UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

______________________________

FORM 10-K

(Mark One)

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2021

OR

For transition period from               to

Commission File Number   001-38847     

______________________________

SILK ROAD MEDICAL, INC.

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

______________________________

1213 Innsbruck Dr. Sunnyvale, CA 94089 (408) 720-9002

(Address, including zip code, and telephone number, including area code, of registrant’s principal executive offices)

______________________________

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act:

None

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act. Yes  ☒    No  ☐

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act. Yes  ☐    No  ☒

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.     Yes  ☒ No  

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically every Interactive Data File required to be submitted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit such files).    Yes  ☒    No  ☐

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, smaller reporting company, or an emerging growth company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer”, “smaller reporting company”, and “emerging growth company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (Check one):

If an emerging growth company, indicate by check mark if the registrant has elected not to use the extended transition period for complying with any new or revised financial accounting standards provided pursuant to Section 7(a)(2)(B) of the Securities Act.  ☐

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has filed a report on and attestation to its management's assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting under Section 404(b) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (15 U.S.C 7262(b)) by the registered public accounting firm that prepared or issued its audit report. ☒

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Act). Yes ☐ No ☒

The aggregate market value of the registrant’s common stock held by non-affiliates of the registrant was approximately $1.6 billion as of June 30, 2021 based on the closing sale price of the registrant’s common stock on the NASDAQ Global Select Market on such date. Shares held by persons who may be deemed affiliates have been excluded. This determination of affiliate status is not necessarily a conclusive determination for other purposes.

As of February 28, 2022, the number of outstanding shares of the registrant's common stock, par value $0.001 per share, was 35,010,136.

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

Portions of the definitive proxy statement for our 2022 Annual Meeting of Stockholders are incorporated by reference into Part III of this report.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

CAUTIONARY NOTES REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

This Annual Report on Form 10-K contains forward-looking statements concerning our business, operations and financial performance and condition, as well as our plans, objectives and expectations for our business, operations and financial performance and condition. Any statements contained herein that are not statements of historical facts may be deemed to be forward-looking statements. In some cases, you can identify forward-looking statements by terminology such as “anticipate,” “assume,” “believe,” “contemplate,” “continue,” “could,” “due,” “estimate,” “expect,” “goal,” “intend,” “may,” “objective,” “plan,” “predict,” “potential,” “positioned,” “seek,” “should,” “target,” “will,” “would” and other similar expressions that are predictions of or indicate future events and future trends, or the negative of these terms or other comparable terminology.

These forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to, statements about:

•our plans to conduct further clinical trials;

•our plans and expected timeline related to our products, or developing new products, to address additional indications or to obtain regulatory approvals or clearances or otherwise;

•the expected use of our products by physicians;

•our expectations regarding the number of procedures that will be performed with our products, the number of physicians we expect to train, and the number of our sales territories;

•our ability to obtain, maintain and expand regulatory clearances for our current products and any new products we create;

•the expected growth of our business and our organization;

•our expectations regarding government and third-party payer coverage and reimbursement;

•our ability to retain and recruit key personnel, including the continued expansion of our sales and marketing infrastructure;

•our ability to obtain an adequate supply of materials and components for our products from our third-party suppliers, most of whom are single-source suppliers;

•our ability to manufacture sufficient quantities of our products with sufficient quality;

•our ability to obtain and maintain intellectual property protection for our products and our business;

•our ability to expand our business into new geographic markets;

•our compliance with extensive Nasdaq requirements and government laws, rules and regulations both in the United States and internationally;

•our estimates of our expenses, ongoing losses, future revenue, capital requirements and our need for, or ability to obtain, additional financing;

•our ability to identify and develop new and planned products and/or acquire new products;

•our expectations regarding the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on our business;

•developments and projections relating to our competitors or our industry; and

•our intended use of net proceeds from our public offerings.

We believe that it is important to communicate our future expectations to our investors. However, there may be events in the future that we are not able to accurately predict or control and that may cause our actual results to differ materially from the expectations we describe in our forward-looking statements. These forward-looking statements are based on management’s current expectations, estimates, forecasts and projections about our business and the industry in which we

operate and management’s beliefs and assumptions and are not guarantees of future performance or development and involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors that are in some cases beyond our control. As a result, any or all of our forward-looking statements in this Annual Report on Form 10-K may turn out to be inaccurate. Factors that may cause actual results to differ materially from current expectations include, among other things, those listed under “Risk Factors” and elsewhere in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

These forward-looking statements speak only as of the date of this Annual Report on Form 10-K. We assume no obligation to update or revise these forward-looking statements for any reason, even if new information becomes available in the future. You should not rely upon forward-looking statements as predictions of future events. Although we believe that the expectations reflected in the forward-looking statements are reasonable, we cannot guarantee that the future results, levels of activity, performance or events and circumstances reflected in the forward-looking statements will be achieved or occur. We undertake no obligation to update publicly any forward-looking statements for any reason after the date of this Annual Report on Form 10-K to conform these statements to actual results or to changes in our expectations.

