Spinal Bone Cement Industry Research Report 2026

Spinal bone cement is a polymer material used in spinal surgeries, typically composed of a powder component and a liquid component. The powder component includes polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA), benzoyl peroxide (used as a polymerization initiator), and barium sulfate (used as a radiopaque agent for X-ray imaging). The liquid component includes methyl methacrylate (the monomer), hydroquinone (a polymerization inhibitor), and N, N-dimethyl-p-toluidine (an accelerator). Spinal bone cement is widely used in procedures such as vertebroplasty, kyphoplasty, pedicular screw augmentation, and specific devices like SpineJack and Kiva System. Once injected into the vertebrae, it rapidly polymerizes, providing mechanical support, enhancing bone strength, relieving pain, and restoring vertebral height and spinal stability.

Poly(methyl methacrylate) (PMMA) was first developed by the chemist Dr. Otto Röhm in 1901, within the scope of his thesis entitled “Polymerization products of acrylic acid”. This material was further developed in his company “Röhm and Hass” and was marketed as PLEXIGLAS in 1933. They produced PMMA-based products for dentures as well as submarine periscopes, windshields, canopies and gun turrets in airplanes during World War II. In 1936, Kulzer and Degussa discovered that the dough formed by mixing ground PMMA powder and a liquid monomer hardens when benzoyl peroxide is added and heated to 100°C. A few years later, they showed that this reaction could also take place at room temperature when a co-initiator (activator) is added 57. This study established the founding principles for the production of PMMA bone cement.

The first in vivo use of PMMA dates back to 1938, to an attempt to close cranial defects in monkeys. Kleinschmitt later repeated this procedure in 1941 to close cranial defect in humans. Since then, the use of PMMA as bone cement has been extended to other fields including dentistry, ophthalmology and orthopaedics. In the 1940s, Jean and Robert Judet introduced a method for fixating prosthetic implants using the cement, followed in the 1950s by Kiaer and Haboush, who used it in hip replacements. However, its current success and popularity for use in hip replacements is commonly accredited to Sir John Charnley. In the mid-1980s, Deramond et al. started to use it for vertebral augmentation procedures (vertebroplasty and balloon kyphoplasty), treating hemangioma-induced vertebral compression fractures (VCFs). Despite the extensive use of PMMA cement in vertebral augmentation, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) did not approve this material until 2004. The success of PMMA bone cement can be attributed to its bioinertness, relatively good biocompatibility over long-term follow-up, and cost-effectiveness. Furthermore, it is easy to handle and provides good mechanical strength.

PMMA bone cement is formed from 2 separate components, a liquid and a solid phase. Even though the exact formulation differs between brands, the cement usually consists of similar basic components. The solid phase, in the form of a powder, is generally composed of pre-polymerized MMA or methacrylate copolymer beads, an initiator for radical polymerization (typically, a peroxide) and a high amount of radiopacifier or contrast agent (typically, an inorganic oxide, 30-45 wt%). The liquid phase comprises mainly methyl methacrylate monomers (MMA) (sometimes butyl methacrylate) and the activator (typically, a tertiary amine) to form radicals. Additionally, hydroquinone is added to prevent premature polymerization during storage. Other additives consist of colorants (e.g. chlorophyll), used to distinguish cement from bone, and/or hydroxyapatite to enhancebiocompatibility of the cement or antibiotics. The amount of liquid and solid varies depending on the brand and is defined as the liquid-topowder ratio (L/P ratio).

Bone cement is synthesized via a free-radical mechanism that occurs when the powder and liquid are mixed together. The initiator, benzoyl peroxide, is decomposed at room temperature by the activator N.NDmpT via a reduction/oxidation reaction to form reactive benzoyl radicals. These radicals initiate the polymerization by reacting with the C=C double bonds of the MMA monomer. The polymeric chains are then generated, growing as the number of radicals increases, and resulting in the formation of a dough with increased viscosity (molecular weight varying from 100 000 to 800 000 Da). The viscosity and reaction rates increase quickly due to the presence of PMMA particles. Chain mobility becomes limited as the cement hardens, so complete conversion of all MMA is therefore not possible. This generally leaves 2-6% of residual monomer in the cement matrix. The dough typically sets in 15 min. During the process, heat is generated, resulting in temperatures of up to 120 °C.

