Legal Proceedings	9 Months Ended
Sep. 30, 2018
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
Legal Proceedings	Legal Proceedings From time to time, we are subject to claims alleging product liability, patent infringement or other claims incurred in the ordinary course of business. These may involve our United States or foreign operations, or sales by foreign distributors. Likewise, from time to time, the Company may receive an information request or subpoena from a government agency such as the Securities and Exchange Commission, Department of Justice, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, the Department of Labor, the Treasury Department or other federal and state agencies or foreign governments or government agencies. These information requests or subpoenas may or may not be routine inquiries, or may begin as routine inquiries and over time develop into enforcement actions of various types. Likewise, we receive reports of alleged misconduct from employees and third parties, which we investigate as appropriate. Manufacturers of medical devices have been the subject of various enforcement actions relating to interactions with health care providers domestically or internationally whereby companies are claimed to have provided health care providers with inappropriate incentives to purchase their products. Similarly, the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act ("FCPA") imposes obligations on manufacturers with respect to interactions with health care providers who may be considered government officials based on their affiliation with public hospitals. The FCPA also requires publicly listed manufacturers to maintain accurate books and records, and maintain internal accounting controls sufficient to provide assurance that transactions are accurately recorded, lawful and in accordance with management's authorization. The FCPA poses unique challenges both because manufacturers operate in foreign cultures in which conduct illegal under the FCPA may not be illegal in local jurisdictions, and because, in some cases, a United States manufacturer may face risks under the FCPA based on the conduct of third parties over whom the manufacturer may not have complete control. While CONMED has not experienced any material enforcement action to date, there can be no assurance that the Company will not be subject to a material enforcement action in the future, or that the Company will not incur costs including, in the form of fees for lawyers and other consultants, that are material to the Company’s results of operations in the course of responding to a future inquiry or investigation. Manufacturers of medical products may face exposure to significant product liability claims. To date, we have not experienced any product liability claims that have been material to our financial statements or financial condition, but any such claims arising in the future could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations or cash flows. We currently maintain commercial product liability insurance of $30 million per incident and $30 million in the aggregate annually, which we believe is adequate. This coverage is on a claims-made basis. There can be no assurance that claims will not exceed insurance coverage, that the carriers will be solvent or that such insurance will be available to us in the future at a reasonable cost. We establish reserves sufficient to cover probable losses associated with any such pending claims. We do not expect that the resolution of any pending claims, investigations or reports of alleged misconduct will have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations or cash flows. There can be no assurance, however, that future claims or investigations, or the costs associated with responding to such claims, investigations or reports of misconduct, especially claims and investigations not covered by insurance, will not have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations or cash flows. Our operations are subject, and in the past have been subject, to a number of environmental laws and regulations governing, among other things, air emissions; wastewater discharges; the use, handling and disposal of hazardous substances and wastes; soil and groundwater remediation and employee health and safety. In some jurisdictions, environmental requirements may be expected to become more stringent in the future. In the United States, certain environmental laws can impose liability for the entire cost of site restoration upon each of the parties that may have contributed to conditions at the site regardless of fault or the lawfulness of the party’s activities. While we do not believe that the present costs of environmental compliance and remediation are material, there can be no assurance that future compliance or remedial obligations would not have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations or cash flows. In April 2017, the previously disclosed lawsuit involving a false advertising claim by Lexion Medical ("Lexion") against SurgiQuest arising prior to the acquisition of SurgiQuest by CONMED went to trial in federal court in the District of Delaware. The claims arose under the Lanham Act, as well as Delaware state laws. Lexion sought damages of $22.0 million for alleged lost profits and $18.7 million for costs related to alleged “corrective advertising,” as well as damages claimed for disgorgement of SurgiQuest’s alleged profits and attorneys' fees. On January 4, 2016, SurgiQuest became a subsidiary of CONMED, and we assumed the costs and liabilities related to the Lexion lawsuit subject to the terms of the merger agreement. On April 11, 2017, a jury returned a verdict finding SurgiQuest liable for $2.2 million in compensatory damages with an additional $10.0 million in punitive damages. These costs were recorded in selling and administrative expense during the nine months ended September 30, 2017. The District Court entered judgment on April 13, 2017. SurgiQuest and Lexion each filed post-verdict motions. Lexion sought an equitable award for disgorgement of SurgiQuest’s alleged profits, for so-called corrective advertising and for attorney’s fees. CONMED sought to vacate the award of punitive damages. By memorandum decision dated May 16, 2018, the District Court denied both Lexion’s and SurgiQuest’s post-verdict motions. The period within which either Lexion or SurgiQuest was able to pursue an appeal expired in June without either party seeking to appeal the judgment. CONMED paid the judgment, together with post-judgment interest, in a total amount of $12.3 million on July 10, 2018. In 2014, the Company acquired EndoDynamix, Inc. The agreement governing the terms of the acquisition provides that, if various conditions are met, certain contingent payments relating to the first commercial sale of the products (the milestone payment), as well as royalties based on sales (the revenue based payments), are due to the seller. We had notified the seller that there was a need to redesign the product, and that, as a consequence, the first commercial sale had been delayed. Consequently, the payment of contingent milestone and revenue-based payments were delayed. On January 18, 2017, the seller provided notice ("the Notice") seeking $12.7 million, which essentially represents the seller's view as to the sum of the projected contingent milestone and revenue-based payments on an accelerated basis. CONMED responded to the Notice denying that there was any basis for acceleration of the payments due under the acquisition agreement. On February 22, 2017, the representative of the former shareholders of EndoDynamix filed a complaint in Delaware Chancery Court claiming breach of contract with respect to the duty to commercialize the product and seeking the contingent payments on an accelerated basis. We believe that there was a substantive contractual basis to support the Company's decision to redesign the product, such that there was no legitimate basis for seeking the acceleration of the contingent payments at that time. The Company recently decided to halt the development of the EndoDynamix clip applier for a number of reasons. While we recorded a charge to write off assets and released previously accrued contingent consideration as described in Note 11, we expect to defend the claims asserted by the sellers of EndoDynamix in the Delaware Court, although there can be no assurance that we will prevail in the litigation.

