Laura Niklason
Analyst · H.C. Wainwright.
So I'll take the first question with regard to the value proposition to VACs and hospitals. As you know, RK, or you may remember, we published a Budget Impact Model in March of this year in the Journal of Medical Economics. That Budget Impact Model contemplated our initial list price of $29,500. And in that model, we showed that by virtue of decreasing amputations and conduit infection relative to plastic grafts, but also relative to other types of grafts like CryoVein and xenograft, because we decreased those complication costs, we actually came in cheaper even at our initial $29,500 price point. With the reduction in price point, that economic argument becomes even stronger. And so, when we lay that out to VACs, it is compelling. What we see, though, is that, some hospitals are -- there are -- because of changes in Medicaid, I will say that there are some hospitals who are -- despite the compelling Budget Impact Model, occasionally, hospitals will still look at just the initial acquisition price and say, even if it's going to save us money in the longer term, I have to think about what I'm spending today. And so, there is still -- in some hospitals, there is still some pushback. But the majority of cases -- in the majority of our VAC submissions, those are now going through successfully. I think because these arguments around decreased cost of amputation, decreased cost of infection are really driving home, especially at our new price point.