In the spinal surgery consumables landscape, spinal bone cement sits in a distinctive procurement position: it is a sterile, single-use, workflow-critical product that hospitals evaluate together with mixing and delivery performance, surgeon handling preference, and procedure fit for vertebroplasty and kyphoplasty, rather than treating it as a commodity. The global market delivered about US$322 million in 2025; it is expected to reach around US$334 million in 2026 and approach US$450 million by 2032, with the market projected to grow at a 2026–2032 CAGR of about 5%. The growth profile is fundamentally volume-anchored, shaped by procedure throughput and mix shift toward higher-control solutions.

Unit demand reinforces that reality. Global sales were about 5.6 million kits in 2025 and are expected to move toward 5.8 million kits in 2026, so the commercial conversation tends to be dominated by consistency, controllability, and complication risk management, not by headline list pricing. For professional buyers, “performance” is defined by the full in-theatre sequence—viscosity build, working time, radiopacity, and predictable injection behavior under real operating cadence—because leakage management and repeatability translate directly into clinical confidence and hospital standardization.

The most decision-relevant market split is procedural. Kyphoplasty is the primary value pool at about US$154 million in 2025 and around US$160 million in 2026, close to half of global revenue; vertebroplasty follows at roughly US$103 million in 2025 and about US$107 million in 2026, around one-third of the market. The remainder is concentrated in pedicular screw augmentation and procedure-specific device workflows, together representing roughly one-fifth. This mix naturally elevates products optimized for controlled delivery, which is why high-viscosity cements account for close to half of revenue, at about US$152 million in 2025 and around US$160 million in 2026, with low- and medium-viscosity segments sharing the balance.

On the supply side, Stryker, Depuy Synthes, and Globus medical form a clear leading tier, jointly representing well over four-fifths of revenue within the tracked mainstream manufacturer set, while Heraeus, Tecres, Osartis, G21, and SUBITON SYNIMED make up the next tier and long tail. That concentration is not accidental: switching costs are real because surgeon habit, device compatibility, on-site support, and training all shape standardized hospital pathways. As a result, competitive advantage is built as much through clinical workflow integration and channel execution as through formulation.

From a manufacturing and value-chain standpoint, spinal bone cement remains dominated by PMMA-based powder and liquid systems engineered around initiator and accelerator balance, radiopaque fillers, sterile packaging, and tight batch-to-batch control of setting behavior. Quality control has to protect the clinical “use window” while managing heat release, residual monomer risk, radiopacity, and injectability, and the mixing and delivery system can materially amplify user experience and adverse-event outcomes. Looking toward the end of the forecast period in 2032, incremental differentiation is likely to continue clustering around more controllable mixing and injection workflows, broader procedure coverage with consistent handling, and the operational reliability that large hospital buyers require for long-cycle standardization.

This report quantifies the global Spinal Bone Cement market in terms of revenue (US$ million) and, where applicable, sales volume (k Kits), using 2025 as the base year and providing annual historical and forecast data for 2021–2032.

It standardizes definitions of Types and Applications, harmonizes vendor attribution, and presents comparable time series by company, Type, Application, and region/country, including indicative price bands (US$/k Kits) and concentration ratios (CR5/CR10).

The outputs are intended to support strategy development, budgeting, and performance benchmarking for brand owners, manufacturers, retailers, channel partners, and investors; data are structured with consistent units and fields to facilitate integration into internal FP&A and BI systems.

This section profiles leading manufacturers, combining 2021–2025 results with a 2026–2032 outlook. It reports revenue, market share, price bands, product and application mix, regional and channel mix, and key developments (M&A, capacity additions, certifications). It also provides global revenue, average price, and—where applicable—sales volume by manufacturer, and calculates CR5/CR10 and rank changes to support comparative benchmarking.

