The Market for Aesthetic Procedures to Treat the Skin
The American Society for Aesthetic Plastic Surgery reports that in 2005, total expenditures for aesthetic procedures were approximately $12.4 billion. From 2000 to 2005 the total number of aesthetic procedures increased from approximately 5.7 million to over 11.4 million procedures, representing a 15% compounded annual growth rate. Non-invasive aesthetic procedures were primarily responsible for the overall increase, rising from approximately 4.3 million to approximately 9.3 million procedures over the same period, representing a 17% compounded annual growth rate. We believe there are several factors contributing to the rapid growth of non-invasive aesthetic procedures, including:
Aging of the U.S. Population. The “baby boomer” demographic segment, defined by the U.S. Census as those Americans born between 1946 and 1964, represented over 26% of the U.S. population during 2005. Baby boomers control approximately $2 trillion in spending power and 50% of all discretionary income. The size and wealth of this aging segment and its desire to retain a youthful appearance have driven the growth for aesthetic procedures. Emergence of Non-Traditional Practitioners. The traditional providers of aesthetic procedures include dermatologists and plastic surgeons. In 2005, there were approximately 16,000 physicians within the specialties of dermatology and plastic surgery according to the American Board of Medical Specialties. Manufacturers of aesthetic systems have placed an increasingly important focus on sales to other physician groups including approximately 67,000 family practitioners, 38,000 obstetricians and gynecologists, and 36,000 general surgeons. Additionally, physician directed medi-spas and non-medical day spas have entered the aesthetics market. Broader Range of and Accessibility to Safe and Effective Treatments. Technological developments have made non-invasive treatment alternatives increasingly safe and effective. These technological developments have also reduced the required treatment and recovery time from invasive surgical procedures, which in turn have led to greater patient demand. These factors, along with the easy-to-use and low-cost nature of these products, have attracted both traditional and non-traditional practitioners to aesthetic procedures. Market Shift Towards Less Invasive Procedures. Market trends confirm that patients are moving away from invasive procedures towards minimally-invasive or non-invasive treatments. Notably, the American Society for Aesthetic Plastic Surgery reports that from 2000 to 2005 the total number of laser skin resurfacing procedures increased from approximately 117,000 to 476,000 procedures, representing a 32% compounded annual growth rate, and the total number of Botox injection procedures increased from 1.1 million to 3.3 million injections over the same period, representing a 25% compounded annual growth rate. Patients are seeking treatment for wrinkles in larger numbers. For example, skin tightening, which represents the fastest growing segment of the aesthetic laser market, is projected to grow at a 31% compounded annual rate over the next five years, according to the Millennium Research Group. Changing Practitioner Economics. Managed care and government payor reimbursement restrictions in the United States, and similar payment-related constraints outside the United States, are motivating practitioners to establish or expand their elective aesthetic practices with procedures that are paid for directly by patients. We expect this trend to continue as physicians look for ways to expand their practices. Increasing Acceptance of Aesthetic Procedures. Mass-market television shows like Extreme Makeover and The Swan reflect the mainstream acceptance of aesthetic procedures. Additionally, features in many popular television and print media have the effect of widely advertising the aesthetic procedures undertaken by celebrities, enhancing the glamour associated with and demand for self-improving treatments.
Similar market trends also exist outside the United States, where demand for non-invasive aesthetic procedures has also experienced strong growth. Manufacturers of non-invasive aesthetic devices typically derive one-third to one-half of their revenue from international sales.
Aesthetic Procedures for Skin and Their Limitations
Many medical treatments are available to treat wrinkles, rejuvenate the skin and give a patient a more youthful appearance. The most popular treatments include invasive surgical procedures, minimally-invasive needle injections and non-invasive energy-based procedures.
Of the various aesthetic alternatives for reducing wrinkles and rejuvenating appearance, invasive surgical procedures, such as cosmetic eyelid surgery, tummy tucks and facelifts, can create the most pronounced and long-lasting changes in appearance. They are performed by plastic surgeons with the patient under general anesthesia.
Market Data. Approximately 230,000 eyelid procedures, 169,000 tummy tucks and 150,000 facelifts were performed in the United States in 2005, according to the American Society for Aesthetic Plastic Surgery. Limitations. Compared to alternative treatments, invasive surgical procedures are expensive, costing thousands of dollars, and can involve weeks of post-surgical recovery and time away from work. They carry risk of hematoma, or accumulation of blood under the skin that may require removal, infection and adverse reactions to anesthesia.
Popular alternatives for temporarily improving appearance and reducing wrinkles include Botox and soft tissue fillers, such as Restylane, that are injected into the skin. These injections are typically administered by dermatologists at a cost of several hundred dollars. In most instances, they involve little or no restricted recovery time for the patients.
Market Data. Approximately 3.3 million Botox and 1.6 million soft tissue filler injections were administered in 2005, according to the American Society for Aesthetic Plastic Surgery. Limitations. The effects of these procedures are temporary and require repeat treatment, with Botox lasting from three to four months and injectable fillers typically lasting from three to six months.
Lasers and other light-based devices are used to perform skin rejuvenation, to temporarily reduce wrinkles and to perform other aesthetic procedures, such as hair removal and vein treatment. Light-based skin rejuvenation, or resurfacing, procedures can be either ablative or non-ablative. Ablative treatments, also known as laser peels, intentionally burn away the epidermis to heat the dermis and to stimulate collagen growth. Non-ablative rejuvenation treatments typically use less energy and employ gels or other substances in order to insulate the epidermis from damage during the treatment. Because they are less intense than ablative lasers, non-ablative procedures typically involve little downtime or recovery.
Market Data. According to the American Society for Aesthetic Plastic Surgery, there were over 470,000 laser skin resurfacing procedures performed in 2005. The Windhover/Medtech Insight Report estimates that 69% of these treatments were non-ablative. Limitations. Ablative treatments, or laser peels, like surgery, are performed under general anesthesia and can involve weeks of post-surgical recovery and time away from work. Non-ablative light-based procedures are often effective in hair removal and other procedures targeting the epidermis. However, the nature of light makes it challenging to reach the depth of the subcutaneous fat layer. Penetration of light, and consequently the ability to produce heat, is physically limited by the wavelength of the light, the light’s natural tendency to scatter within tissue and the absorption of this energy by specific chromophores within the body, such as water, blood and pigmentation. Non-ablative wrinkle treatments typically require multiple sessions, from four to six treatments spread two to four weeks apart per treatment.
These widely-adopted treatment options for wrinkle reduction fall generally into one of two categories: either a single invasive procedure involving significant recovery time, but with a long-lasting, pronounced effect; or a procedure that is either minimally-invasive or non-invasive involving minimal recovery time, but requiring frequent repeat treatments for a modest effect. We believe that the ideal treatment option falls between these two extremes, providing lasting, noticeable effect from a single procedure that involves little or no downtime.