MSI Stent Securement Testing Overview

Summary

In this presentation, Melissa Lockwitzer from Machine Solutions discusses the importance of stent securement testing for patient safety and regulatory compliance. She compares three methods—shim, tape, and the MSI SR-1000—evaluating their ease of setup, operation, and data consistency. The SR-1000 stands out for its automation, precision, and reduced variability in results. Lockwitzer highlights how the SR-1000 offers more consistent and efficient testing than traditional methods, emphasizing its advantages in improving stent testing practices. The presentation also includes a demonstration of the SR-1000 in action.

Takeaways

• 🩺 The presentation is by Melissa Lockwitzer, focusing on stent securement testing methods and their importance.
• 🏥 Stent securement testing is crucial for patient safety and is required by the FDA to ensure that stents reach the intended treatment site without issues.
• ⚙️ Three different stent securement methods are compared: the shim method, the tape method, and the SR-1000 by MSI.
• 🔧 The SR-1000 is the most automated of the three methods, launched last year by Machine Solutions (MSI), and features segmental compression technology.
• 📊 The tape method shows the highest standard deviation and requires significant setup time, often leading to misleadingly high retention forces.
• 📉 The SR-1000 had the lowest standard deviation (0.06 lbs) and the most consistent results in terms of stent securement forces.
• ⏳ Setup time comparison: The tape method takes over 6 minutes, the shim method takes around 3 minutes, and the SR-1000 takes only 1 to 1.5 minutes.
• 🔍 The SR-1000 integrates a video system that links to the test data, helping to identify the exact moment of stent dislodgement.
• 📐 The SR-1000 also provides control over diameter and force, minimizing operator variability and ensuring a more accurate stent securement test.
• 🚀 The conclusion suggests that the longstanding belief about minimum retention forces may be based on the outdated tape method and should be reconsidered.

Q & A

What is the primary purpose of stent securement testing?

The primary purpose of stent securement testing is to ensure that balloon-expandable stents are securely crimped onto the delivery system, making sure they reach the intended treatment site safely and function effectively. This testing is crucial for patient safety, as failure to secure the stent can result in serious complications, including prolonged procedures or even open-heart surgery.

What are the three failure modes discussed in the presentation?

The three failure modes discussed are: 1) Straight dislodgement, where the stent moves outside the proximal and distal marker bands, causing issues with deployment. 2) Stent compression or buckling, which can cause vessel damage or perforation. 3) Complete dislodgement of the stent, where it detaches from the delivery system and can lead to severe complications such as the need for open-heart surgery.

What are the three methods of stent securement testing compared in the presentation?

The three methods compared in the presentation are: 1) The shim method, which uses stainless steel shims and an Instron tensile tester. 2) The tape method, which uses adhesive tape to secure the stent. 3) The MSI SR-1000 method, which utilizes segmental compression technology for more automated and controlled testing.

What are some of the challenges associated with the shim method?

Some challenges with the shim method include difficulties with sample alignment. If the sample isn't perfectly straight, axial angulation can result in higher stent securement forces that are not indicative of the actual securement. Additionally, different-sized shims are required for various stent and balloon sizes, adding complexity to the setup.

Why does the tape method yield the highest securement forces?

The tape method yields the highest securement forces because the tape often adheres to the balloon underneath the stent in addition to the stent itself. This adhesion increases the perceived securement forces, even though it may not accurately reflect the actual securement of the stent on the balloon.

What are the key advantages of the MSI SR-1000 over the other methods?

The key advantages of the MSI SR-1000 include a more automated setup that reduces operator variability, the ability to control both the diameter and force applied to the balloon, and a shorter setup time of around one to one and a half minutes per sample. It also provides more consistent and accurate data with lower standard deviation compared to the other methods.

How does the SR-1000 system ensure accurate stent securement testing?

The SR-1000 system ensures accuracy through its segmental compression technology, which grips the catheter and balloon with precise radial force. It controls both the diameter and the force applied to ensure consistent and linear alignment of the sample, eliminating side axial loading that can skew results. The system is also fully PC-controlled, minimizing operator error.

What were the findings regarding the standard deviation of the securement forces for each method?

The tape method had the highest standard deviation (0.36 pounds), indicating significant variability in the results. The shim method had a lower standard deviation (0.1 pounds), while the MSI SR-1000 had the smallest standard deviation (0.06 pounds), showing that it produced the most consistent and reliable results.

