株式会社グローバルインフォメーション
TEL: 044-952-0102
表紙
市場調査レポート

米国の低侵襲脊椎インプラント市場

US Minimally Invasive Spinal Implant Market - 2011-2021

発行 iData Research Inc. 商品コード 322307
出版日 ページ情報 英文 171 Pages
納期: 即日から翌営業日
価格
こちらの商品の販売は終了いたしました。
Back to Top
米国の低侵襲脊椎インプラント市場 US Minimally Invasive Spinal Implant Market - 2011-2021
出版日: 2014年12月01日 ページ情報: 英文 171 Pages

当商品の販売は、2016年06月17日を持ちまして終了しました。

概要

米国の低侵襲(MIS)脊椎インプラント市場は、2021年までに28億6,000万米ドルに達すると予測されています。

当レポートでは、米国の低侵襲(MIS)脊椎インプラント市場について調査分析し、市場の概要、セグメント別の市場分析と予測、促進要因・阻害要因 、競合分析などを含めて、体系的な情報を提供しています。

第1章 エグゼクティブサマリー

第2章 調査手法

第3章 米国の低侵襲脊椎インプラント市場の概要

  • イントロダクション
  • 市場概要
  • 市場:セグメント別
  • 動向分析:セグメント別
  • 促進要因・阻害要因
  • 競合分析
  • 合併・買収

第4章 ヒトの脊椎

  • 基本的解剖
  • 脊椎の病理学と疾患
    • 変性円板疾患
    • 脊椎変性
    • 外傷・腫瘍
    • 脊椎圧迫骨折
  • 脊椎疾患の治療
    • 減圧
    • 椎間板切除
    • 脊椎固定
    • 椎体切除
    • 脊椎関節形成

第5章 低侵襲脊椎処置数

  • イントロダクション
  • 棘突起固定処置数
  • 椎間関節固定処置数
  • 低侵襲体間固定処置数
  • 椎弓根スクリュー処置数
  • 低侵襲仙腸関節固定処置数

第6章 棘突起固定市場

  • イントロダクション
  • 処置数
  • 市場分析と予測
  • 促進要因・阻害要因
  • 競合分析

第7章 椎間関節固定市場

  • イントロダクション
  • 処置数
  • 市場分析と予測
  • 促進要因・阻害要因
  • 競合分析

第8章 低侵襲体間固定市場

  • イントロダクション
  • 処置数
  • 市場分析と予測
  • 促進要因・阻害要因
  • 競合分析

第9章 低侵襲椎弓根スクリュー市場

  • イントロダクション
  • 処置数
  • 市場概要
  • 市場分析と予測
  • 促進要因・阻害要因
  • 競合分析

第10章 低侵襲仙腸関節固定市場

  • イントロダクション
  • 処置数
  • 市場概要
  • 市場分析と予測
  • 促進要因・阻害要因
  • 競合分析

略語集

図表

目次
Product Code: iDATA_USMIS15_RPT

The U.S. MIS spinal implant market is expected to approach $2.86 billion by 2021.

The U.S. market for minimally invasive surgery (MIS) spinal implants includes spinous process fixation, facet fixation, MIS interbody fusion, MIS pedicle screws and MIS sacroiliac joint fusion. Growth is expected in all segments at variable rates as a result of the physiological and surgical advantages of MIS procedures. In 2014, MIS interbody fusion represented the largest segment, followed by MIS pedicle screws and facet fixation.

The emerging MIS sacroiliac joint fusion market will be the fastest growing segment as changes to reimbursement policies among healthcare insurers will drastically change the market landscape. Regardless, MIS interbody fusion is expected to maintain its position as the largest segment of the MIS spinal implant market over the forecast period.

image1

Spinous Process Fixation Market

The spinous process fixation market will continue to see strong procedural growth, though declining average selling prices will slow overall market growth.

