Uncle François response to OILers drawing his attention to the...

Uncle François response to OILers drawing his attention to the competion from OIL

Author’s reply »Hey guys thank you for your comments. I knew about Optiscan but chosed not to talk about it because it would have made my article too long. Optiscan is not really a competitor. Optiscan's tech is very different and here are some practical consequences:

1. its tech cannot be miniaturized, thus isn't adaptable to all endoscopes. It had to partner with one endoscope maker/ PENTAX (only 10% of endoscopy market), and ended up a commercial failure. MKEA in turn is miniature and adaptable to any endoscope on the market. Furthermore, its tiny dimensions make it adaptable to many others applications unlike Optiscan's device.

2. Optiscan's device is rigid on 5cm ( 2inches) at its extremity, making it impossible to use in tiny structures like pancreatic and biliary canals, or lung bronchs, and makes simple endoscopies sometimes less manoeuvrable. MKEA's device has no impact on endoscopes flexibility and can even be pushed out of the endoscope extremity to explore tiny regions. The probe part of the system (the part that goes in the endoscopes) is a 0.8mm (0.03 inches) optic fibers cable until its extremity (and there are thinner versions). do you realize how thin is that?

3. Optiscan's design makes it impossible to do surgery at the same time you're using it. With MKEA this is no problem and is even one of the main reasons it was designed: to check tissues structure and surgically work on them immediately.

4. Optiscan's resolution is less than 1 image per second when MKEA's Cellvizio is 12 frames per seconds.

Optiscan Must make HUGE R&D investments through massive dilution if it wants to come close to what MKEA has done. However technologies are so different that this looks totally unlikely.