Caveat Emptor
Caveat Emptor
"Let the buyer beware"
I am concerned about inviting a company to present to our group that has not yet had any clinical trials, has not proved the efficacy of concept, and has, as far as I have been able to ascertain, no support yet from the global community of cardiologists.
Signal processing is nothing new. If this concept were truly workable, i.e., if it could reliably and accurately predict impending valve failure and/or thromboembolitic events, why wouldn't the major players in the world be involved? Where is St. Jude, Medtronic, Carbomedics, and all the rest of the valve manufacturers, who would have tons to gain by making their valves even safer?
The following are my opinions, based on my own training and knowledge in the biomedical field: This is not new technology. This is not a new discovery. This is not a product that has been proved to work in any way shape or form in terms of detecting real valve problems. Is it an interesting concept? Sure. But the company behind it has no visible major corporate sponsors, no huge investors (I checked as best I could) and no endorsements by either the European Union nor the FDA.
I am not trying to rain on anybody's parade here, but if this company has endorsement of any recognized medical body in the world, I have not found it. If anybody has information to the contrary, please provide it.
--John