Nevro or Nuvectra


Success is also a relative term. For exaxmple, SJM thinks a trial responder is someone who gets only 30% pain relief.
And forget about what you report commercially. Until it's investigated in a prospective multi-center study and published in a respected journal, it means nothing. There is a reason Nuvectra has the lowest pricing in the industry. They simply have no other value proposition. All this technology means to the market is the accelerated commoditization of low frequency SCS.
 








Success is also a relative term. For exaxmple, SJM thinks a trial responder is someone who gets only 30% pain relief.
And forget about what you report commercially. Until it's investigated in a prospective multi-center study and published in a respected journal, it means nothing. There is a reason Nuvectra has the lowest pricing in the industry. They simply have no other value proposition. All this technology means to the market is the accelerated commoditization of low frequency SCS.

We all can gather our high ratio docs to trial our product and get better trial results than Nuvectra on average. I am curious to see how many trials and perms they have actually done so far to get their average, 20? 30? 40? In addition, I am assuming the two or three docs implanting are experienced and thus will increase their "average". The reps there must be looking for their exit strategy if that is all they got to go with.
 








Success is also a relative term. For exaxmple, SJM thinks a trial responder is someone who gets only 30% pain relief.
And forget about what you report commercially. Until it's investigated in a prospective multi-center study and published in a respected journal, it means nothing. There is a reason Nuvectra has the lowest pricing in the industry. They simply have no other value proposition. All this technology means to the market is the accelerated commoditization of low frequency SCS.
 








Success is also a relative term. For exaxmple, SJM thinks a trial responder is someone who gets only 30% pain relief.
And forget about what you report commercially. Until it's investigated in a prospective multi-center study and published in a respected journal, it means nothing. There is a reason Nuvectra has the lowest pricing in the industry. They simply have no other value proposition. All this technology means to the market is the accelerated commoditization of low frequency SCS.
 
















Success is also a relative term. For exaxmple, SJM thinks a trial responder is someone who gets only 30% pain relief.
And forget about what you report commercially. Until it's investigated in a prospective multi-center study and published in a respected journal, it means nothing. There is a reason Nuvectra has the lowest pricing in the industry. They simply have no other value proposition. All this technology means to the market is the accelerated commoditization of low frequency SCS.

Are you suggesting that the CEO of Nuvectra isn't telling the whole story when reporting an 85% trial success rate during an earnings call? Why ever would he do that?
 
















































Who talks about an asp that is just the ipg? What's their national asp for a dual 8 lead system???? Or do they just do a dual 12 lead?
Don't know ASP but dual 8 pole lead wouldn't make sense. they have a 3x8 or 2x12. you could do a 2x8 with a plugged bore but why wouldn't you go with a 2x12 is you're only going to put in two leads?
 
















Maybe it was the trial conversion rate at ANS before being purchased by St. Jude.
That's the answer. Their CEO says that himself during the most recent investor call. One guy's personal experience at a company ten years ago might not be indicative of the success rate of the industry as a whole. It would be nice to see some published, peer-reviewed clinical data of Nuvectra's trial conversion rate as compared to competitors' current offerings. If it is 15% higher that would be truly impressive.
 








That's the answer. Their CEO says that himself during the most recent investor call. One guy's personal experience at a company ten years ago might not be indicative of the success rate of the industry as a whole. It would be nice to see some published, peer-reviewed clinical data of Nuvectra's trial conversion rate as compared to competitors' current offerings. If it is 15% higher that would be truly impressive.
 








That's the answer. Their CEO says that himself during the most recent investor call. One guy's personal experience at a company ten years ago might not be indicative of the success rate of the industry as a whole. It would be nice to see some published, peer-reviewed clinical data of Nuvectra's trial conversion rate as compared to competitors' current offerings. If it is 15% higher that would be truly impressive.

That's not going to happen. Nuvectra doesn't have the money for a large-scale trial. Even if they did, legit clinical trials are a double-edged sword...you might not get the results you were looking for. Just ask someone at SJM how their Sunburst data turned out.
 








Even if they did, legit clinical trials are a double-edged sword...you might not get the results you were looking for.
Yes, but the arrogance of management never sees that as a possible outcome. The lack of money is the real answer. Also I believe Drees wants to get the salesforce in place before producing clinical data - the same sort of clinical data that St. Jude normally generates.
 
























Yes, but the arrogance of management never sees that as a possible outcome. The lack of money is the real answer. Also I believe Drees wants to get the salesforce in place before producing clinical data - the same sort of clinical data that St. Jude normally generates.

I guess that explains why there have been no sales then. That's not fair, I know you have a patient somewhere out there that has had a trial walking around with a protruding stylette tickling his cord