One Stop Shop for All Your Market Research Reports

Global Gastrointestinal Endoscopic Device Market Insights and Forecast to 2027

Gastrointestinal Endoscopic Device market is segmented by Type, and by Application. Players, stakeholders, and other participants in the global Gastrointestinal Endoscopic Device market will be able to gain the upper hand as they use the report as a powerful resource. The segmental analysis focuses on sales, revenue and forecast by Type and by Application for the period 2016-2027. Segment by Type Flexible Endoscopes Capsule Endoscopes The most widely-used type of Gastrointestinal Endoscopic Device was the Flexible one, that took up a market share of nearly 92% in 2018. Segment by Application Snare Polypectomy ERCP Tissue Resection Others Tissue Resection can be divided into three application area: EMR (Endoscopic Mucosal Resection), ESD (Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection), and Other Resections. Gastrointestinal Endoscopic Devices was most widely used in Snare Polypectomy among those apllications, which accounted for 4.06% of total market share. By Company Olympus Hoya Medtronic Fujifilm Karl Storz Boston Scientific Aohua By Region North America U.S. Canada Europe Germany France U.K. Italy Russia Asia-Pacific China Japan South Korea India Australia Taiwan Indonesia Thailand Malaysia Philippines Vietnam Latin America Mexico Brazil Argentina Middle East & Africa Turkey Saudi Arabia
1 Study Coverage 1.1 Gastrointestinal Endoscopic Device Product Introduction 1.2 Market by Type 1.2.1 Global Gastrointestinal Endoscopic Device Market Size Growth Rate by Type 1.4.2 Flexible Endoscopes 1.4.3 Capsule Endoscopes 1.3 Market by Application 1.3.1 Global Gastrointestinal Endoscopic Device Market Size Growth Rate by Application 1.3.2 Sn
Inquiry Before Buying

Request Sample

Share This Report

Our Clients

Payment Mode
Single User US $ 4900
Multi User US $7350
Corporate User US $9800
About this Report
Report ID 388855
Category
  • Medical Devices
Published on 29-Oct
Number of Pages 112
Publisher Name QY Research
Editor Rating
★★★★★
★★★★★
(43)