Medical Devices in Türkiye

Turning our strength in healthcare delivery into technology

Behlül ÜnverPresident, World Health Tourism Platform27 September 2026

Thousands of decisions are made in a hospital every day. Teams determine which examination to perform, which device to use, how to deliver treatment and how to monitor the patient. Behind these decisions lies the accumulated expertise of physicians, nurses, engineers and other healthcare professionals. Every day also reveals where existing technology is adequate and where a new solution is needed.

This expertise is one of Türkiye’s most important assets in medical devices. How effectively are we translating the experience gained through healthcare delivery into the design and development of new products? Can a problem encountered in our hospitals lead to a technology developed in Türkiye and used in other countries as well?

This should be central to our discussion of medical devices. Strength in healthcare delivery does not automatically translate into the ability to develop the technologies that support it. Building that connection is a shared responsibility of healthcare, science, industrial and foreign trade policy.

What a substantial market tells us

According to the Presidency’s Investment Office, Türkiye’s medical device market reached USD 4.5 billion in 2024. TÜSEB’s 2025 sector report records exports of USD 1.256 billion and imports of USD 2.684 billion for 2024. Within the report’s product coverage, exports amounted to approximately 47% of imports. Market size and trade figures are different indicators; read together, they reveal both substantial demand and production and export capacity that needs further development. [1–2]

The origin of imports is also part of this discussion. In the 2024 UN Comtrade records published through WITS, the United States, China and Germany are Türkiye’s three leading suppliers in HS 9018, a product category that includes medical and surgical instruments. Germany, Slovenia, the Netherlands, China and the United States are among our leading export destinations in the same category. Although this classification does not represent the entire sector, it illustrates Türkiye’s connections with international production and trade networks. [3]

We therefore cannot say that no data exists. What remains missing is a clear view of the technological capabilities behind these figures. Who owns the design of the products we export? Where are their critical components manufactured? How much value is added in Türkiye? Who holds the rights to develop and modify the product? Who receives the subsequent revenue from software, maintenance and consumables?

A country’s position in medical devices cannot be explained solely by the dollar value of its sales. We need to complement trade data with information on design, manufacturing, clinical validation and intellectual property across product groups. Such a picture would also reveal our strengths and identify the dependencies that should be reduced first.

Different product groups require different paths

Medical devices encompass a vast range of products. Surgical instruments, implants, laboratory diagnostic systems, imaging equipment, intensive care devices, rehabilitation technologies and medical software are developed to address different needs. Their capital requirements, research timelines, clinical evaluations and market entry conditions also differ.

Success in one area of manufacturing therefore does not mean that the entire sector has reached the same stage. Equally, dependence on foreign suppliers for an advanced technology system does not diminish the manufacturing capabilities established elsewhere. Sound policy must begin by recognising these differences.

We should also approach domestic production within this framework. A manufacturing facility in Türkiye contributes to employment and supply capacity. Developing original designs, critical components and software here adds further value. Rather than attempting to produce every component simultaneously, we can focus on capabilities that are decisive for continuity of healthcare and international competitiveness.

A high import bill should not be the sole determinant of our priorities. Patients’ unmet needs, the country’s existing scientific capabilities, critical supply risks and global market opportunities should be assessed together. This would concentrate support in selected fields, building expertise rather than dispersing resources across disconnected projects.

From the pandemic to a lasting production system

The pandemic demonstrated in concrete terms what manufacturing capability means for health security. The shipment of ventilators developed in Türkiye to other countries and the entry of domestic molecular diagnostic kits into international markets showed that solutions could be developed in different fields. The Investment Office reported in June 2020 that 650 ventilators had arrived in Brazil alone. [4–5]

The value of this experience extends beyond the success of a single device or company. It lies in the capacity that emerges when research expertise, engineering, production organisation and healthcare needs converge around a common objective. Yet emergency demand during an exceptional period does not guarantee a sustainable market under normal conditions. Maintaining quality, developing new products, providing service and remaining competitive require a separate, sustained effort.

When recalling the pandemic experience, we should therefore also ask: to what extent were the knowledge, skilled workforce and manufacturing capabilities developed at that time transferred to subsequent products? Sustaining these success stories depends on enduring institutions and programmes that enable this transfer.

Hospital needs should be the starting point for research

University hospitals are among the places where this continuity can be established. Problems identified in hospitals should regularly inform the research agenda. Delays in interpreting an image, difficulties using a device, or the needs of a patient returning to hospital because monitoring at home was unavailable can all be the starting point for a new product.

This requires more than bringing physicians and engineers together for a meeting. Medicine, engineering and the basic sciences should work towards shared objectives, with a common budget and timetable. Nurses, biomedical engineering departments and technical service staff should also participate in design. The knowledge of those who use a device and resolve problems when it fails is essential to making a product work in practice.

Universities’ contributions should not be assessed solely by publication and patent counts. Licensing an invention, completing the necessary tests, demonstrating clinical benefit and achieving sustainable production should also be recognised. Intellectual property, responsibilities and revenue sharing should be agreed at the outset of joint projects.

The gap between research support and hospital purchasing decisions must also be closed. A continuing financing model is needed for testing, clinical evaluation, certification and initial use of the product. Public procurement can support access to clinical settings for domestic products with validated performance, while maintaining quality, safety and competition requirements. Manufacturers, in turn, should demonstrate the value of that support through product performance, further development and market acceptance.

