Report
|
|
At a Glance
Traditionally, the Asia-Pacific medtech industry has absorbed global innovations. Now, it’s creating, validating, and exporting them. A structural change is afoot, broadening the region’s capacity and geography for meaningful innovation. This paper covers the full spectrum of medical devices, from capital equipment and implantable devices to software as a medical device (SaMD) and digital health platforms. It excludes in vitro diagnostics (IVD), which follow a distinct development and commercialization path. Written in collaboration withWritten in collaboration with
Over the past 20 years, Japan and Australia have led the region in product development, supported by regulatory maturity and deep clinical infrastructure. Without those advantages, the rest of the region was forced to compete on cost and execution alone. Recently, however, that equation has changed. China and India have moved beyond volume manufacturing and incremental adaptation, and South Korea has emerged as a credible engine for software-only medtech innovation. Meanwhile, Singapore has established a strong medtech ecosystem, combining its advanced regulatory standing and clinical translation infrastructure with precision engineering and end-to-end productization platforms. From this foundation, Singapore is turning promising prototypes into globally validated devices. Across the region, medtechs are running global trials, securing regulatory approvals in the US and the EU, and attracting significant institutional capital. Rather than replicating or incrementally improving existing innovations, Asia-Pacific medtechs are creating novel, globally competitive products of their own. The region has also become one of the most important demand centers. Its share of global medtech demand is expected to reach USD $132 billion by 2030, growing at a 6.9% CAGR—well ahead of the global rate (5.5%). Today, the region represents approximately 16% (USD $94 billion) of the USD $583 billion global medical device market (as defined in the BMI Asia Medical Devices report, excluding IVD and laboratory equipment). Demand is being driven by aging populations and an expanding chronic disease burden across the Asia-Pacific region. A severe shortage of healthcare workers is also increasing demand as providers look for ways to do more with less. The region’s elevated role in medtech innovation affects every player in the medtech value chain. Multinational corporations: Asia-Pacific-originated medtechs are no longer low-cost competitors focused solely on emerging markets. These companies are earning international market share (Mindray), securing global clearances (United Imaging), publishing trial data in esteemed publications (Meril), and increasingly competing head to head with incumbent Western multinational corporations (MNCs) in the global premium segments. Asia-Pacific-originated emerging medtechs: The path to global relevance has never been clearer. However, it requires deliberate investment in specific talent areas, such as regulatory affairs, clinical trial management, health economics and outcomes research (HEOR), and quality systems. Rising firms need clear global commercialization strategies and the foresight to make hard choices early. Ecosystem builders: This includes governments, development agencies, investors, academic institutions, and incubators. For those with solid ideas and early-stage companies, the next challenge is translation: turning talent and clinical evidence into validated innovations that can reach global markets at scale. Meanwhile, several forces are pushing the medtech market in a new direction:
Despite holding meaningful advantages, many Asia-Pacific-originated medtechs have not launched globally competitive, commercially viable products. This report explores how to overcome constraints and reach global scale. It also includes clear takeaways on how Western MNCs, Asia-Pacific-originated emerging medtechs, and ecosystem builders in the region can shape the conditions for scale. Moving up the innovation ladderIn biopharmaceuticals, the development path is typically direct: Companies evolve from generic manufacturing to R&D acceleration to outbound monetization. However, for Asia-Pacific-originated medtechs, moving up the innovation ladder is not strictly sequential. Some companies may operate across multiple phases simultaneously, depending on the market or therapeutic area. Moving up the ladder requires more than technical novelty; an innovative device must also improve the clinical workflow, generate payer-relevant evidence, integrate into hospital procurement, and win physicians’ trust. Medtechs in the Asia-Pacific region typically evolve through three phases:
When regulatory bodies, capital, talent, and infrastructure mature, pathways to international expansion open up quickly. Where innovation sits todayWhile most Asia-Pacific-originated medtech players have won through incremental innovation, the region is beginning to move toward breakthrough innovation. According to US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval datasets, the region’s share of De Novo authorizations was less than 5% between 2021 and 2025. However, the region’s share of total approvals is growing. The region claimed around 30% of global FDA 510(k) clearances from 2021 to 2025. About half of those were driven by China, with South Korea claiming a far second. The quality of submissions is also rising. Shanghai-based United Imaging accumulated 49 FDA 510(k) clearances by year-end 2024 and more than 20 for AI-enabled devices. This shift is supported by a growing research base. The region’s share of global medical device clinical research jumped from 29% in 2012 to 36% in 2022, led by China, Japan, and India. According to the World Intellectual Property Organization, the Asia-Pacific region received more than two-thirds of global patent filings in 2023, up from less than 60% a decade earlier. The evolution is a result of governments across the region deliberately redesigning their regulatory environments to shorten the innovation pathway. For example:
