From today's SA article from Jason Napodano. $874 reimbursement for Epifix.. how will this effect revenue?
In 2014, CMS is proposing bundling skin substitutes with their associated surgeries, similar to how implantable biologics were bundled with surgery in 2009. The agency states, "We see no reason to distinguish skin substitutes from implantable biologics for OPPS packaging purposes based on the clinical application of individual products." Bundling payment for skin substitutes into the APC payment for the related surgical procedures would result in a total prospective payment that is more reflective of the average resource costs of the procedures because prices for these products vary significantly from product to product. Bundling would also promote more efficient resource utilization by hospitals and would be more consistent with the treatment of similar products under the OPPS. The total reimbursement for skin substitutes and the procedure has been proposed at $874.
I don't think anybody can realistically answer the revenue question. We are in a new world post ACA.
NWPT, Negative Wound Pressure companies (KCI etc) were sliced by over 40% by CMS months ago.
Since passage of the ACA (Obamacare), medical companies are on the defense and getting caught off guard with government efforts to find cost savings to fund Obamacare. With ACA, MDXG may have to become Costco, lower margins and higher volumes. Based on the MDXG letter to CMS, it appears that Pete might be expecting some windfall for MDXG. There is alot of market share / low hanging fruit for the taking in the short term. Cost effectiveness is key.
Not sure why Smith & Nephew's Regranex is in the article. It has a block box. I said this before, Smith & Nephew could very well buy out MDXG.