Patients’ needs should shape the technology agenda

Oncology is an important field for this collaborative approach. In cancer care, the need does not end with purchasing an imaging device. Early detection, pathological assessment, treatment planning, accurate delivery and patient monitoring are interconnected processes. Each stage creates different technological needs and research questions.

In advanced fields such as MRI, computed tomography and radiotherapy, objectives can be set for critical components and software as well as complete systems. Developing an original solution used within an international system can build the capabilities needed for more comprehensive products. This nevertheless requires long-term research, clinical evidence and manufacturing discipline.

The same approach applies to cardiovascular disease, diabetes, rehabilitation, care for older people and home healthcare. Medical technology should not be confined to hospital walls. Solutions that support risk monitoring in appropriate patients, timely disease detection and the safe continuation of treatment at home should also be part of the production agenda.

Our measure of success cannot be the use of more devices or the performance of more procedures. What does the solution deliver for patients? Does it reduce diagnostic delays? Does it improve access to treatment? Can it reduce unnecessary procedures or the burden of care? We should assess the economic and health value of technology together.

Artificial intelligence, robotic systems and digital hospitals are tools for this transformation. Adding AI to a product, however, does not automatically establish its clinical benefit. How the algorithm performs across different patient groups, how data is protected and who is responsible when errors occur must be clarified. In discussions of “staffless hospitals”, we should likewise focus on which tasks can be safely automated and how this can increase the time healthcare professionals devote to patients.

Sustaining production requires a place in global markets

Türkiye’s domestic market is an important starting point. Nevertheless, the international relevance of a product should also be considered if investment in advanced technology is to be sustained. MedTech Europe estimates the European medical technology market at approximately EUR 170 billion in 2024. This scale represents an opportunity while also reminding us that we will face strong competitors. [6]

Planning for international markets should not begin after a product is completed. The needs of the target country, market acceptance requirements, payment capacity and service arrangements should be assessed during design. A product developed for Europe may have different requirements from a device intended for settings with different infrastructure.

Türkiye can combine its access to nearby markets with its engineering capabilities and healthcare experience. In Central Asia, the Middle East, Africa and Latin America, needs and competition should be analysed country by country. These regions should not be viewed merely as markets for lower-priced products. Reliability, ease of maintenance, training and operating costs can be decisive in purchasing decisions.

Sustained sales become difficult if a product is not supported by spare parts, maintenance, software updates and user training. Certification costs, long development periods, exchange rate exposure and payment collection risks also place burdens on manufacturers. Support should therefore extend from research through to after-sales service. Export success should be measured through regular sales and sustained use, rather than one-off shipments.

Where health tourism fits into this framework

Health tourism offers an opportunity to bring clinical capability and technology development together. Particularly in complex treatments, international confidence rests on the experience of the team using the equipment, treatment outcomes and continuity of care, alongside the reputation of the device itself. When technology developed in Türkiye demonstrates its value within this wider framework, the country’s healthcare services and manufacturing capacity can reinforce each other.

Our hospitals can become centres where products are evaluated scientifically, practical experience accumulates and international healthcare professionals receive training. Joint clinical studies and professional education can also help solutions developed in Türkiye gain recognition abroad. The distinction between a product under investigation and an established treatment must always remain clear. This can create a tangible connection between health tourism and medical device exports: experience gained in healthcare informs product development; validated technology strengthens clinical services; and education and international collaboration help both reach the world.

Türkiye needs this relationship to extend beyond individual efforts. A programme should be established with defined priorities, responsibilities for universities and hospitals, conditions that allow manufacturers to work over the long term, and transparent monitoring of results. Alongside how much we spend, we should discuss which problems we solve, which capabilities we acquire and what we can offer the world.

Medical Devices in Türkiye The knowledge generated in our hospitals every day should inform the design of a new product just as much as the technical specification for the next purchase. This is the starting point for translating our strength in healthcare delivery into technology production.

Sources and data note

Data checked on 27 September 2026. Numerical comparisons use 2024 data. Market estimates, customs records and technological capabilities are different indicators. The product coverage of different sources has not been combined to calculate a new sector total. The policy proposals in the text represent the author’s assessment.

[1] Presidency of the Republic of Türkiye Investment Office. Life Sciences. Size of Türkiye’s medical device market in 2024. Source

[2] TÜSEB. Vision for Localisation and Strategic Needs Analysis in the Medical Device Industry, 2025, pp. 8–9. Imports and exports within the report’s 2024 Trade Map coverage; exports equivalent to approximately 47% of imports. Checked against a published text copy of the report. Source · Text copy

[3] World Bank WITS / UN Comtrade. Türkiye, 2024, HS 9018. A category covering instruments and appliances used in medicine, surgery, dentistry and veterinary medicine; it does not encompass the entire medical device sector. Country rankings are based on import and export records. Source · Export records

[4] Presidency of the Republic of Türkiye Investment Office. Domestically Produced Ventilators Arrive in Brazil, 8 June 2020. Shipment of 650 devices. Source

[5] KOSGEB. Domestic PCR Production for Detecting COVID-19. Interview with a manufacturer during the pandemic, used as an example of exports of domestically produced molecular diagnostic kits. Company statements have not been extrapolated to the entire sector. Source

[6] MedTech Europe. The European Medical Technology in Figures, Market. Updated 5 September 2025; estimated European medical technology market in 2024. Not used to calculate Türkiye’s market share