 All right, looks like we've had a few questions pop up in the Q&A box for you, Dr. Hoffman. Okay, let's start with the first one. I would like to see how much it is studied in the emergency setting that pertains to what we've seen in the last, in the outlook. There's a few studies, actually, that study did in the emergency setting and studied it with, for example, triple rule out CT as well. And as you would expect, there's higher rates of rejections, but it is still feasible, but we are missing prospective validation evidence for that, really. So that's something that work that still has to be done. We have retrospective evidence, but we need prospective evidence. And then another question was, is there a formula to calculate flow? Well, that is actually, as I said, if you look it up, it's an Navier-Stokes equation, which is a highly complicated equation that takes into account, basically, the flow. And it simulates hyperemia and then normal blood flow, basically, but it's nothing you can just calculate on your calculator on the CT, unfortunately, which is basically why they use supercomputers for it. And there's another question there, which is, I think, very, very important and very interesting. How could foot uncounting impact FFR, especially with stented patients? And that is a very good question, and that is exactly what you saw in these outlook images. So this is foot uncounting data, right? And this is what foot uncounting CT brings us at 0.2 millimeters. And it's very high resolution, and that actually enables us to image stented patients. So usually, for stents, you would say, CCTA is probably not ideal, but we have preliminary data that the high spatial resolution actually lets you see stent struts and you can actually see instant re-synosis. And, again, if you look at what are the cardiologists doing, they have been doing FFR for stents for a long time, and they are actually re-evaluating their intervention success with invasive FFR. So that is something that is entirely unvalidated yet, but it's something that is a super interesting topic. Because we're just learning how we can actually sufficiently image stented patients with CCTA, and then applying FFR to that is extremely interesting. Another interesting question, do nitrates and vasovillation influence CTFFR measurements? Yes and no. You could think so, because if you give nitrates and vasovillation, that is something that we have said we need maximum hyperemia, but you only get the image and you images after your institutional protocol, basically, which in most stenters, I think will use nitrates in order to get a better, invaluable CCTA image, but the hyperemia is simulated by the equation, so it does not influence that equation. So you do need nitrates usually in order to get the nice image, which you can then process, but it does not influence the equation or the measurements from that. And then there's one question pertaining to the cost of the software that depends on the vendor, of course. You can estimate it around, it's on a case base, it's around $1,000 per patient. And then as I talked about, some countries are quite far ahead with reimbursement for that, so that's not a problem. Other countries, like the one I'm living in, there's no reimbursement at all and then $1,000 per patient is quite a lot and that will basically render it not feasible to perform for every patient. But then again, as I said, there's only two vendors right now and that makes it quite the small market and hopefully that will expand and prices might drop below. And what can happen while doing CTFFR? Basically the same things as normal CCTA, right? Because it's all post-processing and we've got the evidence that it is safe to defer patients when CTFFR is fine. The only thing that you have to be careful is use it for the right indications, use it only in intermediate stenosis. And then of course if there's serial stenosis, for example, then these equations just don't take that into account properly. So then that might lead to wrong measurements and that can then falsify your findings. So if you move in between the boundaries that we've set by the evidence, it is safe to use CTFFR. There's really nothing procedure related that can happen because it's just the normal CCTA. And there's one question if I can report to you any available articles or data available. Yes, sure. I encourage you to rewatch and scan every article. There's quite a lot of data there. If you want to have a quick overview, I can heavily recommend this review here in Radiographics, which is really practical and problem-focused and gives you an idea of how to use it. Oh, you meant in regard to PCCT. Well, there's PCCT and FFR, there's really not much evidence out there that's a problem, right? Actually, there's basically no evidence out there that I know of. But for PCCT in general, we're just learning the first few steps of how that impacts coronary artery disease. And I think there's a few centers that do it and are really scientifically active. I'd like to say that the Mainz University Medical Center is one of them. Then I think Zurich is also one that is very active in investigating that. And then the MUSC, so Medical University of Southern Carolina is also very active. So if you look sort of for those authors, you will probably have a pretty good overview. Inventory construction parameters are not very strict, really. Most vendors will accept your standard reconstruction parameters and they just recommend or, of course, they have some quality checks in place. So if you have large step-out effects or stuff like that, they will reject the study and cannot perform at the far. But you don't have to do super high resolution or spectral or anything like that. You can do this basically just your standard of care and you send it to the software vendor and they will perform everything else.