Why is the video system integrated into the SR-1000 system beneficial?

The video system integrated into the SR-1000 is beneficial because it allows operators to visually confirm the moment the stent starts to dislodge. This feature is linked to the data in real-time, ensuring accurate identification of the initial dislodgement point, which helps when analyzing forces and ensuring precise testing.

What conclusion was drawn about the commonly accepted minimum retention force of 0.5 to 1 pound?

The presentation concludes that the long-standing notion of a minimum retention force of 0.5 to 1 pound may be based on the tape method, which produces artificially high securement forces. This standard should not necessarily be applied to other methods, like the MSI SR-1000 or the shim method, which provide more accurate measures of stent securement.

Outlines

00:00

🎤 Introduction and Background

Melissa Lockwitzer introduces herself and her presentation on stent securement testing. She provides an overview of her background in biomedical engineering and her role at Machine Solutions, a leader in medical device manufacturing and testing. She also mentions her work with ASTM subcommittee fo4.30.06, which developed the standard for stent securement testing. The introduction highlights the importance of stent securement testing for patient safety and the need for compliance with FDA requirements.

05:01

🛠 Methods of Stent Securement Testing

Lockwitzer describes the three methods of stent securement testing: the shim method, tape method, and MSI's SR-1000 system. She explains how each method works, focusing on ease of setup, operation, and output variability. The shim method uses stainless steel shims and Instron tensile testers, while the tape method involves adhesive tape to secure the stent. MSI's SR-1000 is the most automated system, utilizing segmental compression technology for more precise and consistent testing.

10:02

📏 Shim and Tape Methods Explained

A detailed look at the shim and tape methods, including their challenges and setup processes. Lockwitzer explains the specifics of the shim method, which uses stainless steel shims and the ASTM guidance document f2394-07 for stent testing. She also highlights the difficulties with axial angulation in the setup, which can lead to higher stent securement forces. The tape method is discussed in detail, explaining the labor-intensive process of cutting and placing the tape precisely, the challenges in preventing tape adhesion to the balloon, and the use of standard Instron tensile testers to pull the stent.

15:03

🔧 The MSI SR-1000 System

Lockwitzer describes how the SR-1000 system from MSI works in comparison to the other methods. This fully integrated system uses motors, load cells, and software to automate the stent securement process. It allows for precise diameter and force control, making the process more consistent. She explains how the system measures withdrawal force and distance and highlights the advantages of the SR-1000, such as the built-in video system, which records the exact moment the stent moves, correlating it with force data.

📊 Test Results and Observations

A comparison of test results from the three stent securement methods shows that the tape method has the highest standard deviation, while the SR-1000 provides the lowest variability. The tape method yields higher retention forces, but these are attributed to the tape's adhesion to the balloon, which causes misleading results. Lockwitzer emphasizes the SR-1000's advantages, such as reduced setup time and greater consistency across samples, due to its automated process and integrated video system.

🔍 Analyzing the Results

Lockwitzer discusses the reasons behind the variability in the test results, noting that the tape method's high variability is due to inconsistent adhesion to the balloon. She also notes that the time-consuming nature of the tape method and the non-circular opening of the shim method contribute to higher forces and variability in those methods. She concludes that the SR-1000 system reduces operator variability and provides more accurate results due to its precise control of force and diameter.

🏆 Key Conclusions and SR-1000 Advantages

The presentation concludes with key findings, suggesting that long-standing industry standards for stent securement forces might be based on outdated methods like the tape method. Lockwitzer suggests that the SR-1000 system, with its lower variability and simpler setup, offers a more accurate and efficient way of testing stent securement. She emphasizes that MSI's SR-1000 eliminates operator variability, ensures linearity, and offers precise control, making it the preferred method for stent securement testing.

📹 Demonstration of SR-1000 System

Lockwitzer wraps up her presentation by offering a video demonstration of the SR-1000 system in action. The video showcases the system's precise control over grip force, diameter, and pull distance, illustrating the dislodgement of the stent and how the data is captured. She invites attendees to visit the booth for a live demonstration and encourages further questions about the system.

Keywords

💡Stent securement testing

Stent securement testing is the process used to evaluate the stability and attachment of a stent to its delivery system, ensuring that it remains secure during implantation. The video highlights its importance in ensuring the stent reaches the intended treatment site safely. Stent securement is critical for patient safety, as improper securement can lead to severe complications such as dislodgement, compression, or embolization.

