Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Gold/Mining/Energy : PYNG Technologies -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Edward W. Richmond who wrote (3783)	5/19/1999 6:34:00 PM
From: CycloneTech	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 8117

Pyng receives results of military study Pyng Technologies Corp PYT Shares issued 9,788,905 May 19 close $1.55 Wed 19 May 99 News Release Mr. Michael Jacobs reports The long-awaited Walter Reed Army Institute of Research study has been released. It compared the F.A.S.T. 1 (designed for adult emergency vascular access through the sternum), to the B.I.G. Bone Injection Gun (designed for in-hospital bone anesthesia), the SurFast (designed for pediatric emergency vascular access through the lower leg), and the Jamshidi needle (designed for bone marrow biopsy). The purpose of the Walter Reed evaluation was to determine the appropriateness of intraosseous infusion in a battlefield environment. In the study, 31 special operations medics got a general lecture on I.O. devices, and viewed videos on the F.A.S.T. 1 and B.I.G., followed by a short hands on session with the devices. Each medic used each device once in a cadaver, then rated the devices for successful access, adequate fluid flow, security of the needle, weight and size, and overall preference. The military medics using the devices rated the F.A.S.T. 1 and the Jamshidi needle as tied for first choice. We assume that medics who ranked the Jamshidi first liked its very low weight in a combat backpack (less than one-10th of the F.A.S.T. 1), while those who ranked the F.A.S.T. 1 first preferred its superior performance. The authors note the Jamshidi, while lightweight and simple to use, protrudes at least two inches above the insertion site, making dislodgement likely during transport. The B.I.G. device was the medics' second choice. Each of the devices was successfully placed by 29 or 30 of the 31 medics using it. Only the F.A.S.T. 1 had good flow rate in all cases. Only the F.A.S.T. 1 infusion site was rated very secure in all cases. The other devices showed slight to "a fair amount" of leakage, at infusion sites where leakage might cause compartment syndrome, a severe medical complication. The F.A.S.T. 1 showed slight leakage in two cases, not clinically significant because compartment syndrome which is a risk at the competitors' sites, does not occur at the sternal site. The two unsuccessful F.A.S.T. 1 attempts were due to operator. Products other than the F.A.S.T. 1 showed design failures (stuck stylet, needle falling out before use, inadequate provision for landmarking the correct site, bent needles). A significant operator safety issue was noted with one of the other devices. All four I.O. devices studied were found easy to use, easy to place and could be adequately used by military combat medics. The study included information which will lead civilian paramedics to conclude that the F.A.S.T. 1 is clearly the device of choice based on speed, effectiveness, and operator safety in the prehospital environment. The most contentious finding, and a significant flaw in the study, related to speed of use. The study reported average times to place the devices ranging from 70 to 114 seconds, with the F.A.S.T. 1, ironically, being least fast. However, the F.A.S.T. 1 system includes all components needed to achieve an accurately located, clean, and securely protected infusion site. None of the other devices contain such features. To quote from the study, "... the F.A.S.T. 1 time included everything from unwrapping the package through securing the insertion site. Dressing the site would simply include an additional one to two seconds to place the plastic dome.... The other I.O. devices would have had increased insertion times if securing and dressing were also included. ... For this reason, times to secure and dress each device were not included as that would have made placement times extremely variable." In other words, the investigators chose not to include securing and dressing the site in the study. All other devices (B.I.G., Jamshidi and SurFast) required dressing after insertion in order to maintain a secure sight. In addition, the investigators used non-clothed cadavers. The time taken to remove clothing and footwear is not included. One of the advantages of the F.A.S.T. 1 is the ease of accessing the sternal site. Paramedics will recognize accessing the site, and securing and dressing the site as critical parts of the procedure, which require another one to two seconds for the F.A.S.T. 1 and up to several minutes for other devices. The study also stated, "The FAST's plastic infusion tube, Velcro patch and plastic dome cover make it the most secure and easily dressed of the units tested. In an environment where the casualty may be carried over the shoulder or in makeshift stretchers, where possible dislodgement is a significant concern, the FAST seems to have the best design. This system is probably more secure than a peripheral IV." In final summary the study states that "if weight and volume are not of significant concern, the F.A.S.T. 1 appears to offer the appropriate option, due to combined package with excellent protection of insertion site." (c) Copyright 1999 Canjex Publishing Ltd. canada-stockwatch.com

To: Edward W. Richmond who wrote (3783)	5/20/1999 2:44:00 PM
From: Edward W. Richmond	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 8117

Tour of Pyng's Operation - Inventory and Distribution of FAST1 Units This post should answer several of the questions raised. Hopefully, you will not find it necessary to read between the lines. If you need clarification, I will be happy provide any information I have. There are currently between 80 and 100 FAST1 units held in-house and small supply in the field. Pyng does not intend to produce any more units prior to mass production. The pilot production of the device is very inefficient and expensive. Current demand outstrips supply by a considerable margin. However, there is little justification for continued field-testing and some sites will no longer be supplied with pilot produced units. It is my opinion that there will be a continuous supply of units only to strategic sites such as Rural Metro in Scottsdale prior to mass production. This site has currently used in excess of 50 units and appears to be a cornerstone of the program and it does share a small amount of units with two hospitals in the Phoenix area. More later… Regards, Ed