By 2015, the U.S. minimally invasive spinous process fixation market will reach $171.3 million, a 7.5% increase over 2014. This market maintained growth over the previous year; though, as predicted, the ASP was negatively affected by the global prevalence of medical cutbacks. However, due to the recent introduction of spinous process fixation devices, this market has been able to evade the effects the economy has had on the spinal implant market at a macro level. The market is projected to continue growing at a strong rate over the forecast period.

As of 2014, many insurance companies still labelled spinous process fixation as an investigational procedure. Their policies specifically state that there is a lack of evidence on the efficacy of interspinous fixation devices, both for use in combination with interbody fusion and for use as a stand-alone procedure. Approximately half of the U.S. population will not be reimbursed if they elect to have the procedure. Many insurance companies have stopped reimbursement for spinous process fixation procedures, which in turn has caused manufacturers to invest in clinical studies with the goal of eventual insurance approval. Until then, market growth will be greatly impacted; the double-digit growth experienced in recent years will quickly dwindle to single-digit growth until the insurance decision is reversed.

image2

Facet Fixation Market

The facet fixation market will continue to be driven by product innovation and new product entrants as minimally invasive techniques continue to gain popularity among spinal surgeons across the United States.

As another emerging technology in the minimally invasive surgery field, the facet fixation market will experience growth trends similar to the spinous process fixation market. The market has experienced high initial growth over the last five years, which has been attributed to increased awareness of the procedure, as well the entrance of new competitors, and new products, into the market.

Growth in this market is driven by the advantages that minimally invasive facet fixation surgeries have over traditional (open) pedicle screw procedures. These benefits include decreased blood loss, fewer disruptions to neighboring tissues and structures, and reduced recovery and intraoperative times, all of which are of great importance to patients and surgeons alike.

Growth in this market will decelerate over the forecast period though the facet fixation market will continue to penetrate the total thoracolumbar fixation market. The facet fixation market will also be impacted by other MIS devices, such as MIS spinous process fixation and pedicle screws. The rise of motion preservation devices such as artificial discs and dynamic stabilization devices is also expected to limit growth in this market over the forecast period.

image3

MIS Interbody Fusion Market

Poor reimbursement rates coupled with high initial average selling prices will deter originally forecasted growth from occurring in the MIS interbody fusion market. As such, the market will only grow at a CAGR of 1.4%.

The ASP of an MIS interbody fusion procedure was $11,021 in 2014, a decrease of 3.3% from the previous year. This ASP includes the cost of the interbody device, fixation, biologics and consumables. The overall ASP is greater than that of single-level procedures alone, because the average number of levels treated per procedure is greater than one.

Compared to traditional posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) procedures, minimally invasive posterior lumbar interbody fusion (MIPLIF) procedures experience a significantly lower average number of levels treated per procedure. In complex multi-level cases, most surgeons will opt to perform a traditional PLIF procedure via an open surgery approach over an MIS approach. This option provides the surgeon with better visualization of the vertebrae and decreases the likelihood of requiring a revision procedure to be performed. Lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) procedures have the highest ASP among the three MIS interbody fusion segments due to higher interbody device costs and a higher average number of levels per procedure. However, the LLIF segment will also be under the most pricing pressure of the three. Pricing pressures will be largely driven by hospitals and insurance providers; insurance payers do not discern a difference between MIS and traditional fusion when determining coverage, and often do not provide additional reimbursement for these more complex procedures.

image4

MIS Pedicle Screw Market

The percutaneous cannulated pedicle screw market will be the driving force behind the MIS pedicle screw market and will comprise over 95% of the market by 2021.

The majority of growth in the MIS pedicle screw market is a result of increased use of cannulated screws as well as growth in the number of percutaneous procedures performed. The number of cannulated screw procedures performed is expected to increase rapidly over the forecast period because such screws can be implanted percutaneously, using guidewires, while non-cannulated screws cannot be implanted through percutaneous procedures. Nearly 6,000 MIS retractor-based pedicle screw procedures were performed in 2014. Of these, approximately 40% used cannulated screws, while the remainder used non-cannulated screws. Cannulated screws allow for more accurate implantation by using guidewires; as a result, they are expected to be increasingly favored over the forecast period.