Four archetypes are shaping Asia-Pacific medtech innovationEach medtech’s competitive posture is shaped by the market conditions in which it was built, including the maturity of local clinical infrastructure, the depth of regulatory frameworks, domestic demand, and available capital and talent. Based on these foundations, we identified four archetypes that describe how Asia-Pacific medtechs compete and where they sit on the path to global scale:
Partnership and investment opportunities in the region must be considered holistically. The Asia-Pacific medtech industry is an integrated system in which the whole is far greater than the sum of its parts. Companies can extract far more value by leveraging market-wide strengths and partnering across the region than they can by focusing on any single company or market. Two routes to global scaleGlobal commercialization and leadership are possible for every archetype, though each company’s path may look different. Asia-Pacific-originated medtechs typically pursue two distinct routes to global expansion,the global, evidence-led pathway and the local-first, access-led pathway. The global, evidence-led pathwayIn this model, companies design products to meet the gold-standard requirements of mature markets to reduce the risk of adoption. For example, China’s Venus Medtech and India’s Meril Life Sciences used multinational trials to launch their heart valve programs. Meril’s Myval device was commercialized in India, followed by rapid international expansion to Europe, and backed by investments in benchmark-comparator evidence. Early US regulatory validation is often viewed as the highest bar of confidence for breakthrough platforms. Synchron, an Australian-founded neurotech firm, received FDA approval for an investigational device exemption feasibility study for its permanently implanted brain-computer interface. Similarly, Australian-based Saluda Medical secured a pre-market approval (PMA)—passing the FDA’s most rigorous review process—for its Evoke spinal cord stimulation system, backed by data from the EVOKE clinical trial. The local-first, access-led pathwayIn this approach, companies first build products for local market conditions such as cost and infrastructure constraints, disease burden, and clinical workflows. Design choices that make these products competitive locally often translate into genuine differentiation when they are exported to global markets as simpler, more accessible, or lower-cost alternatives. GE Healthcare India followed this strategy by developing products to handle high patient volumes in health centers with limited infrastructure, a challenge commonly found in emerging markets. For example, the MAC400 and MAC800 portable electrocardiograph systems, developed for rural Indian clinics, and the Vscan portable ultrasound, for rural clinics in China, were originally designed to expand access to imaging in resource-constrained settings. These products were eventually introduced globally, demonstrating that regional fit-for-purpose design can successfully scale upstream into more mature healthcare markets. Similarly, Sonova recently announced its plans to establish a new Innovation Centre for Affordable Hearing Solutions in Singapore, which will focus on developing high-quality, cost-efficient products and care models tailored to the diverse needs of Asian markets. Pulnovo Medical, a Nanjing-founded cardiovascular device company backed by Qiming Venture Partners, built its pulmonary artery denervation system to address unmet medical needs in pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) treatment. Asia accounts for approximately 60% of global PAH cases. Pulnovo developed a onetime interventional procedure and validated it entirely through Chinese hospital trials over a decade. Evidence was published in JACC: Cardiovascular Interventions before the company pursued approval from the National Medical Products Administration (NMPA) in China, a CE Mark in the EU, and an FDA Breakthrough Device designation. In April 2026, Medtronic led a USD $100 million financing round alongside Qiming Venture Partners, EQT, OrbiMed, and Lilly Asia Ventures, demonstrating that a product designed to solve an Asian disease burden and validated in Asian hospitals can earn the confidence of the world’s largest medtech companies and scale globally. Five gaps holding medtechs backDespite holding meaningful advantages, many Asia-Pacific-originated medtechs have not launched globally competitive, commercially viable products. Five gaps impede their progress. 1. Underfunding and a “mid-market” gapCapital is heavily concentrated in later stages, leaving early-stage and translational rounds under-resourced. According to venture data from 2025, global medtech venture capital (VC) rounds exceeding USD $50 million accounted for the large majority of capital deployed while sub-USD $50 million rounds fell to their lowest count since 2021. In contrast, seed and Series A rounds combined were only USD $2.2 billion across 124 rounds—a significant shortfall for early innovation. Private equity (PE) capital is abundant: Asia-Pacific-based buyout value hit a record USD $23 billion in 2025 with medtech deal value estimated to be around USD $2.3 billion. However, this funding was rarely directed toward growth-stage medtechs. Instead, it went to large, already-scaled platforms through corporate carveouts and take-private transactions. Implications:
