Market Research Logo

US Market Report for MIS Interbody Devices 2017 - MedCore

US Market Report for MIS Interbody Devices 2017 - MedCore

Interbody (IB) devices are designed to replace the intervertebral discs of the spine; this enhances stability in the region and promotes fusion between the two vertebral bodies. These devices are threaded, allowing them to be used in conjunction with bone graft material. Over time, the packed graft is gradually replaced by natural bone, forming a solid piece. IB fusion procedures typically add a posterior fixation device to the associated level. These procedures are often referred to as 360° fusions, as surgeons will implant interbody devices from an anterior approach and flip the patient over to implant a posterior pedicle screw device. This combination increases the fusion success rate over standalone interbody fusion device implantation without the addition of fixation devices.


EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
U.S. MINIMALLY INVASIVE SPINAL IMPLANT MARKET OVERVIEW
COMPETITIVE ANALYSIS
MARKET TRENDS
MARKET DEVELOPMENTS
PROCEDURE NUMBERS
PROCEDURE CODES INVESTIGATED
MARKETS INCLUDED
KEY REPORT UPDATES
VERSION HISTORY
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
1.1 RESEARCH SCOPE
1.2 IDATA’S 9-STEP METHODOLOGY
Step 1: Project Initiation & Team Selection
Step 2: Prepare Data Systems and Perform Secondary Research
Step 3: Preparation for Interviews & Questionnaire Design
Step 4: Performing Primary Research
Step 5: Research Analysis: Establishing Baseline Estimates
Step 6: Market Forecast and Analysis
Step 7: Identify Strategic Opportunities
Step 8: Final Review and Market Release
Step 9: Customer Feedback and Market Monitoring
DISEASE OVERVIEW
2.1 INTRODUCTION
2.1.1 Degenerative Disc Disease
2.1.1.1 Disc Herniation
2.1.1.2 Stenosis
2.1.1.3 Spondyloisthesis
2.1.1.4 Arthritis
2.1.2 Spinal Deformities
2.1.2.1 Scoliosis
2.1.2.2 Kyphosis and Lordosis
2.1.3 Trauma and Tumor
2.1.4 Vertebral Compression Fractures
2.1.4.1 Osteoporosis
2.1.4.2 Vertebral Compression Fractures
PRODUCT ASSESSMENT
3.1 PRODUCT PORTFOLIOS
3.1.1 Interbody Devices
3.1.1.1 Approaches
3.1.1.1.1 ALIF
3.1.1.1.2 PLIF
3.1.1.1.3 TLIF
3.1.1.1.4 Minimally Invasive PLIF
3.1.1.1.5 Minimally Invasive TLIF
3.1.1.1.6 LLIF
3.1.1.1.7 OLIF
3.1.1.1.8 Cervical
3.1.1.1.9 VBR/Corpectomy
3.1.1.2 Materials
3.1.1.2.1 Metal
3.1.1.2.2 PEEK
3.1.1.2.3 Machined Bone Allograft
3.1 FDA RECALLS
3.1.1 Alphatec Spine
3.1.2 DePuy Synthes
3.1.3 Medtronic
3.1.4 Orthofix
3.1.5 Stryker
3.1.6 Zimmer Biomet
3.2 CLINICAL TRIALS
3.2.1 DePuy Synthes
3.2.2 Globus Medical
3.2.3 K2M
3.2.4 Medtronic
3.2.5 Stryker
3.2.6 Zimmer Biomet
MIS INTERBODY DEVICE MARKET
4.1 INTRODUCTION
4.1.1 Approach Types
4.1.1.1 Minimally Invasive Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion
4.1.1.2 Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion
4.1.1.3 Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion
4.1.1.4 Direct Lateral Interbody Fusion
4.1.1.5 eXtreme Lateral Interbody Fusion
4.1.1.6 Guided Lateral Interbody Fusion
4.1.1.7 Oblique Lateral Interbody Fusion
4.2 MARKET OVERVIEW
4.3 MARKET ANALYSIS AND FORECAST
4.3.1 Total MIS Interbody Device Market
4.3.2 MIPLIF Market
4.3.3 MITLIF Market
4.3.4 LLIF Market
4.3.5 OLIF Market
4.4 DRIVERS AND LIMITERS
4.4.1 Market Drivers
4.4.2 Market Limiters
4.5 COMPETITIVE MARKET SHARE ANALYSIS
ABBREVIATIONS
APPENDIX: COMPANY PRESS RELEASES
List of Charts
Chart 1 1: Minimally Invasive Spinal Implants Market by Segment, U.S., 2013 – 2023
