Research, page-3409

4DX have their VX scanner which is equipment plus patented software. I don’t know how much this is used in practice and how many machines are in the market place, but it’s been around a couple of years.
But my understanding is the CT software for ventilation and perfusion uses a regular CT scanner, so really low barriers to entry.
It’s also my understanding that to get the V component on the CT scanner is done by taking two sets of images - inspiration and expiration, and the software comes up with a ventilation model. It’s a representation
Now, with the perfusion component they don’t use contrast but say they can look at CT image changes (using software) to represent blood flow in blood vessels in the lung to see if there are blocked vessels from an embolus. The cold standard is CTPA, which is contrast, but high radiation burden. Next and very good is nuclear med perfusion, which takes more time but minimal radiation.
So if 4DX can do what they say, then it would be revolutionary. But I’m not so sure. Doctors tend to rely on published independent studies rather than company data to change practice. I would like to see this with CTVQ.
I don’t see why others can’t also develop interpretative algorithms for CT as long as it’s done independently. I don’t think that once someone comes up with an algorithm, then it’s game over for everyone else. That’s how algorithms and AI keep getting better.
Anyway, I’m happy to wait and see and offset some gains elsewhere.
Funny thing with CYC was it was sold off when they finally got FDA approval. Buy the rumour, sell the fact ( happens a lot!)