The Gujarat government's revised pricing model for drug-eluting stents (DES) under its public insurance scheme has triggered sharp criticism from domestic device manufacturers. The Association of Indian Medical Device Industry (AiMED) has slammed the move, calling it discriminatory and a blow to the 'Make in India' initiative.

Key Highlights

Dual pricing for stents under public insurance

• Gujarat government capped USFDA-approved stents at ₹25,000 and stents approved by Indian regulators at ₹12,000.

• The policy was notified to insurers as a cost-effectiveness measure ensuring quality care.

AiMED calls policy anti-competitive and discriminatory

• AiMED stated the pricing policy favours American multinationals and undermines domestic manufacturers.

• The organisation alleges it helps MNCs regain lost market share while pushing Indian firms out of their own markets.

Global comparisons and export credibility

• AiMED highlighted that Indian stents are exported to over 100 countries, including the UK and Germany, where such price differentials based on FDA approval do not exist.

• The dual pricing contradicts international norms and harms the credibility of India’s regulatory system.

Backdoor incentives to hospitals alleged

• AiMED claimed MNCs issue credit notes of ₹12,000–₹13,000 per stent, effectively selling them at ₹12,000 while claiming ₹25,000 reimbursement.

• These backdoor incentives make it hard for Indian firms to compete, as they cannot match these margins.

Statements from Leaders or Officials
 Rajiv Nath, Forum Coordinator of AiMED, wrote to Gujarat Chief Minister Bhupendra Patel demanding a rollback:
“The move incentivises unethical practices and severely undermines Indian manufacturers. It’s a mockery of the Make in India campaign.”AiMED has urged the Gujarat government to reconsider the pricing model and promote fair competition. With 80–85% of India’s medical devices still imported, the decision risks deepening reliance on global manufacturers. As the country aims to boost local production, stakeholders stress the need for pricing parity that does not disadvantage homegrown players.