 Turn it over to Dustin for the Q&A. Dr. Philippon and Dr. Mack, a lot of people are interested in some details on FAI screening. And each of you spoke about physical examination, Dr. Mack spoke about 3D biomechanics. When do you go from physical examination guiding your screening to deciding that you need to step up and start with some imaging and then how do you pick your imaging at that point? Dr. Philippon, do you want to take it first and then we'll switch over to Dr. Mack? Yeah, you know, the dynamic exam is a big part, I think, of the resolution and understanding the conflict. So initially we have a fast screening process, like a demonstrator with a favor distance, the impingement test, asymmetric range of motion. But sometimes we can have a patient where there's a label separation. And sometimes I'm trying to quantify how big it is. And what I like to do at that point, because sometimes we try, we have paid athletes, especially they come in, and they're trying to decide if they want to pursue their season or not pursue their season. And sometimes what we'll do is we'll use the ultrasound and I think it's very effective. Use the ultrasound, do an axial distraction test, and also put the hip inflection and just look at the conflict. See how large it can, how much displacement there is with the labrum. And if the labrum is not too unstable, sometimes we'll suggest to our patient, hey, let's get an injection. Let's wait, let's work on our muscles, and we'll try to do this at the end of the season. So for me it's very helpful to do an ultrasound, clinically, just to decide if we should postpone the intervention, surgical intervention, or just try to stay conservative for a little while longer. Okay, and Dr. Mack, do you have any additional comments on that question? So I would agree with what Dr. Philippon has said. I've had a similar experience, and we use dynamic ultrasound as well in our clinics. Oftentimes we will get preoperative MRI. I don't personally do Arthrogram. I haven't found it useful, but others have. I am a very big proponent of the diagnostic injection. Using corticosteroid injections under ultrasound guidance has been helpful to me if athletes need to get through a period of time. However, I do not allow them to have more than one, and I caution them they cannot play within a few days of having the injection, so the numbing medication must be worn off to ensure that we are not masking any potential pain protective mechanisms of the hip. So in those two fashions we try to get individuals through their ability to play their sport. That being said, obviously ultimately if the hip continues to be symptomatic and they are playing through pain to the point where they can't, then that becomes a surgical situation. So Dr. Mack, you discussed the corticosteroids. What are your thoughts on the, and Dr. Philippon will bring this to you next. What are your thoughts on the current state of orthobiologics for FAI patients and for soft tissue lesions, and then the future? What do you think the future is taking us? Dr. Mack, we'll go to you first. Sure. So we do a fair amount of research on that, specifically as it pertains to the cartilage that I presented. And the conclusions we've had is, candidly, we're not there yet, but we probably will be. We have a number of trials going on currently where we can take individuals, both polydactyly cells from kids that don't need it. We can culture them and are actually in an early clinical trial utilizing that, and that can be placed arthroscopically. As far as non-surgical biologic utilization like PRP, stem cells, things like that, my own perspective is the data is not there yet. As far as stem cells are concerned, maybe it will be one day. We don't use it currently. As far as PRP is concerned, it has a role. Lucasite poor PRP has been utilized well in my patients as well as others. As far as symptom management, it's not obviously going to protect the hip from damage or anything of that nature. But to get a hip to calm down, Lucasite poor PRP has decent success. It's something that we use ourselves. It also has very little condor toxicity, unlike cortical steroid injections. So we use that in our athletes for that reason. Dr. Philippon, I know your center is doing a lot of research in this area. What additional thoughts do you have, and especially looking towards the future? Yeah, I agree with Dr. Mack. I think right now we're starting a trial where we'll NIH fund a trial, where we'll look at bone marrow aspirates and look at the effectiveness on the culture generation. Also, we're very interested in synolytics. We're looking at it as well, phycetin, cursetin, and pre-bone marrow aspiration to minimize the senescent cell and have a good yield of good stem cells. So we're doing a lot of research on that. What I do in certain athletes, I'm not saying we have a 100% success rate. A lot of them, to get them through the season, will do an ultrasound guide injection over the conrolable separation with PRP, lococyte-poor. And