Maggie Yuen: Yes, thank you. Obviously, with a good start of the year, we are very happy with our margin performance. At Q1, we typically see some normal material price increase and some investment in new product launch productivity. So for the remainder of the year, we will continue to see productivity improvements and improvement in product mix will continue. So we’re pretty confident that we’ll continue to see this margin trend expansion.
Adam Elsesser: Yes. And I’ll just add on to that. We said when we gave the initial guidance for 2024 on the February call and we reiterated again this quarter that given the cadence of expenses that we traditionally see, we expected that operating margin expansion would be sort of in that 100 to 200 basis point range on a year-over-year basis for each quarter, which would obviously translate into that expansion for the full-year. So it’s important to understand sort of the cadence of our operating margins through the year. All right. Are we still there?
Operator: Our next question comes from David Rescott from Baird. Your line is now open.
David Rescott: Great. Thanks for taking the questions here. I wanted to ask, Adam, I heard you mentioned that Flash 2.0, kind of optimized on some of the advantages of Flash 1.0. So wondering if you can give us a better understanding maybe about, what’s different in the system. And I heard some of the comments around pent-up demand for the system already. So just curious on, what’s baked into maybe that implied to Q2 guide versus the full-year relative to those kind of demand comments and if and what and where maybe Flash 2.0 could open up new opportunities for the company?
Adam Elsesser: Yes. Well, let me sort of first describe what we’re seeing and hearing a lot of, which is obviously, Flash 1.0 did an extraordinary job. It took a great deal of cloud out, very quickly. What Flash 2.0 does, which is simply a change in algorithm and update in the algorithm, it didn’t change the catheter or the catheter size. But 2.0 removes even more clot, even faster, without having to go to a bigger or less appropriate sized catheter. And I think the field is rallying around that. They’re seeing the benefit of it. And as you know, word-of-mouth spreads pretty quick in this field. So we’re seeing a lot of interest from folks who might not have wanted to try it in PE. They might have used Flash 1.0 in DVT. And that level of sort of interest is what I was alluding to.
I think everyone continues to look to optimize the treatment for these patients. That’s the key. You want to do the three things that matter the most and we’ve said it before, but it’s safety, speed and simplicity. And Flash 2.0 really checks those boxes and that’s the reaction that everyone is feeling right now.
David Rescott: Okay, great. And then maybe on Thunderbolt and the THUNDER trial. I heard the comments, and trying to think maybe a little bit longer-term. I believe with SENDit, you had been able to maybe leverage some price already, and you discussed that in the past around gaining — helping to gain share. When I think about Thunderbolt, I guess longer-term in the opportunity that’s out in the front still. Do you still think that there’s an ability to maybe command some type of price premium, for a premium price product, longer-term when it comes to market? Thank you.
Adam Elsesser: Yes. I think there — well, if you step back and think about stroke, it’s not a lot different from caught in the other parts of the body, where the prices of products have risen as technology has developed and become more sophisticated. Right now in stroke, people use a series of things. They might use Aspiration and the stent retriever. They might do this and that. So that by the time you’re done, we are not going to be more expensive than what a lot of people are already doing. They’re just going to be using a 100% of the Penumbra products, because you don’t need all of those ancillary tools when you have one simple system like Thunderbolt. And that’s what we saw already. That’s not we hoping and guessing. That’s what we spent the better part of a year with our CAVT portfolio in the rest of the body, particularly the most sort of closest example would be Lightning Bolt in the arterial system.
The technologies are very, very similar, different sized catheters, and we’ve seen obviously an extraordinary increase in the usage of that product. I think we’ll see something similar with stroke. I think we’ll be starting at a little bit different spot than we did with our older technology in the arterial side, which I think ultimately, it plays to our benefit, because we’re starting with a pretty significant dominant position with a lot of competitors. So I think Thunderbolt just helps us going forward.
David Rescott: All right. Very helpful. Thank you.
Adam Elsesser: Thank you.
Operator: Your next question comes from Mike Matson from Needham & Company. Your line is now open.
Michael Matson: Yes. Thanks. So I want to just ask one with Lightning Flash 2.0. You’ve incorporated software into the CAVT product. So is this sort of an opportunity to iterate on the products faster? In other words, could you — could we expect to see 3.0, 4.0, et cetera maybe over a year or something like that, as you continue to improve the software?
Adam Elsesser: Yes. It’s a great question. The premise is accurate. Obviously, with software, there’s — the possibility of faster iterations than hardware catheters and all the testing is very thorough, but it’s a slightly different thing. That being said, so the — can we continue to improve this? Probably. We’re weeks into the launch, and it’s going really well. So we haven’t yet identified weaknesses that we have to fix. And I think that’s a high class problem for us to have or to improve. But over the course of the sheer volume of work we’re going to do over the next year, I’m sure we will continue to make changes and improve. Obviously, the products that I alluded to the three new CAVT products are not another version of the same one. So they’re newer products that that cover different things than just improving Lightning Flash to a 3.0. But yes, conceptually, that’s possible.
Michael Matson: Okay. Got it. And then, Adam, I think it was — you did made a comment about optimizing the commercial team in the prepared remarks. So I just wanted to see if you could elaborate on that. What that means, I guess.
