The document discusses two medical devices, EndoPAT and Vendys, that are used to measure endothelial dysfunction. It provides comparisons between the two devices in areas such as approved clinical uses, robustness, supporting evidence base, number of tests performed, regulatory approvals, and submissions to medical conferences. Overall, it indicates that EndoPAT has stronger evidence and more extensive approvals and use compared to Vendys.

1. “Integrity is what we need my friend…..”

2. Truth is blushing Red…
EndoPAT less than $40 for clinical and research use
Vendys cleared for reactive hyperemia only, EndoPAT for
diagnosing Endothelial Dysfunction
Not that important…..
Occlusion monitoring is more important:
EndoPAT “Yes “ – Vendys “No”
EndoPAT is more robust to room temperature changes
But not used to improve the measurement…..
EndoPAT’s arm support makes it less sensitive
EndoPAT does have it…..plus embedded QA
Prestigious epidimyological None… Framingham, Guttenberg, Jackson Heart Studies and
studies more……
Number of tests to date Well……? >250,000
Regulatory approvals FDA (reactive hyperemia only) FDA, CE, Health Canada, Shonin (Japan), KFDA (Korea), SFDA
(China), Anvisa (Brazil), TGA (Australia), Russian Health……
Evidence Base (number of Poor Huge and impressive
publications, journals type, …)
EndoPAT has 180 peer-reviewed
papers … Vendys only 13 …

3. Submitted for presentation at the American
College of Cardiology Conference 2009
… but failed to be accepted …

4. Submitted for presentation at the American
College of Cardiology Conference 2009
… but failed to be accepted …