. Currency
- 1.5. Language
- 1.6. Stakeholders
- 2. Research Methodology
- 3. Executive Summary
- 4. Market Overview
- 5. Market Insights
- 5.1. Integration of advanced endoluminal imaging technology for real-time intraoperative gastric sleeve assessments
- 5.2. Development of robotic-assisted bariatric surgery systems optimizing precision and reducing recovery time
- 5.3. Rising adoption of disposable single-use stapling devices designed to minimize postoperative infection risk
- 5.4. Emergence of adjustable gastric banding devices with telemetric remote adjustment and patient monitoring features
- 5.5. Expansion of minimally invasive gastric balloon therapy with longer durability and hormone modulation effects
- 5.6. Advancements in endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty devices enabling outpatient procedures with reduced hospital stays
- 5.7. Introduction of smart sensor-enabled gastric band devices providing real-time patient data for personalized therapy adjustments
- 5.8. Integration of augmented reality guidance in laparoscopic bariatric surgery for enhanced surgeon navigation and safety
- 6. Cumulative Impact of United States Tariffs 2025
- 7. Cumulative Impact of Artificial Intelligence 2025
- 8. Bariatric Surgery Devices Market, by Procedure Type
- 8.1. Biliopancreatic Diversion
- 8.2. Endoscopic Procedures
- 8.3. Gastric Banding
- 8.4. Roux-En-Y Gastric Bypass
- 8.5. Sleeve Gastrectomy
- 9. Bariatric Surgery Devices Market, by Approach
- 9.1. Laparoscopic
- 9.2. Open
- 9.3. Robotic
- 10. Bariatric Surgery Devices Market, by Instrument Type
- 10.1. Balloon Systems
- 10.2. Dissection Devices
- 10.2.1. Graspers
- 10.2.2. Scissors
- 10.3. Energy Devices
- 10.3.1. Bipolar Devices
- 10.3.2. Ultrasonic Devices
- 10.4. Stapling Devices
- 10.4.1. Articulating Reload
- 10.4.2. Standard Reload
- 10.5. Suturing Devices
- 10.5.1. Barbed Suture
- 10.5.2. Manual Suture
- 11. Bariatric Surgery Devices Market, by Distribution Channel
- 11.1. Direct Sales
- 11.2. Third Party Distributor
- 12. Bariatric Surgery Devices Market, by End User
- 12.1. Ambulatory Surgical Centers
- 12.2. Clinics
- 12.3. Hospitals
- 13. Bariatric Surgery Devices Market, by Region
- 13.1. Americas
- 13.1.1. North America
- 13.1.2. Latin America
- 13.2. Europe, Middle East & Africa
- 13.2.1. Europe
- 13.2.2. Middle East
- 13.2.3. Africa
- 13.3. Asia-Pacific
- 14. Bariatric Surgery Devices Market, by Group
- 14.1. ASEAN
- 14.2. GCC
- 14.3. European Union
- 14.4. BRICS
- 14.5. G7
- 14.6. NATO
- 15. Bariatric Surgery Devices Market, by Country
- 15.1. United States
- 15.2. Canada
- 15.3. Mexico
- 15.4. Brazil
- 15.5. United Kingdom
- 15.6. Germany
- 15.7. France
- 15.8. Russia
- 15.9. Italy
- 15.10. Spain
- 15.11. China
- 15.12. India
- 15.13. Japan
- 15.14. Australia
- 15.15. South Korea
- 16. Competitive Landscape
- 16.1. Market Share Analysis, 2024
- 16.2. FPNV Positioning Matrix, 2024
- 16.3. Competitive Analysis
- 16.3.1. Allurion Technologies, Inc.
- 16.3.2. Asensus Surgical, Inc.
- 16.3.3. Aspire Bariatrics, Inc.
- 16.3.4. B. Braun Melsungen AG
- 16.3.5. Boston Scientific Corporation
- 16.3.6. Conmed Corporation
- 16.3.7. Cousin Biotech S.A.S.
- 16.3.8. GI Dynamics, Inc.
- 16.3.9. Gimmi GmbH
- 16.3.10. Intuitive Surgical, Inc.
- 16.3.11. Johnson & Johnson
- 16.3.12. Karl Storz SE & Co. KG
- 16.3.13. Mediflex Surgical Products, Inc.
- 16.3.14. Medtronic PLC
- 16.3.15. Olympus Corporation
- 16.3.16. ReShape Lifesciences, Inc.
- 16.3.17. Richard Wolf GmbH
- 16.3.18. Spatz FGIA Inc.
- 16.3.19. Stryker Corporation
- 16.3.20. Teleflex Incorporated
Pricing
Currency Rates
Questions or Comments?
Our team has the ability to search within reports to verify it suits your needs. We can also help maximize your budget by finding sections of reports you can purchase.
