The global hemodynamic monitoring systems market was valued at US$796.401 million in 2020 and is expected to grow at a CAGR of 5.91% over the forecast period to reach a market size of US$1,190.393 million by 2027.
Hemodynamic monitoring systems take blood pressure readings directly from the veins, heart, and arteries. They also check for blood flow and oxygen levels. These systems also include interfaces for recording diagnostic catheterizations, coronary, peripheral, and electrophysiology (EP) operations. The minimally invasive technologies aid in the continuous monitoring of stroke volume and provide dynamic fluid responsiveness information. Some of the systems measure volumetric preload factors, while others use proprietary catheters to continuously monitor central venous saturation.
The growth is being driven by technological advancements in hemodynamic monitoring systems, increased research into hemodynamic monitoring systems, an influx of venture capital funding, rising prevalence of cardiovascular diseases and diabetes, rising geriatric population & growing number of surgeries, industry awareness initiatives, and government focus on critical care infrastructure & services.
A revolutionary echocardiography device known as a transesophageal echocardiography device with a tiny probe has recently been developed and is being used for continuous hemodynamic assessment. These monitoring devices have simplified hemodynamic calculations, attracting the attention of healthcare providers and leading in market growth. However, the risk of sepsis, bleeding, hemorrhage, thrombosis, air embolism, and pulmonary capillary necrosis associated with invasive hemodynamic monitoring is projected to restrict the market expansion. Furthermore, rising pricing pressure on market competitors, a lack of patient awareness regarding disease diagnosis, and a scarcity of experienced specialists is restricting the market growth.
North America dominates the hemodynamic monitoring market and is likely to do so for a few more years. Due to the existence of prominent market participants, technologically advanced hospitals, and an increasing number of critically ill patients being treated in hospitals throughout the region, the hemodynamic monitoring market is expected to develop the most. The North American hemodynamic monitoring market is likely to increase during the forecast period, thanks to rising FDA approvals for monitoring devices and new product releases.
With an increasing preference for noninvasive alternatives, Invasive techniques have become less popular in recent years. Noninvasive hemodynamic monitoring technologies allow for painless diagnosis and limit the chance of patients contracting blood-borne diseases. Furthermore, these systems are less invasive and can be operated by a nurse in the absence of a professional or doctor as opposed to invasive systems. Due to this advantage, the hemodynamic status of multiple patients can be monitored at the same time, resulting in lower staffing and treatment costs. The market for non-invasive systems is likely to grow in the next years due to these benefits. For critically ill patients, noninvasive hemodynamic monitoring requires continuous measurement of blood pressure with finger cuffs and measurement of cardiac output with the pulse contour method. The Caretaker 4 from Caretaker Medical, for example, measures continuous beat-by-beat blood pressure (“cNIBP”), heart rate, and other physiological data with a finger cuff.
Apart from the discomfort of invasive monitoring (particularly the insertion of the pulmonary artery catheter), there are several risks associated with this procedure: sepsis, bleeding, cardiac arrhythmias, reduced circulation to the distal limb, hemorrhage, nerve damage (during insertion), thrombosis, air embolism, and pulmonary capillary necrosis. During invasive hemodynamic procedures, these factors increase the fatality rate. Hence, invasive hemodynamic monitoring is only suggested for a limited number of purposes, assuming that the risks are outweighed by the benefits of obtaining relevant data during the procedure. Furthermore, invasive hemodynamic monitoring methods are not advised for elderly or weak patients. Furthermore, invasive hemodynamic monitoring is very costly and necessitates the use of qualified professionals to place catheters in patients. Despite the fact that invasive hemodynamic monitoring gives accurate, comprehensive, and continuous data regarding a patient's hemodynamic state, the risks described above limit its use.
The outbreak of COVID-19 had a positive impact on the hemodynamic monitoring systems market. The majority of contractors have closed down their projects due to the pandemic. Patients who need to be hospitalized for COVID-19 have a higher chance of developing sepsis, acute lung injury (ALI), and acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). The complicated and constantly changing nature of critically ill patients necessitates continual information to assist the patient through the continuum of care, regardless of the treatment approach used. Hemodynamic monitoring can help doctors treat critically ill patients by giving data during the four stages of the critical illness timeline: rescue, optimization, stabilization, and de-escalation. Therefore, the adoption of hemodynamic monitoring systems is expected to grow.