💡Dislodgement

Dislodgement refers to the unintended movement of the stent away from its correct position on the delivery system. The video explains that dislodgement can occur in several ways, such as straight dislodgement, where the stent moves out of the marker bands, leading to complications in deployment. If a stent completely dislodges, it can result in severe outcomes like the need for open-heart surgery to retrieve the stent.

💡Shim method

The shim method is one of the traditional methods used to test stent securement by utilizing thin stainless steel shims to grip the stent. This method is discussed in the video as part of the comparison between different testing methods. While widely used, the shim method is described as time-consuming and prone to errors if the sample is not perfectly straight, leading to inaccurate securement force measurements.

💡Tape method

The tape method involves using adhesive tape to secure the stent and balloon catheter for testing. The video discusses how this method is basic but prone to errors, such as tape adhering to the balloon rather than just the stent, which can skew test results. Despite being the most time-consuming setup, it produced the highest force results, possibly due to unwanted adhesion between the tape and balloon.

💡SR-1000

The SR-1000 is a testing system developed by Machine Solutions Inc. (MSI) for automated stent securement testing. In the video, it is presented as a more modern and efficient alternative to traditional methods like the shim and tape methods. The SR-1000 features segmental compression heads and an integrated video system, offering more accurate and reliable results with less operator variability.

💡ASTM guidance

ASTM guidance refers to the set of standards provided by the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) to guide the testing of medical devices, including stent securement. The video mentions ASTM subcommittee F04.30.06, which is responsible for writing the standards on stent securement. These guidelines are important for ensuring that tests follow a consistent, reliable procedure, like in the shim method, which is based on ASTM F2394-07.

💡Segmental compression technology

Segmental compression technology is the mechanism used by the SR-1000 system, where compression heads grip the stent radially to simulate real-world forces during stent deployment. This technology reduces operator error and variability compared to other methods. It allows for precise control over the diameter and force applied to the stent, contributing to the system's improved accuracy.

💡Initial dislodgement force

Initial dislodgement force is the force required to begin dislodging the stent from the delivery system. In the video, this metric is used to evaluate and compare the effectiveness of different stent securement testing methods. The SR-1000, for example, produces lower and more consistent dislodgement forces compared to the shim and tape methods, highlighting its accuracy in measuring securement.

💡Crimping

Crimping is the process of tightly securing a stent onto a balloon catheter by applying pressure. In the video, crimping is performed using the MSI SC775 system, which applies both heat and pressure to ensure a secure fit. Proper crimping is essential for accurate stent securement testing, as it ensures that the stent is properly attached before any tests are conducted.

💡Standard deviation

Standard deviation is a statistical measure used to quantify the variation in a set of data. In the video, it is used to compare the consistency of results from different stent securement testing methods. The SR-1000 system has the lowest standard deviation, indicating that it produces the most consistent results, whereas the tape method showed the highest variability.

Highlights

Introduction to stent securement testing and its importance for patient safety.

Melissa Lockwitzer presents her background in biomedical engineering and experience in medical device testing.

Machine Solutions (MSI) as the global leader in medical device manufacturing and testing equipment.

Stent securement testing is required by the FDA, but its main importance is ensuring the stent reaches its treatment site safely.

Three main failure modes of stents: straight dislodgement, stent compression/buckling, and complete dislodgement.

MSI conducted a comparison test of three methods of stent securement testing: shim method, tape method, and MSI's SR-1000.

MSI's SR-1000 is the most automated of the stent securement methods, offering precise control and ease of use.

Shim method involves thin stainless steel shims and an Instron tensile tester, with challenges around sample angulation.

Tape method, while widely used, involves adhesive tape and presents significant variability in results due to tape adhesion to the balloon.

MSI SR-1000 uses segmental compression technology to provide consistent radial gripping, resulting in lower variability and more accurate data.

Testing showed that the tape method had the largest standard deviation, while MSI's SR-1000 had the smallest.

The SR-1000’s design reduces operator variability through force and diameter control.

SR-1000 integrates a video system for real-time monitoring and data synchronization, allowing precise identification of initial dislodgement.

The study revealed that industry assumptions about securement forces may be based on outdated methods like the tape method.

