Josh Jennings: Understood. And I wanted to ask just about the replacement cycle and is any sense you can help us out just what percentage of the installed base is approaching 10 years or 10 years plus, and is this segment sizable and does it represent the low-hanging fruit within the replacement channel? And is that where your Salesforce is focused and intact mode? Thanks a lot.
David Fischel : Yes. So, by now the majority, I’d say a significant majority of our installed base has X-Ray and system that are 10 years old or more. I think, that there is still this extension of the life of EP labs where we have now seen multiple labs that are 14 years,15 years. I think even now we have a lab that is 16 years old and they have not yet gone through with a replacement of their lab. And so, this breaks from all historical precedents from what we hear from X-Ray manufacturers and other equipment. But it definitely seems like that is the case. What we see, if you look at a company like Intuitive Surgical, they seem to be able to drive a replacement cycle and much quicker based on continuous innovation in new robotic technology.
Given that our robots are tied at our construction process still at this stage and very much tied to the X-Ray that is in the lab, it’s very hard for us to drive a replacement cycle, different from the replacement cycle of an X-ray. It’s just that it would require still a shutdown of the lab architectural planning, contractor’s construction. And so, if you do that, you very much should be exchanging the X-Ray at the same time. And so that’s where — there are — there have been a couple cases where the robot has driven the cycle, but for the most part it’s been driven by the X-Ray timing, and the hospital’s plan to replace the X-Ray. I think as you see us, evolve to the next generation robot and to future generations potentially, obviously after that, I think, that we kind of free ourselves from that timeline and given the pace of innovation that we’ve been doing on the robot side, whereas you see almost every three years, four years, five years we are able to come out with a new robot.
I think, that we will be able to drive replacement cycles at a much quicker place than 10 year to 15-year timeline. That seems to exist right now. But right now, we do have a majority of our sites are over 10 years now in age. And so are very much ripe for replacement. But we have still seen that happen more in trickles and a gradual process rather than a full bolus.
Operator: [Technical difficulty]
Alex Nowak: Good morning, everyone. So how quickly can you collect the data in Europe on the three to three sites? And what are the number of patients per site? Is it 20 per site?
David Fischel: Alex, good morning. So, the trial is structured such that we can capture the acute clinical data from 20 patients as soon as that is available. And that will then be submitted for — as part of the CE Mark resubmission. And we are able to enroll up to 30 patients at each site. And we are able to go actually up to even 10 sites if we would like. But we’ve really focused on these three primary ones up front. And the trial can also be converted into a post-approval follow-up trial. So, we will probably use the same protocol to enroll patients after we have CE Mark approval at additional sites, but we really focused on these three sites that are very experienced and were able to move in a relatively fast fashion through the ethics committee approvals and work with us on the national submission.
And so, I would kind of see that we’ll obviously work most expediently to enroll the 20 patients and then we’ll probably go up till 30 patients at each of these three sites.
Alex Nowak: But reading through all the commentary probably sounds like you’ll have that data in hand per quarter certainly before you get feedback from the FDA.