Legal Proceedings

From time to time, we are subject to claims alleging product liability, patent infringement or other claims incurred in the ordinary course of business. These may involve our United States or foreign operations, or sales by foreign distributors. Likewise, from time to time, the Company may receive an information request or subpoena from a government agency such as the Securities and Exchange Commission, Department of Justice, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, the Department of Labor, the Treasury Department or other federal and state agencies or foreign governments or government agencies. These information requests or subpoenas may or may not be routine inquiries, or may begin as routine inquiries and over time develop into enforcement actions of various types. Likewise, we receive reports of alleged misconduct from employees and third parties, which we investigate as appropriate.

Manufacturers of medical devices have been the subject of various enforcement actions relating to interactions with health care providers domestically or internationally whereby companies are claimed to have provided health care providers with inappropriate incentives to purchase their products. Similarly, the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act ("FCPA") imposes obligations on manufacturers with respect to interactions with health care providers who may be considered government officials based on their affiliation with public hospitals. The FCPA also requires publicly listed manufacturers to maintain accurate books and records, and maintain internal accounting controls sufficient to provide assurance that transactions are accurately recorded, lawful and in accordance with management's authorization. The FCPA poses unique challenges both because manufacturers operate in foreign cultures in which conduct illegal under the FCPA may not be illegal in local jurisdictions, and because, in some cases, a United States manufacturer may face risks under the FCPA based on the conduct of third parties over whom the manufacturer may not have complete control. While CONMED has not experienced any material enforcement action to date, there can be no assurance that the Company will not be subject to a material enforcement action in the future, or that the Company will not incur costs including, in the form of fees for lawyers and other consultants, that are material to the Company’s results of operations in the course of responding to a future inquiry or investigation.

Manufacturers of medical products may face exposure to significant product liability claims. To date, we have not experienced any product liability claims that have been material to our financial statements or financial condition, but any such claims arising in the future could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations or cash flows. We currently maintain commercial product liability insurance of $30 million per incident and $30 million in the aggregate annually, which we believe is adequate. This coverage is on a claims-made basis. There can be no assurance that claims will not exceed insurance coverage, that the carriers will be solvent or that such insurance will be available to us in the future at a reasonable cost.

