Jeff Cohen: Okay, thanks. And then one more quick one. Joe, could you comment, we’re not looking for guidance on margins, but you did have a nice beat in Q3. Any commentary on some of the overall inflationary pressures, have they diminished to a certain degree?
Joe Mara : Yeah, I would just say, I mean, we’re obviously, we’re kind of focused on that on that gross margin and the margin expansion. So certainly kind of be at the higher revenue growth, I think kind of helps us. We’re seeing higher margin, we’re seeing higher pull through, so I don’t think –certainly a lot of that kind of baked in already. And I think we’re just trying to manage kind of margins effectively. So nothing new to call out, that adding additional pressure, I just think, the focus right now from a team perspective to do what we can to grow the top line, but also enhance those margins this year and in the next year, as we talked about in the prepared remarks.
Jeff Cohen: Got it. Thanks for taking our questions.
Joe Mara : Thank you.
Nick Colangelo : Thanks, Jeff.
Operator: One moment for the next question. And your next question comes to the line of Samuel Brodovsky with Truist Securities. Your line is now open.
Samuel Brodovsky: Hey, guys, thanks for taking the questions. Just to start off, just want to ask a clarifying one on NexoBrid, with the presumed contribution in 4Q, is that still largely expected to be stocking revenue? And what one, how long do you think stocking can be a driver of revenue and when should we think about sort of procedural revenue taking over that? That’s that first half ’24 comment you think?
Nick Colangelo : Yeah, so I think as Joe mentioned, we’re kind of, product was shipped from our Cardinal, our 3PL to the specialty distributors the last couple of days of the quarter. So it’s essentially one quarter of activity in this year. The stocking, essentially is done once that initial stocking happen, right? They think about sort of, obviously, there’s kind of three main distributors, they have different locations, they think about sort of uptake at hospitals. And so I’d say we’re kind of through that phase. And now it’s really just as Joe mentioned, kind of getting through getting the P&T committee approvals, getting the initial orders, getting initial patients treated, that then turns into reorders. And that’s how we build our model going forward.
So I’d say, again, as we ramp up through the fourth quarter and get these hospitals on board, we’ll start to see some initial utilization revenue and then that kind of feeds into Q4 and the uptake that we were talking about.
Samuel Brodovsky: Okay, that’s helpful. Thanks. And then on arthroscopic, should we be thinking about any price component in terms of that adding to revenue growth next year?
Nick Colangelo : Yeah, I’d say, from again, our — the main component of our revenue on MACI is really the implant itself, right. And so, we’ve taken typical price increases, as we’ve talked about each year, and we would expect to do that again, next year. I think having an innovative instrument set will help shape sort of the price increase that we would take. And then, we’re still sort of in the process of determining sort of instrument revenue opportunities as well, that obviously would be like our biopsies kits currently where it contributes a little bit of revenue, but is not kind of the main driver for the MACI business.
Samuel Brodovsky: Got it. So then just, I guess, I know it’s early days here, but as we think about the MACI over sort of the medium term, what will be a reasonable expectation for the mix between the traditional sort of open versus arthroscopic revenue mix or implant mix is maybe the better way to frame it over, call it like the next few years here?
Nick Colangelo : Yeah, that is a good question. And you’re right, it is early days. I think it’s important, as Joe mentioned that assuming a Q2 launch, and given the revenue cycle, one — the initial question is going to be, do surgeons kind of look at it prospectively? And maybe I’ll take a step back, as we said earlier, we expected to complete the human factor study in the third quarter, and great job by the team getting that done. We expect, as we said publicly, to submit the prior approval supplement by the end of the year. That’s typically, by statute, a six month review period, although they try to get them done within, in a shorter period of time. So that’s what kind of gets you to sort of the latter portion of the first half of the year for anticipated approval and launch.
The first question will be, do surgeons kind of look at it prospectively? In other words, now the instruments are available, as patients come in, I’m going to identify patients with 2 square centimeter to 4 square centimeter defects on the femoral condyles, and then you’re kind of into the typical sort of revenue cycle that and when you go from biopsy timing for — going from biopsies to implants, which again, kind of points you towards the back half of the year, and when we think, MACI arthroscopic could start contributing. As you move out into the sort of midterm years, I think it will still it’s to be determined kind of exactly what that mix looks like. If you looked at sort of the addressable market, as we mentioned, the third of the defects fall into that sort of arthroscopic eligible category.
And the rest, kind of fall into sort of the more of the open opportunities via patella defects or larger defects, etc. So, yeah, I think that sort of puts some bounds around what you might think over time, it could end up being.
Samuel Brodovsky: Thanks for taking the questions.
Nick Colangelo : Thank you.
Operator: One moment for the next question. Your next question comes from the line of George Sellers with Stephens Inc. Your line is now open.
George Sellers: Good morning. Thanks for taking the question and congrats on the quarter. Maybe sticking with a question on the arthroscopic delivery option, you touched on some of the regulatory timeline pieces. I’m just curious from a commercialization perspective, you touched on some of the arthroscopic only surgeons, maybe 1000 to 2000 target range, would that imply a few extra sales reps need to be hired? Or how should we think about some of the commercial investments ahead of launching that arthroscopic delivery option?
Nick Colangelo : Yeah, just from a kind of a headcount perspective, we would anticipate adding a relatively small number of support reps and specialists to kind of support the rollout. But again, nothing that sort of would change kind of the margin profile that Joe has been alluding to. So sort of like when we expanded our burn care franchise to support the launch of NexoBrid, somewhere kind of in a similar range, half a dozen to call it a dozen folks over the course of the year.