Chart 1 2: Minimally Invasive Spinal Implants Market Overview, U.S., 2013 & 2023
Chart 4 1: MIS Interbody Device Market by Segment, U.S., 2013 – 2023
Chart 4 2: MIS Interbody Device Market Breakdown, U.S., 2016
Chart 4 3: MIS Interbody Device Market Breakdown, U.S., 2023
Chart 4 4: Total MIS Interbody Device Market, U.S., 2013 – 2023
Chart 4 5: MIPLIF Market, U.S., 2013 – 2023
Chart 4 6: MITLIF Market, U.S., 2013 – 2023
Chart 4 7: LLIF Market, U.S., 2013 – 2023
Chart 4 8: OLIF Market, U.S., 2013 – 2023
Chart 4 9: Leading Competitors, Total Cervical Fixation Market, U.S., 2016
List of Figures
Figure 1 1: Minimally Invasive Spinal Implants Market Share Ranking by Segment, U.S., 2016 (1 of 2)
Figure 1 2: Minimally Invasive Spinal Implants Market Share Ranking by Segment, U.S., 2016 (2 of 2)
Figure 1 3: Companies Researched in this Report, U.S., 2016
Figure 1 4: Factors Impacting the Minimally Invasive Spinal Implants Market by Segment, U.S. (1 of 2)
Figure 1 5: Factors Impacting the Minimally Invasive Spinal Implants Market by Segment, U.S. (2 of 2)
Figure 1 6: Recent Events in the Minimally Invasive Spinal Implants Market, U.S., 2015 – 2017
Figure 1 7: Minimally Invasive Spinal Procedures Covered, U.S., 2016
Figure 1 8: Procedure Codes Investigated, U.S., 2016 (1 of 2)
Figure 1 9: Procedure Codes Investigated, U.S., 2016 (2 of 2)
Figure 1 10: Minimally Invasive Spinal Implant Markets Covered, U.S., 2016
Figure 1 11: Key Report Updates
Figure 1 12: Version History
Figure 3 1: Interbody Devices by Company (1 of 2)
Figure 3 2: Interbody Devices by Company (2 of 2)
Figure 3 3: Class 2 Device Recall Alphatec Spine
Figure 3 4: Class 2 Device Recall DePuy Synthes
Figure 3 5: Class 2 Device Recall DePuy Synthes
Figure 3 6: Class 2 Device Recall Medtronic
Figure 3 7: Class 2 Device Recall Medtronic
Figure 3 8: Class 2 Device Recall Medtronic
Figure 3 9: Class 2 Device Recall Medtronic
Figure 3 10: Class 2 Device Recall Orthofix
Figure 3 11: Class 2 Device Recall Orthofix
Figure 3 12: Class 2 Device Recall Orthofix
Figure 3 13: Class 2 Device Recall Orthofix
Figure 3 14: Class 2 Device Recall Stryker
Figure 3 15: Class 2 Device Recall Stryker
Figure 3 16: Class 2 Device Recall Zimmer Biomet
Figure 3 17: An ACDF Multi-Center Study Using ViviGen Cellular Bone Matrix
Figure 3 18: A Retrospective Study Using CALIBER® TLIF Expandable Spacer in the Treatment of DDD: 2 Year Follow-up.
Figure 3 19: Comparing Pedicle Screw Systems for the Treatment of Adolescent Paediatric Spine Deformity
Figure 3 20: A Prospective, 5-Year Global Study on MAST™
Figure 3 21: Spinal Cord Stimulation to Treat Post-operative Atrial Fibrillation (SCS-PAF)
Figure 3 22: OLIF25™ /OLIF51™ Study
Figure 3 23: AccuLIF® PROSPECTIVE PATIENT OUTCOMES STUDY (APROPOS)
Figure 3 24: Post-Market Surveillance Study of the TM Ardis Interbody Fusion System
Figure 4 1: MIS Interbody Device Market by Segment, U.S., 2013 – 2023 (US$M)
Figure 4 2: Total MIS Interbody Device Market, U.S., 2013 – 2023
Figure 4 3: MIPLIF Market, U.S., 2013 – 2023
Figure 4 4: MITLIF Market, U.S., 2013 – 2023
Figure 4 5: LLIF Market, U.S., 2013 – 2023
Figure 4 6: OLIF Market, U.S., 2013 – 2023
Figure 4 7: Drivers and Limiters, Dental Cement Market, U.S., 2016
Figure 4 8: Leading Competitors, MIS Interbody Device Market, U.S., 2016

Download our eBook: How to Succeed Using Market Research

Learn how to effectively navigate the market research process to help guide your organization on the journey to success.

Download eBook

Share this report