<p>作者：Mike Scarcella</p>
<p>华盛顿，12 月 22 日（路透社）-</p>
<p>贝克顿·迪金森（Becton Dickinson，BDX.N）被一家竞争对手的医疗设备制造商起诉，指控其在美国外科疝气网市场上阻碍竞争，导致患者和医疗提供者支付更高的价格。</p>
<p>该诉讼由 Tela Bio Inc（TELA.O）于周五在费城的联邦法院提起，声称贝克顿·迪金森利用其在两个关键产品类别——永久疝气网和可吸收疝气网——的主导地位，排除 Tela Bio 的 OviTex 产品。</p>
<p>根据诉讼，疝气修复手术是全国范围内最常见的手术之一，每年金额达到 120 亿美元。</p>
<p>疝气网每年用于超过 150 万次手术，以增强虚弱的组织。永久网由合成材料制成，广泛用于大多数手术，而外科医生通常在更复杂的修复中使用可吸收网。Tela Bio 在可吸收网市场上与贝克顿·迪金森竞争。</p>
<p>总部位于宾夕法尼亚州的 Tela Bio 指控贝克顿·迪金森违反反垄断法，惩罚医院和其他医疗系统购买 Tela Bio 的产品，并使用长期合同将购买者锁定为仅从贝克顿·迪金森购买。</p>
<p>贝克顿·迪金森尚未立即回应置评请求。</p>
<p>Tela Bio 表示，它在 2016 年推出了其竞争对手的可吸收网，且价格低于贝克顿·迪金森的产品。Tela Bio 表示，它已经损失了大量收入，并要求法院判给其未指明的赔偿，并发布促进竞争的法院命令。</p>
<p>贝克顿·迪金森面临全国范围内关于其疝气网产品的诉讼。</p>
<p>该公司去年在州和联邦法院达成和解。具体条款未披露，但贝克顿·迪金森当时表示，金额包括其为产品责任诉讼预留的 “绝大多数”</p>
<p>17 亿美元。该公司并未承认任何不当行为。</p>
<p>Tela Bio 表示，针对贝克顿·迪金森的其他数万起疝气网诉讼仍在待决中。</p>
<p>该案件为 Tela Bio Inc 诉贝克顿·迪金森公司等，案件编号：美国宾夕法尼亚东区地方法院，2:25-cv-07189。</p>
<p>原告律师：Derek Ho（Kellogg, Hansen, Todd, Figel &amp; Frederick）；Jeffrey Berhold（Jeffrey L. Berhold, P.C.）；Richard Placey（Montgomery, McCracken, Walker &amp; Rhoads）</p>
<p>被告律师：尚未出现</p>
<p>阅读更多：</p>
<p>贝克顿·迪金森同意和解约 38,000 起疝气网诉讼</p>
<p>罗德岛陪审团裁定贝克顿·迪金森在疝气网审判中支付 480 万美元</p>

TELA

<p>Tela Bio Inc 起诉 Becton Dickinson，指控其垄断美国疝气网市场，导致价格上涨。诉讼称 Becton Dickinson 利用其市场主导地位排除 Tela Bio 的 OviTex 产品，违反了反垄断法。Tela Bio 寻求赔偿和法院命令以促进竞争。Becton Dickinson 之前曾因疝气网产品面临诉讼，目前仍有许多诉讼待决</p>