Percutaneous implantation of pedicle screws is the least invasive access method, less so than retractor implantation. As a result, growth in the percutaneous pedicle screw market is expected to be driven by the perceived physiological benefits of minimally invasive surgery to the patient. Growth in the market will also be facilitated by surgeons themselves, as more become trained in MIS techniques and offer these procedures to their patients. Nevertheless, growth will decelerate steadily due to the saturation of MIS pedicle screws in the spinal fusion market and the emergence of motion preservation devices.

image5

MIS Sacroiliac Joint Fusion Market

It is expected that as U.S. healthcare insurers change policies regarding the reimbursement of MIS sacroiliac joint fusion, patient demand will fuel a massive amount of surgeries in a short span. The market is poised to grow by nearly 200% in 2015 alone.

Early in 2014, the American Medical Associations' Editorial Panel decided to make a change that will significantly impact the MIS sacroiliac (SI) joint fusion market. Along with artificial disc replacement and vertebral augmentation, there will be changes to minimally invasive sacroiliac joint fusion coding. This change is expected to take place on January 1st, 2015 and will drastically change the market landscape. This change is due to a study conducted by the International Society for the Advancement of Spine Surgery (ISASS), as well as the Society for Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery (SMISS), which determined that due to the prevalence of the procedure, as well as the highly evolved standard of care, the procedure should be reimbursed to make the surgery more accessible to all patients.

As of yet, the MIS SI joint fusion market is reported by a category III CPT code (0334T). With the change to a category I CPT code, more Medicare Administrative Contractors (MACs) are expected to change their non-coverage decision to follow their counterparts, as most of the MACs normally monitor each other's decisions. As this trend continues, the market should see private insurers, such as United Healthcare, Blue Cross and Blue Shield, begin covering MIS SI joint fusion procedures as well. Once this CPT code changes, the backlog of patients waiting for reimbursement coverage will start to see treatment. Many patients have waited to have the surgery done until such a time when the reimbursement policies make the procedure more affordable.

image6

Leading Competitors

Medtronic was the largest company within the U.S. minimally invasive surgery spinal implant market with a share of 24.3% in 2014.

In 2014, Medtronic held leading positions in the MIS interbody fusion and MIS pedicle screw markets with their large portfolio of MIS products. Medtronic's large share in each of the spinous process fixation, MIS interbody fusion, and MIS pedicle screw markets collectively put the company at the forefront of the total MIS spinal implant market. This only bolsters the already massive portfolio of traditional spine products that Medtronic carries: one of the main reasons for the quick acceptance of their minimally invasive surgery products among spine surgeons.

Other leading competitors in this market include NuVasive, DePuy Synthes, Globus Medical and Stryker, all of which compete directly with Medtronic in most MIS segments. A number of other competitors hold leading positions in their respective segments; however, due to the smaller size of those markets, these companies have a smaller share of the total MIS spinal implant market. Competitors such as Biomet and SI-BONE will continue to promote growth in their individual segments.

image7

Table of Contents

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF FIGURES

LIST OF CHARTS.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

  • 1.1 U.S. MINIMALLY INVASIVE SPINAL IMPLANT MARKET
  • 1.2 SPINOUS PROCESS FIXATION MARKET
  • 1.3 FACET FIXATION MARKET
  • 1.4 MIS INTERBODY FUSION MARKET
  • 1.5 MIS PEDICLE SCREW MARKET
  • 1.6 MIS SACROILIAC JOINT FUSION MARKET
  • 1.7 LEADING COMPETITORS

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

  • 2.1 RESEARCH SCOPE
  • 2.2 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

