Stryker Corporation announced on Tuesday, April 25, 2017, that sales for the first quarter 2017 rose 8.2% (excluding currency and acquisitions). Sales for the quarter were $2.955 billion, which is up from $2.495 billion reported in the first quarter of 2016. An extra selling day this quarter added about 1% to the growth.
Stryker Posts 8.2% First Quarter Sales Increase
1 min read Premium comments
Secondary
Stryker Corporation, which is based in Kalamazoo, Michigan, is one of the largest orthopedic companies in the world and has products in every sector of the orthopedic market. The following table shows the sales details for first quarter 2017.
" data-large-file="https://i0.wp.com/ryortho.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/Stryker-1Q17-Table.jpg?fit=730%2C152&ssl=1" src="https://i0.wp.com/ryortho.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/Stryker-1Q17-Table.jpg?resize=730%2C152&ssl=1" alt="" width="730" height="152">Source: Stryker Corporation company documents
According to Joanne Wuensch, an analyst with BMO Capital Markets, “[First Quarter 2017] expectations were high, but Stryker delivered.”
She also said in her report, “MAKO was a hot topic, placing 18 robots in [first quarter 2017], including 11 in the U.S. (399 total worldwide and 344 in the U.S.). The launch of the total knee application exceeded expectations, having trained over 200 surgeons since [the annual meeting of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons].”
Mike Matson of Needham & Company, LLC, said “Stryker’s [first quarter 2017] revenue and EPS beat consensus and management maintained guidance” and that “MedSurg saw the biggest improvement in organic growth”.
“Our positive momentum continued in the first quarter, as we demonstrated our ongoing commitment to deliver organic sales growth at the high end of med-tech and leveraged earnings gains,” said Kevin A. Lobo, chairman and chief executive officer of Stryker in a press release.
“Our results were well-balanced across business segments and geographies, and position us well for another strong year in 2017.”
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.