Hemodynamic monitoring systems take blood pressure readings directly from the veins, heart, and arteries. They also check for blood flow and oxygen levels. These systems also include interfaces for recording diagnostic catheterizations, coronary, peripheral, and electrophysiology (EP) operations. The minimally invasive technologies aid in the continuous monitoring of stroke volume and provide dynamic fluid responsiveness information. Some of the systems measure volumetric preload factors, while others use proprietary catheters to continuously monitor central venous saturation.
The growth is being driven by technological advancements in hemodynamic monitoring systems, increased research into hemodynamic monitoring systems, an influx of venture capital funding, rising prevalence of cardiovascular diseases and diabetes, rising geriatric population & growing number of surgeries, industry awareness initiatives, and government focus on critical care infrastructure & services.
A revolutionary echocardiography device known as a transesophageal echocardiography device with a tiny probe has recently been developed and is being used for continuous hemodynamic assessment. These monitoring devices have simplified hemodynamic calculations, attracting the attention of healthcare providers and leading in market growth. However, the risk of sepsis, bleeding, hemorrhage, thrombosis, air embolism, and pulmonary capillary necrosis associated with invasive hemodynamic monitoring is projected to restrict the market expansion. Furthermore, rising pricing pressure on market competitors, a lack of patient awareness regarding disease diagnosis, and a scarcity of experienced specialists is restricting the market growth.
North America dominates the hemodynamic monitoring market and is likely to do so for a few more years. Due to the existence of prominent market participants, technologically advanced hospitals, and an increasing number of critically ill patients being treated in hospitals throughout the region, the hemodynamic monitoring market is expected to develop the most. The North American hemodynamic monitoring market is likely to increase during the forecast period, thanks to rising FDA approvals for monitoring devices and new product releases.
Growth Factors:
Technological advancements
With an increasing preference for noninvasive alternatives, Invasive techniques have become less popular in recent years. Noninvasive hemodynamic monitoring technologies allow for painless diagnosis and limit the chance of patients contracting blood-borne diseases. Furthermore, these systems are less invasive and can be operated by a nurse in the absence of a professional or doctor as opposed to invasive systems. Due to this advantage, the hemodynamic status of multiple patients can be monitored at the same time, resulting in lower staffing and treatment costs. The market for non-invasive systems is likely to grow in the next years due to these benefits. For critically ill patients, noninvasive hemodynamic monitoring requires continuous measurement of blood pressure with finger cuffs and measurement of cardiac output with the pulse contour method. The Caretaker 4 from Caretaker Medical, for example, measures continuous beat-by-beat blood pressure (“cNIBP”), heart rate, and other physiological data with a finger cuff.
Restraints:
Risks involved with invasive hemodynamic monitoring
Apart from the discomfort of invasive monitoring (particularly the insertion of the pulmonary artery catheter), there are several risks associated with this procedure: sepsis, bleeding, cardiac arrhythmias, reduced circulation to the distal limb, hemorrhage, nerve damage (during insertion), thrombosis, air embolism, and pulmonary capillary necrosis. During invasive hemodynamic procedures, these factors increase the fatality rate. Hence, invasive hemodynamic monitoring is only suggested for a limited number of purposes, assuming that the risks are outweighed by the benefits of obtaining relevant data during the procedure. Furthermore, invasive hemodynamic monitoring methods are not advised for elderly or weak patients. Furthermore, invasive hemodynamic monitoring is very costly and necessitates the use of qualified professionals to place catheters in patients. Despite the fact that invasive hemodynamic monitoring gives accurate, comprehensive, and continuous data regarding a patient's hemodynamic state, the risks described above limit its use.
COVID-19 impact on the hemodynamic monitoring systems market
The outbreak of COVID-19 had a positive impact on the hemodynamic monitoring systems market. The majority of contractors have closed down their projects due to the pandemic. Patients who need to be hospitalized for COVID-19 have a higher chance of developing sepsis, acute lung injury (ALI), and acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). The complicated and constantly changing nature of critically ill patients necessitates continual information to assist the patient through the continuum of care, regardless of the treatment approach used. Hemodynamic monitoring can help doctors treat critically ill patients by giving data during the four stages of the critical illness timeline: rescue, optimization, stabilization, and de-escalation. Therefore, the adoption of hemodynamic monitoring systems is expected to grow.
Competitive Insights and Recent Events:
- Masimo, a global medical technology company, expanded its suite of advanced measurements in February 2021 by acquiring LiDCO Group Plc, a leading provider of hemodynamic monitoring in the United Kingdom.
