Man everyone on here is so negative.
I'm just saying the primary endpoint favors the LifeVest when accounting for wear time. Of course no one expects patients to wear it for 24 hrs a day, but what I get out this is that if you wear it for at least 12 hrs a day, the benefit of improved sudden death/VT/VF will be significant.
Of course the device is uncomfortable, of course it needs improvement, but objectively I think there is value in the LifeVest and the overall mortality endpoint demonstrates this:
If you told me I had a 5% chance of dying in the next 3 months, and if I wore an uncomfortable $1500 vest I could lower that to 3%, honestly I would do it. That is the result I take away from the VEST trial.
The future published wear time data will help explain why the primary endpoint was missed. Total mortality is a big deal. Everyone calm down.
Also saying that 90% of the rhythms that LifeVest treats are self terminating, just shows your ignorance.
