Zimmer Biomet Holdings, Inc. announced on Tuesday, January 31, 2017, that sales for the fourth quarter ended December 31, 2016 rose 4.1% over the prior year period and was an increase of 4.4% on an adjusted constant currency basis. Net sales for the quarter were $2.013 billion.
Zimmer Biomet Posts 4.1% Fourth Quarter Sales Increase
1 min read Premium comments
Secondary
Zimmer Biomet, which is headquartered in Warsaw, Indiana, is a global leader in musculoskeletal healthcare. For the full year of 2016, sales were $7,683.9 billion, up from $5,997.98 billion in 2015. The following table shows the sales details for 2016.
Joanne Wuensch, an analyst with BMP Capital Markets said: “The [fourth quarter] call was 180 degrees better than the [third quarter] call, but there is still work to be done. Progress has clearly been made in the recovery process since the announcement of supply chain issues. The overall [Reconstructive] market appears to have strengthened, but the question remains, ‘why?’”
Mike Matson, an analyst with Needham & Company, LLC, said, “We are encouraged by [Zimmer Biomet Holdings, Inc.]’s rapid progress in addressing its manufacturing issues and we note that its organic [fourth quarter 2016] revenue growth was 3.5% after adjusting for selling days.”
Zimmer Biomet President and CEO David Dvorak said in a press release, “Zimmer Biomet delivered solid revenue growth in the fourth quarter. Our performance was driven, in part, by the reacceleration of our Knee and Hip businesses, as well as the ongoing strength of our S.E.T. category and Asia Pacific region.”
For 2017, the company is anticipating that constant currency revenue for full-year 2017 will increase between 3.7% and 4.7% (inclusive of approximately 120 basis points of contribution from LDR transaction). Most analysts agree that in 2017 Zimmer Biomet will see an increase in Knee, Spine and S.E.T. markets as well as in Reconstructive.
React:
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.