You should read this Annual Report on Form 10-K and the documents that we reference in this Annual Report on Form 10-K and have filed with the SEC as exhibits to this Annual Report on Form 10-K with the understanding that our actual future results, levels of activity, performance and events and circumstances may be materially different from what we expect.

‎

PART I

Item 1. Business

Overview

We are a medical device company focused on reducing the risk of stroke and its devastating impact. We believe a key to stroke prevention is minimally-invasive and technologically advanced intervention to safely and effectively treat carotid artery disease, one of the leading causes of stroke. We have pioneered a new approach for the treatment of carotid artery disease called transcarotid artery revascularization, or TCAR, which we seek to establish as the standard of care.

TCAR relies on two novel concepts - minimally-invasive direct carotid access in the neck and high-rate blood flow reversal during the procedure to protect the brain - and combines the benefits of innovative endovascular techniques with fundamental surgical principles. TCAR using our portfolio of products has been clinically demonstrated to reduce the upfront morbidity and mortality risks commonly associated with carotid endarterectomy while maintaining a reduction in long-term stroke risk. We are the first and only company to obtain FDA approvals, secure specific Medicare reimbursement coverage, and commercialize products engineered and indicated specifically for transcarotid use, in patients who require carotid revascularization and are at high risk for adverse events from carotid endarterectomy and who meet certain treatment criteria. As of December 31, 2021, more than 40,000 TCAR procedures have been performed globally, including more than 13,900 in the United States in 2021.

Carotid artery disease is the progressive buildup of plaque causing narrowing of the arteries in the front of the neck, which supply blood flow to the brain. Plaque can embolize, or break away from the arterial wall, and travel toward the brain and interrupt critical blood supply, leading to an ischemic stroke. Carotid artery disease is one of the leading causes of stroke, and stroke is one of the most catastrophic, debilitating, and costly conditions worldwide. We believe the best way to mitigate the mortality, morbidity and cost burden of stroke is to prevent strokes in the first place. Clinical evidence has demonstrated that with proper diagnosis and treatment, stroke due to carotid artery disease is mostly preventable. We believe there were approximately 4.3 million people with carotid artery disease in the United States in 2020, with an estimated 433,000 new diagnoses in 2021, and existing treatment options have substantial safety and effectiveness limitations.

The main goal of treating carotid artery disease is to prevent a future stroke. Unfortunately, one of the main complications of existing treatments for carotid artery disease is causing a stroke, along with other procedure-related adverse events. When intervention beyond medical management is warranted, the current standard of care for reduction in stroke risk is an invasive carotid revascularization procedure called carotid endarterectomy, or CEA. To perform a CEA, a physician makes a large incision in the neck, cuts the carotid artery open, and then removes the plaque from inside the vessel. CEA was first performed in 1953, and while generally effective at reducing stroke risk in the long term, large randomized clinical trials have demonstrated that CEA is associated with a significant risk of adverse events, including cranial nerve injury, heart attack, wound complications, and, in some cases, even stroke and death. These risks are elevated in certain patient populations.

To address the invasiveness of CEA, transfemoral carotid artery stenting, or CAS, was developed in the 1990s. The CAS procedure uses minimally-invasive catheters traveling from a puncture site in the groin to place a stent in the carotid artery in the neck to restrain the plaque and prevent embolization that could cause a stroke. While both CEA and CAS have been clinically demonstrated to reduce long-term stroke risk, randomized clinical trials and other studies have shown that CAS, relative to CEA, often results in an almost two-fold increase in stroke within 30 days following treatment, which we believe is due to inadequate protection of the brain. We believe this represents an unacceptable trade-off relative to the current standard of care of CEA. As such, after almost 30 years of development, CAS has achieved limited adoption and narrow reimbursement coverage in the United States. CEA remains the standard of care and represented approximately 82% of the approximately 169,000 carotid revascularization procedures performed in the United States in 2021. Therefore, we believe reducing the rate of morbidity and mortality of CEA is an unmet clinical need that continues to persist.

