Deltex Medical Share Discussion Threads

[supernumerary] 13/5/2015 16:36

Surely adding torsional stiffness is the last thing you'd want? That would ensure that all movement by the patient resulted in a dislocation? Ditto locking it to his teeth - then it's only his head that has to move to throw it off. What you really want are little grappling hooks on the probe - I know a man who could easily invent those, and try them out ;¬)

Incidentally, since piezo crystals are natural dipoles, it would be easy to get 2 signals - one off either side. I don't think you have to assume the decay is linear, merely predictable. Sorting out the noise would be nontrivial, but not beyond the wit of those clever people at Deltex?

[mdrans1] 13/5/2015 13:53

Kas having pulled the conversation round to what some critics have in the past perceived to be a problem, it’s no surprise that gav has chipped in. If I remember correctly (gav should be able to find the reference) they have redesigned the probe cable such that it remains flexible but resists torsion (twisting) and can be locked to the patients teeth, thus maintaining the desired tip orientation.

For two probes set at 180 to each other to work, wouldn’t you have to assume that the signal decay on rotation is linear and there is no interference between the signals? Moreover you would also have to assume that the people at Deltex, with all their experience, and all the thousands of ODM user, were too stupid not to have spotted the kas solution first.

p.s.

If the kas fantasy were to be true, he would also have had to be stupid enough not to consult Deltex before embarking on his experiment. That would apply wherever he lives. Being in South Africa and spending too much time in the sun is no excuse.

[supernumerary] 13/5/2015 11:55

I believe you ;¬)

Actually I guess if you could split one ultrasonic beam and send it in two opposing directions, then have two receiving sensors, that would do the job more simply.

[kasman] 13/5/2015 11:51

I work in South Africa.
I can do things....
Enough said.

[gavapentin] 13/5/2015 11:38

Errrr - wnat about the recent critical care review saying the same thing...lol

And I quote a paper by Vincent (2015) - arguably THE doyen of Critical Care

REVIEW Open Access
Perioperative cardiovascular monitoring of
high-risk patients: a consensus of 12

Esophageal Doppler offers a minimally invasive
determination of CO. The CardioQ™/CardioQ-ODM™
(Deltex Medical Ltd, Chichester, UK) is the most
commonly used device. Esophageal probes measure
blood flow in the descending part of the aorta. SV is
calculated by multiplying the cross-sectional area of
the aorta (from nomograms based on height, weight,
and age) by the blood flow velocity. Technical and
methodological concerns regarding probe positioning
and the use of nomograms have been raised.


I guess mdrans will counter that....somehow....but then the fool knows no bounds

By the way, the important message is good for ODM (AND OTHER devices)

[ramnik007] 13/5/2015 11:27

Hopefully 11p by sept, if not sooner!

[mdrans1] 13/5/2015 10:48

Don't be daft. No sane qualified medic is going to do the experiment that kas claims to have performed (on a real live person), without having first consulted the medical device manufacturer.

p.s.

kas, for some unknown reason, has always had a down on Deltex. This latest fantasy is just a further attempt to plant the idea that rotation/focusing of the probe tip is a problem.

[supernumerary] 13/5/2015 10:27

kasman - if I've understood the problem correctly (by no means certain!) it sounds like your solution would work. But it would make the probes significantly more expensive since they'd require 2 sensors. Maybe it would be cheaper just to add a position sensor chip like those in VR headsets and then compensate in software for any movement?

How serious a problem is it?

[mdrans1] 13/5/2015 08:14

Kas

Yes I do!

Your real name is Walter, Walter Mitty.

[kasman] 12/5/2015 20:59

And there you have it. No patent. Just goodwill.
Cheers for now.
Hopefully this makes its way to development and makes one of you'll rich.
Bye.

[kasman] 12/5/2015 20:57

Mdrans1. You really don't know me do you. Which is quite sad.
I've been unable to post since my last post as I'm also dealing with a significant family tragedy... Which I prefer not getting into...

Anyway... This is my solution: I managed to stick two separate probes together... back to back such that they each faced the opposite direction.
I attached each to its own monitor and sited it in an anaesthetised patient.
I found, as I expected, that as one probe rotated out of position, the other rotated INTO position. This meant that the summation of the 2 waveforms always added to the same amount had a single probe been used.
Obviously the total wave is also double but by simply halving the sum, the original value is obtained.
Thus the rotation, as it occurred, was unable to affect the total summated wave!!!
Obviously I had 2 separate monitors, but if Deltex could combine the 2 sensors in this 180 degree position to each other and add the wave intensities then display half that, the Rotation artefact would be Obliterated.

[mdrans1] 12/5/2015 16:48

This video appears to have slipped under the radar.

Posted by FH on another site, name beginning with II.

Deltex Medical and ADVI: The benefits of Obamacare

OK this link works

[zho] 12/5/2015 16:28

... although it's also interesting if you leave the XXX in ;-)

[mdrans1] 12/5/2015 16:22

Edit:

See post 7466 with a link that work on ADVFN

[arf dysg] 11/5/2015 12:49

kasman, first file for a patent, then talk to the company. If they think you have a new patentable idea they'll be interested.

[mdrans1] 11/5/2015 11:32

Kas likes to make you work for it. That's what all those acronyms were about.

I suggest you attache bow and stern lines plus maybe a couple of springs for a clean cast off against the flow. Come out in reverse if the flow is with you. When you are out give it enough power to maintain steerage.

P.S. Patent lawyers don't come cheap. Before you talk to anyone you should file for a patent priority date. Anyone else and I would say you could probably do that yourself. The fee is quite modest.

[supernumerary] 11/5/2015 10:42

If it's genuinely original, how about a patent attorney?

[eclair] 11/5/2015 09:06

Kasman, I don't understand why you would post your question on a BB. Surely you should be contacting the company. Maybe you're just joking though, given your previous scepticism of the technology.

[bigt20] 11/5/2015 08:36

kasman
11 May'15 - 08:10 - 7456 of 7456 0 0


How do I proceed?

--> Buy lots of Deltex shares! Lol!

[kasman] 11/5/2015 08:10

How do I proceed?
This is new territory for me.

[kasman] 11/5/2015 07:57

Last night I solved the rotational drift problem. Without any major design change and only a simple software amendment possibly required... Which I obviously cannot test.

[p1nkfish] 08/5/2015 18:51

15p would do me. Whenever it happens, whatever price, I can't see DEMG remaining independent.

[february 30th] 08/5/2015 16:57

p1nkfish,

Perhaps the important point is, that the US news keeps getting flagged. An account here, an account there. No-one knows for sure whether these accounts will lead anywhere, but something is going on in the US.

Edwards bought BMEye for 32.5m Euros, which is 24m GBP, which equates to something like a 10p share price for Deltex. BMEye sales were of course a fraction of Deltex's, so Deltex at 15p would be a bargain. The figure is higher if you convert the dollar price of BMEye to pounds: $42m becomes 27m GBP.

However at the moment I can't see Deltex being able to defend themselves against a 15p offer, and at the same time I can't see why EW or one of its competitors wouldn't want to take Deltex over. Does EW really want to risk CardioQ falling into the hands of a fully capitalized competitor? Can it take the risk?