U.S. MINIMALLY INVASIVE SPINAL IMPLANT MARKET OVERVIEW

  • 3.1 INTRODUCTION
    • 3.1.1 Spinous Process Fixation
    • 3.1.2 Facet Fixation
    • 3.1.3 Minimally Invasive Interbody Fusion
      • 3.1.3.1 Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion
      • 3.1.3.2 Minimally Invasive Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion
      • 3.1.3.3 Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion
    • 3.1.4 Minimally Invasive Surgery (MIS) Pedicle Screws
      • 3.1.4.1 Percutaneous MIS Systems
      • 3.1.4.2 Retractor-Based MIS systems
    • 3.1.5 MIS Sacroiliac Joint Fusion
  • 3.2 MARKET OVERVIEW
  • 3.3 MARKET BY SEGMENT
  • 3.4 TREND ANALYSIS BY SEGMENT
  • 3.5 DRIVERS AND LIMITERS
    • 3.5.1 Market Drivers
    • 3.5.2 Market Limiters
  • 3.6 COMPETITIVE ANALYSIS
  • 3.7 MERGERS AND ACQUISITIONS

THE HUMAN SPINE

  • 4.1 BASIC ANATOMY
  • 4.2 SPINAL PATHOLOGY AND DISORDERS
    • 4.2.1 Degenerative Disc Disease
      • 4.2.1.1 Disc Herniation
      • 4.2.1.2 Stenosis
      • 4.2.1.3 Spondylolisthesis
      • 4.2.1.4 Arthritis
    • 4.2.2 Spinal Deformities
      • 4.2.2.1 Scoliosis
      • 4.2.2.2 Kyphosis and Lordosis
    • 4.2.3 Trauma and Tumor
    • 4.2.4 Vertebral Compression Fractures
      • 4.2.4.1 Osteoporosis
      • 4.2.4.2 Vertebral Compression Fractures
  • 4.3 SPINAL DISORDER TREATMENTS
    • 4.3.1 Decompression
      • 4.3.1.1 Microdecompression
      • 4.3.1.2 Laminectomy
    • 4.3.2 Discectomy
    • 4.3.3 Spinal Fusion
    • 4.3.4 Corpectomy
    • 4.3.5 Spinal Arthroplasty

MINIMALLY INVASIVE SPINE PROCEDURE NUMBERS

  • 5.1 INTRODUCTION
  • 5.2 SPINOUS PROCESS FIXATION PROCEDURE NUMBERS
  • 5.3 FACET FIXATION PROCEDURE NUMBERS
  • 5.4 MIS INTERBODY FUSION PROCEDURE NUMBERS
  • 5.5 PEDICLE SCREW PROCEDURE NUMBERS
  • 5.6 MIS SACROILIAC JOINT FUSION PROCEDURE NUMBERS

SPINOUS PROCESS FIXATION MARKET

  • 6.1 INTRODUCTION
  • 6.2 SPINOUS PROCESS FIXATION PROCEDURE NUMBERS
  • 6.3 MARKET ANALYSIS AND FORECAST
  • 6.4 DRIVERS AND LIMITERS
  • 6.4.1 Market Drivers
  • 6.4.2 Market Limiters
  • 6.5 COMPETITIVE ANALYSIS
    • 6.5.1 Leading Competitors

FACET FIXATION MARKET

  • 7.1 INTRODUCTION
  • 7.2 FACET FIXATION PROCEDURE NUMBERS
  • 7.3 MARKET ANALYSIS AND FORECAST
  • 7.4 DRIVERS AND LIMITERS
    • 7.4.1 Market Drivers
    • 7.4.2 Market Limiters
  • 7.5 COMPETITIVE ANALYSIS
    • 7.5.1 Leading Competitors

MIS INTERBODY FUSION MARKET

  • 8.1 INTRODUCTION
    • 8.1.1 Approach Types
    • 8.1.1.1 Minimally Invasive Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion
    • 8.1.1.2 Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion
    • 8.1.1.3 Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion
    • 8.1.1.4 Direct Lateral Interbody Fusion
    • 8.1.1.5 eXtreme Lateral Interbody Fusion
    • 8.1.1.6 Guided Lateral Interbody Fusion
  • 8.2 PROCEDURE NUMBERS
    • 8.2.1 Total MIS Interbody Procedures
    • 8.2.2 MIS Interbody Procedure Numbers by Approach
  • 8.3 MARKET OVERVIEW
  • 8.4 MARKET ANALYSIS AND FORECAST
    • 8.4.1 Total MIS Interbody Fusion Market
    • 8.4.2 Minimally Invasive Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion Market
    • 8.4.3 Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Market
    • 8.4.4 Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion Market
  • 8.5 DRIVERS AND LIMITERS
    • 8.5.1 Market Drivers
    • 8.5.2 Market Limiters
  • 8.6 COMPETITIVE ANALYSIS
    • 8.6.1 Leading Competitors