2. Regulatory and clinical talent gapsTo launch “me-first” devices, emerging medtechs need professionals who have already navigated FDA De Novo and PMA submissions, managed trials to ISO 14155 standards, and built ISO 13485-compliant quality systems. This level of global experience is scarce across the Asia-Pacific region. Companies that reach their first regulatory milestone without this expertise often face setbacks measured in years, not months. The model for closing the talent gap varies by scale: Smaller firms typically engage specialist consultants to shape their clinical and regulatory strategy while larger ones build dedicated in-house teams. Both approaches require early clarity on priority markets and clinical evidence specific to each regulator. Companies that resolved these questions before entering pivotal development have moved significantly faster and attracted stronger partners (e.g., Meril with its 31-site clinical trial or Venus Medtech with its US-based study). Implications:
3. IP protection gapsIP strategies often start too late for emerging medtechs, severely limiting the firms’ strategic options. Delaying global IP filings may work for “me-better” devices competing solely on cost or execution, but it’s risky when products are genuinely novel. When conversations shift toward licensing, partnership, or acquisition, IP becomes the most valuable asset. Implications:
4. Infrastructure gapsMost Asia-Pacific-originated emerging medtechs have yet to build the commercial foundations—such as market prioritization, entry models, channel infrastructure, and key opinion leader (KOL) networks—required to compete beyond their home markets. In complex, regulated markets, acquiring these capabilities through partnerships, co-promotion, or licensing is often more capital-efficient than building from scratch. Companies like Mindray and Venus Medtech acquired Western commercial infrastructure to support their global expansion. In doing so, they also gained access to sales teams and important hospital relationships. Implications:
5. Reimbursement and evidence gaps
Regulatory approval is the beginning of the commercial challenge, not the end. According to a study by Stanford University and the Journal of the American Medical Association Health Forum, only 44% of novel devices granted FDA authorization between 2016 and 2019 achieved even nominal Medicare coverage from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS). The median wait was 5.7 years, longer than the FDA authorization process itself. The new CMS-FDA RAPID pathway, announced in April 2026, may eventually compress the timeline for breakthrough-designated devices; however, implementation is pending. In the meantime, barriers remain around clinical evidence, channel entry, and KOL advocacy. In the EU and Japan, evolving Health Technology Assessment (HTA) frameworks are raising the evidence bar even higher. These systems include formal “comparative effectiveness” data—proof that a new device is superior to existing treatments—that most Asia-Pacific-based clinical programs aren’t equipped to provide. Evidence design is a key part of the problem. Trials that lack demographic diversity or fail to meet endpoints prioritized by the FDA or required under the EU Medical Device Regulation (MDR) often must be duplicated—at great cost—regardless of the underlying data quality. There are early signs that some markets are working to close this gap. In Singapore, HSA and the Agency for Care Effectiveness can already share company and product information with companies' consent, reducing the need to resubmit similar documentation across regulatory approval and HTA processes. Both agencies have also signaled their intent to develop more coordinated pathways that would allow clinical development, regulatory review, and HTA to progress in closer alignment for selected technologies that address priority disease areas or unmet clinical needs. Implications:
Stakeholder playbooksClosing these gaps is a strategic mandate. The following playbooks outline specific actions each stakeholder can take to bridge the divide between local innovation and global scale. Implications for multinational medtechsMany Western MNCs have localized production to counter market or competitive pressures, but these efforts often underdeliver, especially when importing expensive global operating models into cost-sensitive segments. To win in the next decade, Western MNCs must transition from “selling in” to “buying from” or co-creating with Asia-Pacific medtechs. With this shift, the region can become both an innovation engine and a proving ground. Immediate priorities
Priorities for the next 12–24 months
Implications for Asia-Pacific-originated emerging medtechsTo graduate from “me-too” substitutes (Phase 1) to “me-first” innovators (Phase 3), Asia-Pacific-originated emerging medtechs must pair engineering speed with clinical credibility. Winners will treat clinical and economic proof as core products and seek partners to complement and extend their expertise instead of attempting to do it all in house. Immediate priorities
Priorities for the next 12–24 months
Implications for ecosystem buildersGovernments, development agencies, investors, academic institutions, and incubators all share a common function: removing structural barriers so promising innovations can reach global markets. The Asia-Pacific region is full of promising ideas, but they frequently stall before reaching the global market. The actions below are designed to address the three foundational layers where stalling occurs most often: talent infrastructure, evidence systems, and commercial pathways. Immediate priorities
