In a move to provide “Significant non-dilutive” funding, VertiFlex, Inc. is selling certain spinal implant technologies to Stryker Corporation.
VertiFlex Sells Undisclosed Spine Technologies to Stryker

Earl Fender, VertiFlex president and CEO and former worldwide president of DePuy Spine, said in a March 13, 2013 announcement that the sale of these “innovative assets to Stryker represents the beginning of a new era in our relationship with strategic partners.” Fender noted that in addition to enrolling the largest ever FDA PMA (premarket approval) trial of a device for spinal stenosis, the company has also demonstrated “proficiency” in developing differentiated products for spinal therapies. “The assets sold to Stryker are representative of such innovation.”
The company did not specify which technologies are being sold, but said they are not core to the ongoing strategic operations of the company. The agreement includes up-front cash, contingent payments as well as a long-term licensing agreement. The funding will be used to advance VertiFlex’s platform for minimally invasive treatment of spinal stenosis. No financial details were provided. A company spokesperson told OTW the company had no other details to provide on the transaction at this time.
The San Clemente, California-based company was founded in 2005 and has developed a proprietary, minimally invasive interspinous access platform for performing both indirect and direct decompressions of the lumbar spine. The company believes it has compiled the largest, most rigorous, body of device clinical evidence, related to lumbar spinal stenosis. This past January the company announced FDA 510(k) clearance of two new products to its portfolio: The Totalis Direct Decompression System and UniVise Spinous Process Fixation System.
Stryker’s spine division has been growing. In the fourth quarter of 2012, the company reported $190 million in sales, a 6.4% increase over the previous year’s same quarter.

Discussion
This is a fascinating development. In my practice we've seen similar outcomes with the revised protocol. The key differentiator seems to be patient selection criteria. Has anyone else noticed the correlation with BMI thresholds?
Great point. I'd push back slightly on the conclusion, the sample size in the cited study is too small to draw population-level inferences. That said, the directional signal is compelling and worth a larger RCT.
We implemented a similar approach last year. Early results are promising but we're still gathering 12-month follow-up data. Happy to share our protocol if anyone is interested.
Join the conversation
Orthopedic professionals are discussing this. Sign in and upgrade to read every comment and add your voice.