Josh Jennings: Okay. Great. So, I just want to make sure. Just one maybe for Geoff and maybe Sean as well, just on the renal denervation program and understand, I think it’s well understood that the totality of evidence can get the approval. I believe that your team has had preliminary discussions with payers and it might be helpful just in terms of under better understanding your optimism that not just approval could be in hand in the next 6 months to 12 months, but payer decisions will ultimately be positive. And then the follow-up is just on supply and just want to make sure I am clear on the dynamics here. And just the recovery and regaining momentum is what’s left, but is the supply chain €“ are those headwinds gone? And just should we be expecting €“ I know you have got your team has executed on the streamlining or consolidation of operations and supply chain functions, and we start to see a benefit from those efforts in fiscal €˜24?
Thanks for taking the questions.
Geoff Martha: Maybe I will start with the supply situation. Are the supply chain issues gone, not completely, but the biggest pain, or if you will, is behind us, especially in surgical innovations with the packaging, as I mentioned, issue. What lingers a bit would be, like we have talked about before, some semiconductor, I would say, constraints. But the changes that we have made to our supply organization with the new leadership under Greg, the new structure, bringing in new people to help us with capabilities where we thought we weren’t €“ where we needed to be, implementing new systems and new processes. And these changes, I believe are durable. I mean they are €“ so we are going to get €“ we are getting through this.
The worst is behind us. We factored in or updated into the guidance, but there are some. I mean like some issues that are outstanding like the semiconductors, but all that’s factored in, and we feel good about going forward, not just FY’24, but beyond that. Regarding Ardian, look, I will ask Sean to chime in here. But look, the €“ as you look at the data, we believe it’s very compelling. And you see that the sham arm in the trial increased their medication and the Ardian arm reduced. And the difference is 10x. I mean it’s a significant difference. And when you €“ when physicians look at it, they understand this and are excited about it and why we are optimistic with payers is because health systems and governments are really focused on €“ and payers are focused on hypertension, which €“ and like the current standard, as I mentioned in the commentary, just isn’t working and more data came out to substantiate that in September a physician €“ to substantiate what people already know.
And so now there is a new option. And I think payers are going to be compelled to take it seriously, especially with the public health epidemic that we are facing here. Sean, do you want to chime in and add some more color to this?
Sean Salmon: Yes, you said it well, Geoff. And Josh, you are right. The totality of the data is really the strength of this program compared to just about any other new therapy I can think of there is really not a lot of comparisons for just how much good data we have here. It’s over 3,000 patients in the real world data on top of the sham-controlled randomized studies. And importantly, we did a patient preference study, which is getting more and more considered by payers because they know that patients have a say in what they want to go do. And there is a large majority of patients that prefer having a procedure versus adding just even one more drug. And of course, we can get their blood pressure down without the addition of drugs, which is a huge benefit.
