Forget the analyst - the 1st surgeon at the conference said there were very few surgeries that wouldn't benefit from this technology, as most complications are due to some form of necrosis or leakage that could be avoided by using Spy.
I'm a little confused. Why would I want to forget an analyst who makes such a powerful positive statement. As I understand it once equipment is deemed the standard of care for a particular type of surgery, a surgeon would take on real risk in performing the operation without using the equipment.
While the value of the equipment may be applicable to all surgeries, it is a little too soon to hope that it becomes the standard of care for all surgeries. However, having watched the presentations, the importance of this equipment in breast reconstruction is so overwhelming that having it designated as standard of care for this type of surgery could happen in the not to distant future.
Endo - I'm just making the point that it has been clear for some time that Spy would become the standard of care for certain procedures - it was already rapidly moving toward that in breast reconstruction before the conference - so, the analysts point is not necessarily news or anything to get excited about. Listening to the surgeons is another story - it is clear from their comments during the conference that the variety of procedures that Spy will ultimately be used in will be more than what we have been told about to date. Sure, the next few years will be dominated by growth in reconstruction, colon and wound indications, but additional indications will be added, so that the growth 3-5 years out will continue to escalate.