we've had good success, and maybe a third, a fourth of our, a third to a little more than a third of our patient with that. And that, what it does in our opinion, create a little inflammation, it'll scar and stabilize the conrolable junction temporarily. And I've had a few patients where we inject PRP and they can go on for a year or a year and a half and postpone surgery. Now, it's not going to treat the impingement, obviously, but it's a good way sometime. Let's say the Olympic cycle, someone is ready for the summer Olympic, we'll try to get them through the Olympics if they get hurt a few months before because they cannot have surgery and get them through if it's possible. And as I said, for us in our hands, a little more than a third of our patient can have a good response to that. A lot of people are interested in return to activity rates after hip arthroscopy. And from my experience in working with both of you for a long time with Team USA athletes, I actually don't know of any athlete who did not return in our program, which is pretty impressive and I don't think is in the literature. But I know you guys know the literature by heart. Dr. Philippon first, how does return to activity after hip arthroscopy look for elite athletes? Well, that's a great question. Now, if we look, there's different cohorts. If you look at the pro athletes, we looked at it by sports and we have published that in the American Journal of Sports Medicine and other medical journals. So we look at ice hockey players, for example, high soccer players are cohorts and NHL hockey players return to play was 100%. Baseball player in the 90 plus percent return to play, measuring baseball pressure, NBA basketball player. We just published that recently, 100% return to play. So I would say an NFL actually was a little lower. It's I-80s. Overall, you could say that return to play at the professional level after an intervention like we do is at least 90% plus chance of return to play at the same level. Now, in the recreational athlete might be a little different because you're dealing with different muscle structures, muscle strength and training and all that. But overall, let's say return to sports at the same level. That's it's certainly around 90% plus. That's phenomenal. Dr. Mack, what additional thoughts do you have on that topic? I think you might be under. So I would agree completely with what Dr. Philippon said. And that's it was the part of this talk that you just heard was the specific differences between recreational and professional athletes. And there are very big differences that I think it has to do with the stresses on their hip. And one would think that elite athletes have higher stressors and they do, but they also are far more able to accommodate and they have better neuromuscular kinematics. So our experience has been the same that the study that I quoted that showed a 74% return to sport in my experience, that is unquestionably on the low end. And my experience has been the same as Dr. Philippon's where we're upwards in the middle, middle to high 90s. NBA athletes interestingly are a unique cohort depending on the specific position you're in. It may have a higher or lower percentage, but I think elite athletes are unique and surgery works when it's indicated when elite athletes extremely well. And I would caution the audience that these results are definitely better when you have a very experienced surgeon. This is a fairly new technique and they're inexperienced surgeons. And we've seen that when we use very experienced hip arthroscopists we see phenomenal results. Our next question is for Dave. Dave, people had a lot of questions about the athlete 360 program. Is it something that can be bought? How is it developed? Can you expand on the history and the current state of the athlete 360 program? This is a bespoke program where we've actually partnered with our team at KINDUCT. It started off the back of, as Dustin and I sort of presented in our presentation, that it was initially just a screening program that coupled with something that inspired actually out of World Bar's questionnaire that he mentioned earlier today. And then it's progressed across time. It just started with one team. Now we're servicing over 500 Olympic and Paralympic athletes across probably what we would say, 17 different NGBs. And I heard that term mentioned earlier in 26 different sporting groups. We're not quite to the whole of Team USA, but we're definitely our outreach is continuing to expand. And especially during this time where we're sort of distance-based training and contact with our athletes has been imperative in us understanding their wellness and that individualized training load. All right, so we're out of time for this panel. Thank you, Dr. Mack and Dr. Philippon for everything you've done for Team USA. We're extremely appreciative of your expertise and for your centers contributing to our national medical network. And that's the end of this session. We're going to kick it over to Charlie.