We establish reserves sufficient to cover probable losses associated with any such pending claims. We do not expect that the resolution of any pending claims, investigations or reports of alleged misconduct will have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations or cash flows. There can be no assurance, however, that future claims or investigations, or the costs associated with responding to such claims, investigations or reports of misconduct, especially claims and investigations not covered by insurance, will not have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.

Our operations are subject, and in the past have been subject, to a number of environmental laws and regulations governing, among other things, air emissions; wastewater discharges; the use, handling and disposal of hazardous substances and wastes; soil and groundwater remediation and employee health and safety. In some jurisdictions, environmental requirements may be expected to become more stringent in the future. In the United States, certain environmental laws can impose liability for the entire cost of site restoration upon each of the parties that may have contributed to conditions at the site regardless of fault or the lawfulness of the party’s activities. While we do not believe that the present costs of environmental compliance and remediation are material, there can be no assurance that future compliance or remedial obligations would not have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.

In April 2017, the previously disclosed lawsuit involving a false advertising claim by Lexion Medical ("Lexion") against SurgiQuest arising prior to the acquisition of SurgiQuest by CONMED went to trial in federal court in the District of Delaware. The claims arose under the Lanham Act, as well as Delaware state laws. Lexion sought damages of $22.0 million for alleged lost profits and $18.7 million for costs related to alleged “corrective advertising,” as well as damages claimed for disgorgement of SurgiQuest’s alleged profits and attorneys' fees. On January 4, 2016, SurgiQuest became a subsidiary of CONMED, and we assumed the costs and liabilities related to the Lexion lawsuit subject to the terms of the merger agreement. On April 11, 2017, a jury returned a verdict finding SurgiQuest liable for $2.2 million in compensatory damages with an additional $10.0 million in punitive damages. These costs were recorded in selling and administrative expense during the nine months ended September 30, 2017. The District Court entered judgment on April 13, 2017. SurgiQuest and Lexion each filed post-verdict motions. Lexion sought an equitable award for disgorgement of SurgiQuest’s alleged profits, for so-called corrective advertising and for attorney’s fees. CONMED sought to vacate the award of punitive damages. By memorandum decision dated May 16, 2018, the District Court denied both Lexion’s and SurgiQuest’s post-verdict motions. The period within which either Lexion or SurgiQuest was able to pursue an appeal expired in June without either party seeking to appeal the judgment. CONMED paid the judgment, together with post-judgment interest, in a total amount of $12.3 million on July 10, 2018.

In 2014, the Company acquired EndoDynamix, Inc. The agreement governing the terms of the acquisition provides that, if various conditions are met, certain contingent payments relating to the first commercial sale of the products (the milestone payment), as well as royalties based on sales (the revenue based payments), are due to the seller. We had notified the seller that there was a need to redesign the product, and that, as a consequence, the first commercial sale had been delayed. Consequently, the payment of contingent milestone and revenue-based payments were delayed. On January 18, 2017, the seller provided notice ("the Notice") seeking $12.7 million, which essentially represents the seller's view as to the sum of the projected contingent milestone and revenue-based payments on an accelerated basis. CONMED responded to the Notice denying that there was any basis for acceleration of the payments due under the acquisition agreement. On February 22, 2017, the representative of the former shareholders of EndoDynamix filed a complaint in Delaware Chancery Court claiming breach of contract with respect to the duty to commercialize the product and seeking the contingent payments on an accelerated basis. We believe that there was a substantive contractual basis to support the Company's decision to redesign the product, such that there was no legitimate basis for seeking the acceleration of the contingent payments at that time. The Company recently decided to halt the development of the EndoDynamix clip applier for a number of reasons. While we recorded a charge to write off assets and released previously accrued contingent consideration as described in Note 11, we expect to defend the claims asserted by the sellers of EndoDynamix in the Delaware Court, although there can be no assurance that we will prevail in the litigation.