MSI's SR-1000 offers the fastest setup time, taking only about one to one-and-a-half minutes per sample compared to six minutes for the tape method.

Transcripts

welcome everyone

i am melissa lockwitzer and today i'm

presenting the ins and outs of stent

securement testing

thank you very much for coming and

listening to this presentation

so we'll start over with a bit of an

overview

so i'll give you some background on

myself as well as machine solutions

the importance of stem securement

testing

and then what we did

to compare three different stent

securement type methods to really kind

of give you an overview of what sten

securement is out there today as well as

where msi plans to take it in the future

so my background i have my master's in

biomedical engineering and i've worked

in the medical device industry for eight

years

still in the

industry today

manager of the contract testing lab at

machine solutions as well as other

responsibilities

and i'm a member of the astm

subcommittee the fo4.30.06

this is a subcommittee that actually

wrote the standard

the guidance on stent securement

and recently i led the development team

for msi's current extend securement test

system the sr-1000

so a little bit about machine solutions

we are the global leader in medical

device manufacturing and testing

equipment

we have a wide range of products from

stent crimping

self-expanding stent loading

angioplasty balloon pleating and folding

device testing equipment the sr1000

which i'll talk more about today

so what's so important about stent

securement testing

one of the key things is the fda

requires it um but but more important i

think to me than that is it's it's

important for patient safety um the

purpose of the testing is to verify that

you know the balloon expandable stent

that's crimped on that delivery system

makes it to the intended treatment site

in a very functioning and safe way

so what sten securement looks for

there's a few failure modes

three that we're looking at here

one is a straight dislodgement

so if you look at the image on top here

basically this is when the stent moves

outside of the proximal and distal

marker bands those marker bands are what

the physicians use to position that

stent and if that scent moves outside of

that window there's going to be an issue

with

complete deployment of that stent

and if that happens the doctor's then

going to have to take significantly more

time to attempt to deploy that stent in

a different manner

another failure mode is stent

compression or buckling

and that's

pictured here

definitely wouldn't want that pressed up

against my vessel wall

it's something that will

with those struts being perpendicular to

the plane of the stent you're going to

end up possibly with perforation into

your vessel wall and definitely damage

in a longer healing time for that

procedure

then the kind of worst case scenario is

a complete dislodgement of the stent

that stent fully comes off of your

delivery system and embolizes into your

system now you're potentially looking at

open heart surgery to retrieve that

stent um

and definitely a significantly longer

recovery time than what you're planning

on

so the comparison test what we did at

msi was we conducted a test to compare

three methods of stent securement

testing the shim method the tape method

and msi's sr1000

the purpose was to look at the ease of

method setup

ease of operation as well as output

variability

the sr-1000 was launched last year by

msi and is the most automated of the

methods

both the shim and tape method have been

in use for many years within industry

and are currently in use today as well

so some images of the test methods

shim and instron

the shim sorry

the shim method which utilizes the

instron tensile tester this is a method

that uses thin stainless steel shims

and instrument

standard grippers to withdraw the

balloon from

the stent the tape method

it's as as basic as it sounds you see

two pieces of adhesive tape uh generally

painters type tape

and they're used to secure to the stent

and standard in strong grippers are used

to grip your

catheter as well as the tape and

dislodge the tape and stent

from the balloon

then you have the msi sr 1000 this uses

our segmental compression technology

just in a little different way so we

have two segmental compression heads one

acts as the gripper so you get a nice

radial grip on your

catheter and the other one acts as the

shim

and then the two heads are separated by

a motor to dislodge the stand

i'll get into more detail here as well

so some close-up images of the shim

method

this kind of

this fixture is designed around the astm

guidance document f2

f2394-07

and it is just a guidance document and

the shim method is one of the

methods that is just a possible

test method within that

so you have

two 5000 stainless steel shims these

have rounded v-notches

and that's what contacts the

circumference of the stent's proximal

edge

and you have to have different

you have to have different size shims

for all of your different size stents

and bloom systems

and

um along with instant system to support

the custom base

and withdraw so

some of the other challenges uh with

this method set up

so on this image you can see our balloon

and stent are below and then our

catheter is above and this is where our

grips from the instrument come down

if this sample isn't perfectly straight

if it has any kind of axial angulation

to it you're going to get higher

stent securement forces

that aren't actually related to the the

stent being secure onto the balloon