MIS PEDICLE SCREW MARKET

  • 9.1 INTRODUCTION
    • 9.1.1 Percutaneous MIS Systems
    • 9.1.2 Retractor-Based MIS systems
  • 9.2 PROCEDURE NUMBERS
    • 9.2.1 Total MIS Pedicle Screw Procedure Numbers
    • 9.2.2 MIS Pedicle Screw Procedure Numbers by Access Type
  • 9.3 MARKET OVERVIEW
  • 9.4 MARKET ANALYSIS AND FORECAST
    • 9.4.1 Total MIS Pedicle Screw Market
    • 9.4.2 Percutaneous Cannulated Pedicle Screw Market
    • 9.4.3 Retractor Cannulated Pedicle Screw Market
    • 9.4.4 Retractor Non-Cannulated Pedicle Screw Market
  • 9.5 DRIVERS AND LIMITERS
    • 9.5.1 Market Drivers
    • 9.5.2 Market Limiters
  • 9.6 COMPETITIVE ANALYSIS
    • 9.6.1 Leading Competitors

MIS SACROILIAC JOINT FUSION MARKET

  • 10.1 INTRODUCTION
  • 10.2 MIS SACROILIAC JOINT FUSION PROCEDURE NUMBERS
  • 10.3 MARKET ANALYSIS AND FORECAST
  • 10.4 DRIVERS AND LIMITERS
  • 10.4.1 Market Drivers
  • 10.4.2 Market Limiters
  • 10.5 COMPETITIVE ANALYSIS

