LinkedInXFacebook
Subscribe
Orthopedics This Week
  • My Feed
  • |Posts
  • |Events
  • |MSK Innovations
  • |Power Rankings
  • |Masterclasses
  • |Technology Awards
  • Press Releases
  • |Advertising
  • |Job Board
  • Spine
  • ◆Joints
  • ◆Upper Extremities
  • ◆Foot & Ankle
  • ◆Sports Medicine
  • ◆Pain Mgmt
  • ◆Trauma
  • ◆Biologics
  • ◆Technology
  • ◆People
  • ◆Company News
  • ◆Legal & Regulatory
Home/Spine/Titan Spine Hits 27, 000 Implantations of Endoskeleton!
Spine

Titan Spine Hits 27, 000 Implantations of Endoskeleton!

February 3, 2015 2 min read Premium comments

Advertisement

Titan Spine Hits 27, 000 Implantations of Endoskeleton!
Kevin Gemas, President / Titan Spine, LLC
Secondary

Titan Spine, LLC has announced that it has achieved 27, 000 implantations of its Endoskeleton interbody fusion devices, a figure which represents an increase of 25% from 2013.

Titan President Kevin Gemas commented, “The significant growth of Titan Spine observed in 2014 alone has been tremendous, and we are extremely well positioned to continue our momentum in 2015 and beyond. Over the past year, Titan achieved several milestones that attributed to our global growth and further validated our position as the leader in surface technology. These include the expanded use of our devices in Europe, securing market registration approval in Australia and New Zealand, and obtaining FDA clearance for both the Endoskeleton TL, the first lateral device to feature surface technology, as well as our next generation nanoLOCK surface technology, the first FDA-cleared interbody fusion devices to feature nanotechnology.”

The company says that it has greater than 220 hospital customers (an increase of 40% from 2013), with more than 90 U.S. distributors. It has plans for a full launch of Endoskeleton TL lateral device for the first quarter of 2015.

Gemas told OTW, “Essentially the ultimate goal for Titan this year is to change the status-quo in the spine industry with the purpose of providing better care for more patients. In our view, the industry has become complacent and accepts PEEK (a plastic material) as the standard material to provide surgeons and their patients for a fusion procedure. We see this as totally unacceptable and we as an industry can do much better for patients in need of spinal fusion.”

“Titan will continue to be the leader in 2015 as the most highly-differentiated interbody spinal fusion device company. We will accomplish this objective in a number of ways. First, by applying our new proprietary and improved FDA-cleared nanoLOCK surface technology—the only nano surface FDA cleared in the spine industry—to all of our interbody devices this year.”

“Second, Titan is investing significant capital and engineering/quality resources to produce devices that will be sterile packed and delivered to hospitals in a more efficient and effective method. In addition, we are also exploring areas of our manufacturing processes where we can be more cost-effective for hospitals around the world in order to reach and better serve more fusion patients.”

“Third and equally important as reaching more people, in 2015 Titan will continue to invest in additional top field professionals to educate and communicate our interbody device’s benefits to more surgeons and patients that currently rely on a plastic spacer. We believe that the time has finally come for a fusion device that is designed and engineered to participate in the fusion process by promoting the upregulation of osteogenic and angiogenic growth factors for bone development.”

“This year, Titan will continue to be laser-focused on providing devices that allow patients to heal faster, and that is why we are always investing in making the best fusion devices possible.”

React:

Discussion

14
DS
Dr. Sarah MitchellOrthopedic Surgeon · Mayo Clinic

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?

8
JT
James Thornton, MDSpine Fellow · HSS

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.

5
RP
R. PatelSports Medicine · Stanford

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.

Subscribe

Get Full Access

Read every OTW article and join member discussions for $24.99/month.

Get Full Access

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement

Orthopedics This Week

The most trusted source in orthopedic industry news since 2005. Covering spine, joints, trauma, biologics, and the business of orthopedics.

A publication of RRY Publications, LLC

LinkedInXFacebook

Categories

  • Spine
  • Joints
  • Upper Extremities
  • Foot & Ankle
  • Sports Medicine
  • Pain Mgmt
  • Trauma
  • Biologics
  • Technology
  • People
  • Company News
  • Legal & Regulatory

Resources

  • Subscribe
  • Community Posts
  • Job Board
  • Press Release Opportunities
  • Power Rankings
  • About OTW
  • Advertise
  • Contact Us

Get Full Access

Unlimited articles, community posts, and Power Rankings.

Get Full Access

Plans start at $24.99/mo · Annual saves 20%

© 2026 Orthopedics This Week · RRY Publications, LLC

Privacy PolicyTerms of ServiceCookie Policy