<p>By Mike Scarcella</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>作者：Mike Scarcella</p>
</div><p>WASHINGTON, Dec 22 (Reuters) -</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>华盛顿，12 月 22 日（路透社）-</p>
</div><p>Becton Dickinson (BDX.N) has been sued by a rival medical device manufacturer for allegedly thwarting competition in the U.S. market for surgical hernia mesh and causing patients and care providers to pay higher prices.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>贝克顿·迪金森（Becton Dickinson，BDX.N）被一家竞争对手的医疗设备制造商起诉，指控其在美国外科疝气网市场上阻碍竞争，导致患者和医疗提供者支付更高的价格。</p>
</div><p>The by Tela Bio Inc (TELA.O) , filed on Friday in the federal court in Philadelphia, claims Becton Dickinson leveraged its dominance in two key product categories — permanent hernia mesh and resorbable hernia mesh — to exclude Tela Bio’s OviTex product.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>该诉讼由 Tela Bio Inc（TELA.O）于周五在费城的联邦法院提起，声称贝克顿·迪金森利用其在两个关键产品类别——永久疝气网和可吸收疝气网——的主导地位，排除 Tela Bio 的 OviTex 产品。</p>
</div><p>Hernia repairs are among the most widely performed operations nationwide, amounting to $12 billion annually, according to the lawsuit.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>根据诉讼，疝气修复手术是全国范围内最常见的手术之一，每年金额达到 120 亿美元。</p>
</div><p>Hernia mesh is used in more than 1.5 million surgeries annually to reinforce weakened tissue. Permanent mesh, made from synthetic materials, is used in most procedures, while surgeons often use resorbable mesh for more complex repairs. Tela Bio competes with Becton Dickinson in the market for resorbable mesh.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>疝气网每年用于超过 150 万次手术，以增强虚弱的组织。永久网由合成材料制成，广泛用于大多数手术，而外科医生通常在更复杂的修复中使用可吸收网。Tela Bio 在可吸收网市场上与贝克顿·迪金森竞争。</p>
</div><p>Pennsylvania-based Tela Bio alleges Becton Dickinson violated antitrust law by punishing hospitals and other healthcare systems for buying Tela Bio’s product and using long-term contracts to lock purchasers into buying solely from Becton Dickinson.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>总部位于宾夕法尼亚州的 Tela Bio 指控贝克顿·迪金森违反反垄断法，惩罚医院和其他医疗系统购买 Tela Bio 的产品，并使用长期合同将购买者锁定为仅从贝克顿·迪金森购买。</p>
</div><p>Becton Dickinson did not immediately respond to requests for comment.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>贝克顿·迪金森尚未立即回应置评请求。</p>
</div><p>Tela Bio said it introduced its rival resorbable mesh in 2016and that it cost less than Becton Dickinson’s product. Tela Bio said it has lost substantial revenue and asked the court to award it unspecified damages and issue a court order fostering competition.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>Tela Bio 表示，它在 2016 年推出了其竞争对手的可吸收网，且价格低于贝克顿·迪金森的产品。Tela Bio 表示，它已经损失了大量收入，并要求法院判给其未指明的赔偿，并发布促进竞争的法院命令。</p>
</div><p>Becton Dickinson has faced nationwide litigation over its hernia mesh products.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>贝克顿·迪金森面临全国范围内关于其疝气网产品的诉讼。</p>
</div><p>The company last year about in state and federal courts. The terms were not disclosed, but Becton Dickinson said at the time that the amountincluded a “large majority” of</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>该公司去年在州和联邦法院达成和解。具体条款未披露，但贝克顿·迪金森当时表示，金额包括其为产品责任诉讼预留的 “绝大多数”</p>
</div><p>$1.7 billion the company had set aside</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>17 亿美元。该公司并未承认任何不当行为。</p>
</div><p>for product liability litigation. The company did not admit any wrongdoing.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>Tela Bio 表示，针对贝克顿·迪金森的其他数万起疝气网诉讼仍在待决中。</p>
</div><p>Tela Bio said tens of thousands of other hernia mesh lawsuits remain pending against Becton Dickinson.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>该案件为 Tela Bio Inc 诉贝克顿·迪金森公司等，案件编号：美国宾夕法尼亚东区地方法院，2:25-cv-07189。</p>
</div><p>The case is Tela Bio Inc v. Becton, Dickinson &amp; Co et al, U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Pennsylvania, No. 2:25-cv-07189.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>原告律师：Derek Ho（Kellogg, Hansen, Todd, Figel &amp; Frederick）；Jeffrey Berhold（Jeffrey L. Berhold, P.C.）；Richard Placey（Montgomery, McCracken, Walker &amp; Rhoads）</p>
</div><p>For plaintiff: Derek Ho of Kellogg, Hansen, Todd, Figel &amp; Frederick; Jeffrey Berhold of Jeffrey L. Berhold, P.C.; and Richard Placey of Montgomery, McCracken, Walker &amp; Rhoads</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>被告律师：尚未出现</p>
</div><p>For defendants: No appearances yet</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>阅读更多：</p>
</div><p>Read more:</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>贝克顿·迪金森同意和解约 38,000 起疝气网诉讼</p>
</div><p>Becton Dickinson agrees to settle about 38,000 hernia mesh suits</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>罗德岛陪审团裁定贝克顿·迪金森在疝气网审判中支付 480 万美元</p>
</div><p>R.I. jury orders Becton Dickinson to pay $4.8 mln in hernia mesh trial</p>

医疗器械制造商 Becton Dickinson 因涉嫌垄断疝气网片市场而被起诉