Priorities for the next 12–24 months
The 2030 visionCompanies that close strategic gaps by 2030 will transform the region’s medtech landscape. By the end of the decade, a successful ecosystem could be defined by: Global evidence validation: De Novo applications and PMA-track programs from the region will no longer be considered exceptional; they will be a standard part of the FDA’s annual docket. The number of Asia-Pacific–based pivotal trials meeting FDA and international standards will have grown substantially. Higher shares of global revenue: Regional leaders will generate a majority of their revenue outside home markets. Once the Asia-Pacific region is validated as an innovation source, hospital systems in the US and Europe will actively source Asia-Pacific-born devices for their superior clinical outcomes and purpose-built designs rather than just for their lower costs. A self-reinforcing talent cycle: The region will produce a generation of regulatory and HEOR professionals capable of launching global programs from the Asia-Pacific region. This will be supported by national talent initiatives, specialized CRO platforms, and MNC secondment programs. Routine partnerships and acquisitions: Global players will view the Asia-Pacific region as a primary source for innovation, and outbound licensing, co-development, and acquisition will become standard practice. Compounding investments: High-quality clinical evidence will trigger a self-reinforcing cycle: Proven results attract global partners, partners generate revenue and credibility, and that credibility attracts institutional capital to fund the next generation of innovation. As an example, consider Cochlear (137 times return from its 1995 IPO to its 2024 peak), Mindray (10 times per-share return for A-share investors from its 2018 ChiNext IPO price to its 2021 peak), and Resmed (425 times return from its 1995 IPO to its 2021 peak). ConclusionAsia-Pacific-originated medtechs have the potential to move beyond local leadership and produce global champions. Reaching that milestone requires moving beyond manufacturing excellence to clinical and regulatory mastery. How far Asia-Pacific-based innovations go depends on how well stakeholders address structural gaps between innovation and commercialization:
Enablers are already compounding. Investments made over the next 24 months will determine the role the Asia-Pacific region plays in the global medtech landscape. With the right strategic commitments, it will be a leading role.
About A*STARThe Agency for Science, Technology and Research (A*STAR) is Singapore’s lead public sector R&D agency. Through open innovation, we collaborate with our partners in both the public and private sectors to benefit the economy and society. As a Science and Technology Organisation, A*STAR bridges the gap between academia and industry. Our research creates economic growth and jobs for Singapore, and enhances lives by improving societal outcomes in healthcare, urban living, and sustainability. A*STAR plays a key role in nurturing scientific talent and leaders for the wider research community and industry. A*STAR’s R&D activities span biomedical sciences to physical sciences and engineering, with research entities primarily located in Biopolis and Fusionopolis. www.a-star.edu.sg
About EDB SingaporeThe Singapore Economic Development Board (EDB), a government agency under the Ministry of Trade and Industry, is responsible for strategies that enhance Singapore’s position as a global centre for business, innovation, and talent. We undertake investment promotion and industry development, and work with international businesses, both foreign and local, by providing information, connection to partners and access to government incentives for their investments. Our mission is to create sustainable economic growth, with vibrant business and good job opportunities for Singapore and Singaporeans. www.edb.gov.sg
About Enterprise SingaporeEnterprise Singapore is the Singapore government agency championing enterprise development. With a global network in over 35 locations around the world, it drives Singapore companies’ global expansion while connecting international businesses to trusted partners in Singapore. Singapore is a powerhouse of growth. As a global hub for trade and innovation, it offers access to a thriving ecosystem of global enterprises, start-ups, and investors. Known for their commitment to quality and innovation, Singapore companies are also ideal partners for growth. www.enterprisesg.gov.sg
About J.P. MorganJ.P. Morgan is a global leader in financial services, providing comprehensive, scalable solutions in investment banking, commercial banking, financial transaction processing and asset management. Committed to being the leading bank for the innovation economy, J.P. Morgan and its bankers across the globe provide venture-backed and high-growth companies with specialized services, access to a robust professional and venture capital network, and money-management solutions. www.jpmorgan.com
About SG Growth CapitalSG Growth Capital is the strategic investment platform of the Singapore Economic Development Board (EDB) and Enterprise Singapore, advancing Singapore’s economic priorities through targeted investments in key industries. By bridging capital, networks, and market expertise, SG Growth Capital accelerates the growth of its portfolio companies, helping them scale faster in the region and globally. Its investment arms, EDBI and SEEDS, back global leaders and co-invest in early-stage local startups, respectively. Together, we drive the development of innovative solutions and create high-value jobs, strengthening Singapore’s long-term economic resilience. www.sggc.sg |