ABBREVIATIONS

LIST OF FIGURES

  • Figure 3-1: Total Minimally Invasive Spinal Implant Market, U.S., 2011 - 2021 (US$M)
  • Figure 3-2: Minimally Invasive Spinal Implant Market by Segment, U.S., 2011 - 2021 (US$M)
  • Figure 3-3: Minimally Invasive Spinal Implant Market Growth by Segment, U.S., 2011 - 2021
  • Figure 3-4: Drivers and Limiters, Minimally Invasive Spinal Implant Market, U.S., 2014
  • Figure 3-5: Leading Competitors, Minimally Invasive Spinal Implant Market, U.S., 2014
  • Figure 5-1: Spinous Process Fixation Procedure Numbers, U.S., 2011 - 2021
  • Figure 5-2: Facet Fixation Procedure Numbers, U.S., 2011 - 2021
  • Figure 5-3: Minimally Invasive Interbody Fusion Procedure Numbers by Approach, U.S., 2011 - 2021
  • Figure 5-4: Pedicle Screw Procedure Numbers by Access Type, U.S., 2011 - 2021
  • Figure 5-5: MIS Sacroiliac Joint Fusion Procedure Numbers, U.S., 2011 - 2021
  • Figure 6-1: Spinous Process Fixation Procedure Numbers, U.S., 2011 - 2021
  • Figure 6-2: Spinous Process Fixation Market, U.S., 2011 - 2021
  • Figure 6-3: Drivers and Limiters, Spinous Process Fixation Market, U.S., 2014
  • Figure 6-4: Leading Competitors, Spinous Process Fixation Market, U.S., 2014
  • Figure 7-1: Facet Fixation Procedure Numbers, U.S., 2011 - 2021
  • Figure 7-2: Facet Fixation Market, U.S., 2011 - 2021
  • Figure 7-3: Drivers and Limiters, Facet Fixation Market, U.S., 2014
  • Figure 7-4: Leading Competitors, Facet Fixation Market, U.S., 2014
  • Figure 8-1: MIS Interbody Procedure Numbers, U.S., 2011 - 2021
  • Figure 8-2: MIS Interbody Procedure Numbers, Breakdown by Approach, U.S., 2011 - 2021
  • Figure 8-3: MIS Interbody Procedure Numbers, Breakdown by Approach, U.S., 2011 - 2021
  • Figure 8-4: MIS Interbody Fusion Market by Segment, U.S., 2011 - 2021 (US$M)
  • Figure 8-5: Total MIS Interbody Fusion Market, U.S., 2011 - 2021
  • Figure 8-6: Minimally Invasive Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion Market, U.S., 2011 - 2021
  • Figure 8-7: Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Market, U.S., 2011 - 2021
  • Figure 8-8: Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion Market, U.S., 2011 - 2021
  • Figure 8-9: Drivers and Limiters, MIS Interbody Fusion Market, U.S., 2014
  • Figure 8-10: Leading Competitors, MIS Interbody Fusion Market, U.S., 2014
  • Figure 9-1: Total MIS Pedicle Screw Procedure Numbers, U.S., 2011 - 2021
  • Figure 9-2: MIS Pedicle Screw Procedure Numbers, Breakdown by Access Type, U.S., 2011 - 2021
  • Figure 9-3: MIS Pedicle Screw Procedure Numbers, Breakdown by Access Type, U.S., 2011 - 2021
  • Figure 9-4: MIS Pedicle Screw Market by Segment, U.S., 2011 - 2021 (US$M).
  • Figure 9-5: Total MIS Pedicle Screw Market, U.S., 2011 - 2021
  • Figure 9-6: Percutaneous Cannulated Pedicle Screw Market, U.S., 2011 - 2021
  • Figure 9-7: Retractor Cannulated Pedicle Screw Market, U.S., 2011 - 2021
  • Figure 9-8: Retractor Non-Cannulated Pedicle Screw Market, U.S., 2011 - 2021
  • Figure 9-9: Drivers and Limiters, MIS Pedicle Screw Market, U.S., 2014
  • Figure 9-10: Leading Competitors, MIS Pedicle Screw Market, U.S., 2014
  • Figure 10-1: MIS Sacroiliac Joint Fusion Procedure Numbers, U.S., 2011 - 2021
  • Figure 10-2: MIS Sacroiliac Joint Fusion Market, U.S., 2011 - 2021
  • Figure 10-3: Drivers and Limiters, MIS Sacroiliac Joint Fusion Market, U.S., 2014
  • Figure 10-4: Leading Competitors, MIS Sacroiliac Joint Fusion Market, U.S., 2014