- Baxter International Inc., a renowned global medical products company, agreed to acquire Cheetah Medical, a leading producer of non-invasive hemodynamic monitoring technology, in September 2019. The partnership highlights Baxter's continued commitment to enhancing clinical outcomes by utilizing a well-established patient monitoring technology to better inform and guide practitioners' treatment decisions.
Market Segmentation:
By Type
- Non-Invasive
- Minimally-Invasive
- Invasive
By Product
- Monitors
- Disposables
By End-User
- Hospitals & Clinics
- Ambulatory Care Centers
- Home Care Settings
By Geography
- North America
- USA
- Canada
- Mexico
- South America
- Brazil
- Argentina
- Others
- Europe
- Germany
- France
- UK
- Italy
- Spain
- Others
- Middle East and Africa
- Saudi Arabia
- UAE
- South Africa
- Others
- Asia Pacific
- China
- India
- Japan
- South Korea
- Taiwan
- Thailand
- Indonesia
- Others
Table of Contents
1. Introduction1.1. Market Overview1.2. Covid-19 Scenario
1.3. Market Definition
1.4. Market Segmentation
2. Research Methodology2.1. Research Data
2.2. Assumptions
3. Executive Summary3.1. Research Highlights
4. Market Dynamics4.1. Market Drivers
4.2. Market Restraints
4.3. Porter's Five Forces Analysis
4.3.1. Bargaining Power of End-Users
4.3.2. Bargaining Power of Buyers
4.3.3. Threat of New Entrants
4.3.4. Threat of Substitutes
4.3.5. Competitive Rivalry in the Industry
4.4. Industry Value Chain Analysis
5. Hemodynamic Monitoring Systems Market Analysis, by Type5.1. Introduction
5.2. Non-invasive
5.3. Minimally-invasive
5.4. Invasive
6. Hemodynamic Monitoring Systems Market Analysis, by Product6.1. Introduction
6.2. Monitors
6.3. Disposables
7. Hemodynamic Monitoring Systems Market Analysis, by End-User7.1. Introduction
7.2. Hospitals & Clinics
7.3. Ambulatory Care Centers
7.4. Home Care Settings
8. Hemodynamic Monitoring Systems Market Analysis, by Geography8.1. Introduction
8.2. North America
8.2.1. USA
8.2.2. Canada
8.2.3. Mexico
8.3. South America
8.3.1. Brazil
8.3.2. Argentina
8.3.3. Others
8.4. Europe
8.4.1. Germany
8.4.2. France
8.4.3. UK
8.4.4. Italy
8.4.5. Spain
8.4.6. Others
8.5. Middle East and Africa
8.5.1. Saudi Arabia
8.5.2. UAE
8.5.3. South Africa
8.5.4. Others
8.6. Asia Pacific
8.6.1. China
8.6.2. India
8.6.3. Japan
8.6.4. South Korea
8.6.5. Taiwan
8.6.6. Thailand
8.6.7. Indonesia
8.6.8. Others
9. Competitive Environment and Analysis9.1. Major Players and Strategy Analysis
9.2. Emerging Players and Market Lucrativeness
9.3. Mergers, Acquisitions, Agreements, and Collaborations
9.4. Vendor Competitiveness Matrix
10. Company Profiles 10.1. Edward Lifesciences Corporation
10.2. GE Healthcare
10.3. Koninklijke Philips N.V.
10.4. Draeger
10.5. LiDCO Group PLC
10.6. Pulsion Medical Systems SE
10.7. ICU Medical, Inc.
10.8. Cheetah Medical, Inc.
10.9. CNSystems Medizintechnik GmbH
10.10. Schwarzer Cardiotek GmbH
Companies Mentioned
- Edward Lifesciences Corporation
- GE Healthcare
- Koninklijke Philips N.V.
- Draeger
- LiDCO Group PLC
- Pulsion Medical Systems SE
- ICU Medical, Inc.
- Cheetah Medical, Inc.
- CNSystems Medizintechnik GmbH
- Schwarzer Cardiotek GmbH
Methodology
LOADING...
Table Information
| Report Attribute | Details |
|---|---|
| No. of Pages | 126 |
| Published | January 2022 |
| Forecast Period | 2020 - 2027 |
| Estimated Market Value ( USD | $ 796.4 million |
| Forecasted Market Value ( USD | $ 1190.39 million |
| Compound Annual Growth Rate | 5.9% |
| Regions Covered | Global |
| No. of Companies Mentioned | 10 |