then you have the tape method

uh this uses two pieces of adhesive tape

a lot of times just a painters grade of

tape

a lot of

effort is put into cutting the tape to

the exact length of the stent

so as you can see in this image

my proximal edge of the stent ends right

at the edge of the tape distal end right

at the edge of the tape you can see it

here as well

this is the edge of my stent

and then we create two tabs

these two tabs are just folded over a

piece of tape so we're actually grabbing

onto the tabs and we want to prevent any

of the tape from adhering to either the

proximal or distal edge of the balloon

we also use a clam shell fixture so we

need to basically stick the tape to the

stent without actually compressing it

with our hands or in a non-circular

fashion because we don't want to change

how that stem stem's been crimped before

we do our testing so

we have multiple clam shells that are

have radiuses sized to the stent plus

the thickness of the tape

so that we can place the tape in the

clamshell the stent on top tape on top

of that

close the clam shell and try to secure

the tape or secure the tape just to the

stent and not to the balloon

well um if the stent has been probably

properly secured onto the balloon you

have parts of that balloon that stick up

and it's very hard to prevent um the

stent or the tape from sticking to that

balloon that's right underneath the

stent itself

we use a standard instron pencil tester

with two standard grips to dislodge the

stent and tape and hold on to the

catheter

significant patience was needed with

this method it was the longest

setup per device it took over six

minutes to get everything set up just

right um to be able to get as clean a

data as we possibly could with this

method

segmental compression so msi's sr1000

so with this method we have it's a fully

contained system has the motors load

cells

and the software all incorporated into

the system

the segmental

compression head that has one millimeter

thick segments that acts as your shims

and it has diameter and force control so

you can close down that head to a set

diameter

as well as knowing exactly how much

force you're applying to the balloon

just distal to that stent

the additional set of

segments is used to grip and then we

have a motor

and load cell here that are used to

separate those two and measure your

withdrawal and force as well as the

withdrawal distance

another nice feature with the sr 1000 is

the integrated a video system with the

data

sometimes if you can see on this graph

your securement data is very obvious

this is your initial dislodgement point

but sometimes it's not quite as obvious

and having that video linked in time

allows you to see exactly when that

stent started to move and compare that

to where your data

where the forces are at on your data

test samples and preconditioning so we

use 30 stainless steel balloon

expandable stents

just a standard 3.5 millimeter od by 24

millimeter length

we crimped them on to pleated and folded

balloons

using the msi sc775 this system allows

us to crimp to a force while imparting

heat and pressure into the balloon

that pressure within the balloon

while we're crimping down to force

allows that balloon to kind of expand

slightly underneath that stent and get

into any of kind of the between struts

um or between segments so that you get a

very tight securement of that

stent after we crimped the stents outer

diameters were measured to make sure all

30 samples um were identical before they

were randomized into the three different

groups we had a standard deviation of

less than one thousandth of an inch

for our final ods

the samples were not tracked through a

torturous path

as the astm standard calls out they were

soaked in a water bath we opted to not

track them for this testing just that we

could maintain as uniform as possible

samples

as soon as they get tracked there may

have been slight

differences in the stents and because we

were just looking at comparing the three

methods and not actually you know

testing actual securement or

wanting to submit this data we

chose to not track the samples

so the test parameters we tried to keep

everything as similar as we could

between the three methods one of those

similarities was the pull rate so 10

inch per minute this is based on the

guidance document

the shim size

was

36th out of 46 thou

because they're slightly oval

and non-circular that was the diameter

range for those

the sr-1000 capture diameter

was one millimeter with a capture force

of one newton plus or minus 0.2 so we

actually can know what force we're

applying on that balloon

and the pull distance was set to 10

millimeters for all of the methods

so the results the exciting part here so

there we go i got a smile

we have 10 stents that were tested with

each method the graph shows the

initial dislodgement force in pounds

the blue is the sr 1000 data the red is

the shim data and the green is the tape

method

as you can

really obviously see the tape method had

the largest standard deviation

0.36 pounds

the shim method was a little tighter on

the standard deviation 0.1

msi was below 0.1 at 0.06 pounds

but you also see along with the

i guess large difference in standard

deviations is the large difference in

your actual state retention forces we're

looking at an average of two pounds for

the tape method

0.5 pounds for the shim and about 0.25

for the sr-1000

so really wanting to look at

what causes you know those

dramatic differences i guess

statistically difference uh

statistically significant differences um

in data