Spinal Bone Cement Market by Company

Stryker

Depuy Synthes

Globus medical

Heraeus

Tecres

Osartis

G21

SUBITON/SYNIMED

Low Viscosity Cements

Medium Viscosity Cements

High Viscosity Cements

Kyphoplasty

Vertebroplasty

Pedicular Screw

Specific Devices (e.g. SpineJack, Kiva System)

North America

United States

Canada

Mexico

Europe

Germany

France

U.K.

Italy

Russia

Spain

Netherlands

Switzerland

Sweden

Poland

Asia-Pacific

China

Japan

South Korea

India

Australia

Taiwan

Southeast Asia

South America

Brazil

Argentina

Chile

Middle East & Africa

Egypt

South Africa

Israel

Türkiye

GCC Countries

High-impact rendering factors and drivers have been studied in this report to aid the readers to understand the general development. Moreover, the report includes restraints and challenges that may act as stumbling blocks on the way of the players. This will assist the users to be attentive and make informed decisions related to business. Specialists have also laid their focus on the upcoming business prospects.

1. This report will help the readers to understand the competition within the industries and strategies for the competitive environment to enhance the potential profit. The report also focuses on the competitive landscape of the global Spinal Bone Cement market, and introduces in detail the market share, industry ranking, competitor ecosystem, market performance, new product development, operation situation, expansion, and acquisition. etc. of the main players, which helps the readers to identify the main competitors and deeply understand the competition pattern of the market.

2. This report will help stakeholders to understand the global industry status and trends of Spinal Bone Cement and provides them with information on key market drivers, restraints, challenges, and opportunities.

3. This report will help stakeholders to understand competitors better and gain more insights to strengthen their position in their businesses. The competitive landscape section includes the market share and rank (in volume and value), competitor ecosystem, new product development, expansion, and acquisition.

4. This report stays updated with novel technology integration, features, and the latest developments in the market

5. This report helps stakeholders to gain insights into which regions to target globally

6. This report helps stakeholders to gain insights into the end-user perception concerning the adoption of Spinal Bone Cement.

7. This report helps stakeholders to identify some of the key players in the market and understand their valuable contribution.

Chapter 1: Research objectives, research methods, data sources, data cross-validation;

Chapter 2: Introduces the report scope of the report, executive summary of different market segments (by region, product type, application, etc.), including the market size of each market segment, future development potential, and so on. It offers a high-level view of the current state of the market and its likely evolution in the short to mid-term, and long term.

Chapter 3: Detailed analysis of Spinal Bone Cement manufacturers competitive landscape, price, production and value market share, latest development plan, merger, and acquisition information, etc.

Chapter 4: Provides profiles of key players, introducing the basic situation of the main companies in the market in detail, including product production/output, value, price, gross margin, product introduction, recent development, etc.

Chapter 5: Production/output, value of Spinal Bone Cement by region/country. It provides a quantitative analysis of the market size and development potential of each region in the next six years.

Chapter 6: Consumption of Spinal Bone Cement in regional level and country level. It provides a quantitative analysis of the market size and development potential of each region and its main countries and introduces the market development, future development prospects, market space, and production of each country in the world.

Chapter 7: Provides the analysis of various market segments by type, covering the market size and development potential of each market segment, to help readers find the blue ocean market in different market segments.

Chapter 8: Provides the analysis of various market segments by application, covering the market size and development potential of each market segment, to help readers find the blue ocean market in different downstream markets.

Chapter 9: Analysis of industrial chain, including the upstream and downstream of the industry.

Chapter 10: Introduces the market dynamics, latest developments of the market, the driving factors and restrictive factors of the market, the challenges and risks faced by manufacturers in the industry, and the analysis of relevant policies in the industry.

Chapter 11: The main points and conclusions of the report.