Dr. Thomas Chi on the economics of the CVAC system for kidney stones

In this video, Thomas Chi, MD, MBA, discusses the economics of the CVAC System. Chi is a professor of urology, associate chair for Clinical Affairs, and the Kutzmann Endowed Professor in Clinical Urology at the University of California, San Francisco.

Transcription:

Could you discuss the cost-effectiveness of the CVAC System compared with traditional URS methods?

Now, the CVAC device does cost more. You have to utilize a ureterscope, whether you use a single-use or a reusable ureterscope, there's the cost induced with using a ureterscope. And then on the CVAC first generation, you would be opening an additional suction device that's on top of your ureteroscope. In the second generation, a steerable suction device exists for stone removal, and it's in the form factor of a ureteroscope. So now you can do your entire procedure using 1 device that looks and feels like a ureteroscope, but it's really a suction device that's quite innovative as a design, but you can now do laser lithotripsy through that same device under direct vision, and then when you're done, utilize suction through that direct vision device to remove the stone fragments. So in that second-generation device, now you're taking out the cost of a separate ureteroscope, because you can do it all through the same second generation CVAC device. You still have to pay for the laser, and you don't have to pay for a basket anymore. Now, when you look at the cost comparison for straight cost, the second-generation CVAC device costs overall more than a traditional ureteroscope plus a basket. But one of the things that I've appreciated about the team for Calyxo is that they've really paid a lot of attention to the economics of reimbursement and the economics of cost. When you look at the way that this particular device has been coded and will be reimbursed, they're cross referencing several CPT codes that should allow the physician to actually bill for different CPTs. So from a revenue, profit and loss perspective, actually, in many instances, they anticipate that physicians may actually make more money using the second-generation CVAC device compared to traditional ureteroscopy, depending on your payer mix and your practice. So those types of strategies, I think, from a pragmatic standpoint, will be very impactful for physicians who are looking to adopt the CVAC device into their practices.

This transcript was edited for clarity.