so before we touch on that um just

wanted to highlight how that initial

dislodgement force was pulled from the

data um it was actually fairly simple

with this group of stents we just looked

at the peak before

a drop in force was shown

so as you can see here this was actually

a lateral move so we actually kept going

up right here was our peak force before

we saw a drop in force and so that would

be our initial dislodgement force

there can be higher forces

farther along in the data and that may

be from the stent going over a distal

seal a marker band or other feature on

the balloon that's meant to secure it

that may cause higher forces

so in comparing these three methods with

this close to identical devices as

possible it's a destructive test so you

can't use the same sample over and over

again

the difference is definitely

statistically significant

the tape method yield the highest forces

but that's most likely due to the tape's

adhesion to the balloon beneath the

stent as well as the stent itself no

matter how much we try to gently

compress that tape onto that stent you

just can't avoid that that adhesion

there

as well as the variation in the tape

adhesion to the balloon there might be a

little more balloon sticking out on some

stents than on others and as soon as

different amounts of balloon are adhered

to the tape you're going to have

a great variation in actual your

securement data

the tape method was also the most time

consuming if you compare the three

methods the tape method took upward of

six minutes per sample to set up the

shim method was seated in about three

minutes per sample to set up and the sr

1000 was at a minute to a minute and a

half to set up for each sample

the non-circular opening of the rounded

v-notches on the shim method

really can be attributed to the slightly

higher forces with that method

not knowing exactly how much compression

you're getting on that balloon and

depending on the pleat and fold of that

balloon

as well as slight angulations in our

setup definitely led to more variation

and higher forces within that method

so some key conclusions i guess from

this data the long-standing notion that

the minimum retention force of a half to

one pound for a secured device

may truly be based on the tape method

and should not be applied to other

methods of stent securement testing um

for a long time when we looked at sense

securement data and saw forces below a

half a pound we're like oh that's you

know not a very secure device but i

think it just really depends on the

method that you're using to secure that

to test that securement

the standard deviation within the tape

as well as those misleading high values

should really put this method into

question and the sr-1000 produced very

similar results to the the shim it had a

simpler setup and you could use the same

setup for a wide range of your diameters

and the smaller standard deviation

highlights its innovative qualities

so some of the features that

msi put in to the sr 1000 to

eliminate some some of that variation

we really wanted to eliminate operator

setup variable thus putting in the

diameter control as well as the force

control

the key with the two sets of segmental

head it keeps those two heads concentric

so when you close down on your grip and

you close down on your capture that

sample in there is always linear you're

not going to have any other side axial

loading to add variability to your data

we have a very short gauge length that

we can use on our system it prevents

stretch effect of the catheter we're

pulling a polymer

if there's any stretch within that

sample that's going to lead to some

variation in your data

and then also the system just being pc

controlled all of the force and diameter

calibrations are simply done within the

system leads to a lot of

eliminates a lot of operator variability

the sr-1000

it can be kind of a little harder for

you guys to visualize you may not be as

familiar with it

the tape and shim are out there so i did

want to show you a video today just to

allow you to kind of see

um

oops sorry let me pop back

there we go

just so you can see how the sr-1000

works we also have this system at our

booth so if you want a live

demonstration please stop by our booth

so this is the

the grip side of the segments closing

down on your catheter shaft

so we usually set this just to a grip of

20 newtons just so we have a strong hold

this is the one millimeter

shim segment

closing down to a set diameter or a set

force

now you can see the two segments

this is your grip and this is your shim

and now you can see the stent

initial dislodgement as it pulls in

within the software

you have full control of your closed

diameter closed speed your pull speed

as well as your grip force

and your pull distance in this study we

did the 10 millimeter length pull

the most interesting information

generally does occur within this first

one millimeter of the pull

but sometimes it's you know just

beneficial to see what's also happening

as it's going over your distal seal or

other features of your balloon as it

gets withdrawn into your stent

and so it's nice to have both this video

and data are then linked in time

so if your operator may have missed when

that initial dislodgement happened they

can go back and pull up that video and

find that force

that they need for their

submittal

so that's uh concludes my presentation

today but if there's any questions i'd

be happy to take them now or you can

stop by our booth 3135 and i can take

questions there as well

thank you very much for your time and

attention today

you