LIST OF CHARTS

  • Chart 1-1: Minimally Invasive Surgery Spinal Implant Market, U.S., 2011 - 2021
  • Chart 1-2: Spinous Process Fixation Market Value, U.S., Select Years Between 2013 and 2021
  • Chart 1-3: Procedure Number Growth Rates, Facet Fixation Market, U.S., 2012 - 2017
  • Chart 1-4: Average Selling Price, Total MIS Interbody Fusion Market, U.S., 2012 - 2018
  • Chart 1-5: Average Selling Price vs. Units Sold vs. Market Value, MIS Pedicle Screw Market, U.S., 2014
  • Chart 1-6: Market Growth Rates, MIS Sacroiliac Joint Fusion Market, U.S., 2014 - 2019
  • Chart 1-7: Leading Competitors, Minimally Invasive Surgery Spinal Implant Market, U.S., 2014
  • Chart 3-1: Total Minimally Invasive Spinal Implant Market, U.S., 2011 - 2021 (US$M)
  • Chart 3-2: Minimally Invasive Spinal Implant Market by Segment, U.S., 2011 - 2021
  • Chart 3-3: Minimally Invasive Spinal Implant Market Breakdown, U.S., 2014
  • Chart 3-4: Minimally Invasive Spinal Implant Market Breakdown, U.S., 2021
  • Chart 3-5: Minimally Invasive Spinal Implant Market Growth by Segment, U.S., 2011 - 2021
  • Chart 3-6: Leading Competitors, Minimally Invasive Spinal Implant Market, U.S., 2014
  • Chart 5-1: Spinous Process Fixation Procedure Numbers, U.S., 2011 - 2021
  • Chart 5-2: Facet Fixation Procedure Numbers, U.S., 2011 - 2021
  • Chart 5-3: Minimally Invasive Interbody Fusion Procedure Numbers, Breakdown by Approach, U.S., 2014
  • Chart 5-4: Minimally Invasive Interbody Fusion Procedure Numbers, Breakdown by Approach, U.S., 2021
  • Chart 5-5: Pedicle Screw Procedure Numbers, Breakdown by Access Type, U.S., 2014
  • Chart 5-6: Pedicle Screw Procedure Numbers, Breakdown by Access Type, U.S., 2021
  • Chart 5-7: MIS Sacroiliac Joint Fusion Procedure Numbers, U.S., 2011 - 2021
  • Chart 6-1: Spinous Process Fixation Procedure Numbers, U.S., 2011 - 2021
  • Chart 6-2: Spinous Process Fixation Market, U.S., 2011 - 2021
  • Chart 6-3: Leading Competitors, Spinous Process Fixation Market, U.S., 2014
  • Chart 7-1: Facet Fixation Procedure Numbers, U.S., 2011 - 2021
  • Chart 7-2: Facet Fixation Market, U.S., 2011 - 2021
  • Chart 7-3: Leading Competitors, Facet Fixation Market, U.S., 2014
  • Chart 8-1: MIS Interbody Procedure Numbers, U.S., 2011 - 2021
  • Chart 8-2: MIS Interbody Procedure Numbers, Breakdown by Approach, U.S., 2014
  • Chart 8-3: MIS Interbody Procedure Numbers, Breakdown by Approach, U.S., 2021
  • Chart 8-4: MIS Interbody Fusion Market by Segment, U.S., 2011 - 2021
  • Chart 8-5: MIS Interbody Fusion Market Breakdown, U.S., 2014
  • Chart 8-6: MIS Interbody Fusion Market Breakdown, U.S., 2021
  • Chart 8-7: Total MIS Interbody Fusion Market, U.S., 2011 - 2021
  • Chart 8-8: Minimally Invasive Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion Market, U.S., 2011 - 2021
  • Chart 8-9: Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Market, U.S., 2011 - 2021
  • Chart 8-10: Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion Market, U.S., 2011 - 2021
  • Chart 8-11: Leading Competitors, MIS Interbody Fusion Market, U.S., 2014
  • Chart 9-1: Total MIS Pedicle Screw Procedure Numbers, U.S., 2011 - 2021
  • Chart 9-2: MIS Pedicle Screw Procedure Numbers, Breakdown by Access Type, U.S., 2014
  • Chart 9-3: MIS Pedicle Screw Procedure Numbers, Breakdown by Access Type, U.S., 2021
  • Chart 9-4: MIS Pedicle Screw Market by Segment, U.S., 2011 - 2021
  • Chart 9-5: MIS Pedicle Screw Market Breakdown, U.S., 2014
  • Chart 9-6: MIS Pedicle Screw Market Breakdown, U.S., 2021
  • Chart 9-7: Total MIS Pedicle Screw Market, U.S., 2011 - 2021
  • Chart 9-8: Percutaneous Cannulated Pedicle Screw Market, U.S., 2011 - 2021
  • Chart 9-9: Retractor Cannulated Pedicle Screw Market, U.S., 2011 - 2021
  • Chart 9-10: Retractor Non-Cannulated Pedicle Screw Market, U.S., 2011 - 2021
  • Chart 9-11: Leading Competitors, MIS Pedicle Screw Market, U.S., 2014
  • Chart 10-1: MIS Sacroiliac Joint Fusion Procedure Numbers, U.S., 2011 - 2021
  • Chart 10-2: MIS Sacroiliac Joint Fusion Market, U.S., 2011 - 2021
  • Chart 10-3: Leading Competitors, MIS Sacroiliac Joint Fusion Market, U.S., 2014
Back to Top