TCAR is a minimally-invasive procedure that addresses the morbidity of CEA and the 30-day stroke risk of CAS while maintaining a reduction in long-term stroke risk beyond the first 30 days. TCAR starts with a small incision in the neck slightly above the collarbone, otherwise known as transcarotid access, through which our ENROUTE® Transcarotid Stent System, or ENROUTE stent, is placed during a period of temporary high-rate blood flow reversal that is enabled by our ENROUTE® Transcarotid Neuroprotection System, or ENROUTE NPS. Blood flow reversal directs embolic debris that could cause a stroke away from the brain, while the stent braces the plaque and prevents embolization to afford a

reduction in long-term stoke risk. We believe that by meeting the standard of brain protection and reduction in 30-day and long-term stroke risk afforded by CEA, while providing benefits commensurate with an endovascular, minimally-invasive approach, TCAR could become the preferred alternative for carotid revascularization. Additionally, we believe that as our technology becomes more widely adopted, TCAR may become a compelling alternative for patients who are treated with medical management alone each year.

Based on the estimated 433,000 new carotid artery disease diagnoses that occurred in the United States in 2021, we believe a total annual U.S. market opportunity of approximately $3.1 billion exists for our portfolio of TCAR products. There were approximately 169,000 carotid revascularization procedures performed in 2021, which we estimate to represent a market conversion opportunity greater than $1.2 billion. More than 13,900 TCAR procedures were performed in 2021 in the United States using our products, representing just over 3% of annual diagnoses of carotid artery disease.

The safety, effectiveness and clinical advantages of TCAR have been demonstrated in multiple clinical trials, post-market studies and registries that have been published in peer-reviewed journals representing outcomes in more than 7,000 patients to date. The results of our U.S. pivotal trial, ROADSTER, reflect the lowest reported 30-day stroke rate for any prospective, multicenter clinical trial of carotid stenting of which we are aware. Our ROADSTER 2 post-approval study was completed in 2019 and showed a thirty-day stroke rate of 0.6% in the FDA-analysis population. Additionally, data on real-world outcomes of TCAR relative to CEA and CAS have continued to accrue through the ongoing TCAR Surveillance Project, or TSP, which is an ongoing open-ended registry sponsored by the Society for Vascular Surgery through the Vascular Quality Initiative, or VQI. In a VQI study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association in December 2019, a propensity matched analysis of 3,286 high surgical risk patients in each cohort showed in-hospital stroke or death was 1.6% for TCAR versus 3.1% for CAS. The differences favoring TCAR persisted through 30 days and 1 year. In a VQI study published in the Annals of Surgery in September 2020, a propensity matched analysis of 6,384 high surgical risk patients in each cohort demonstrated significant reduction in the risk of postoperative myocardial infarction and cranial nerve injury after TCAR compared to CEA, with no differences in the rates of in-hospital stroke/death (1.6% TCAR and 1.6% CEA).

We manufacture the ENROUTE NPS at our facility in Sunnyvale, California and distribute our portfolio of TCAR products from our facilities in Sunnyvale, California and Plymouth, Minnesota. We market and sell our products in the United States through a direct sales organization consisting of 64 sales representatives, known as area managers, or AMs, and 62 clinical support specialists, known as therapy development specialists, or TDSs, as of December 31, 2021, that are focused on driving adoption of TCAR among the approximately 2,750 physicians and 750 hospitals in the United States that we believe are responsible for approximately 80% of carotid revascularization procedures each year. While our current commercial focus is on the U.S. market, our ENROUTE NPS and ENROUTE stent have obtained CE Mark approval, allowing us to commercialize in Europe in the future. We are also pursuing regulatory clearances in China and Japan.

TCAR is reimbursed based on established current procedural technology, or CPT, codes and International Classification of Diseases, or ICD-10, codes related to carotid stenting that track to Medicare Severity Diagnosis Related Group, or MS‐DRG classifications. In September 2016, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, or CMS, made coverage available for TCAR in symptomatic and asymptomatic patients at high risk for adverse events from CEA, or high surgical risk, treated at facilities participating in the Society for Vascular Surgery’s TCAR Surveillance Project using FDA-cleared and approved transcarotid devices. Our ENROUTE NPS and stent are currently the only FDA-cleared and approved transcarotid devices. Carotid artery disease is most often a disease of the elderly and, as such, CMS is the primary payer for carotid revascularization procedures. We estimate that the high surgical risk patient population represents approximately two-thirds of the treated patient population, with the remaining one-third represented by standard surgical risk patients. We are pursuing expansion of FDA labeling for the ENROUTE stent, currently indicated for use in certain patients at high surgical risk, and upon FDA approval, pursue CMS coverage of TCAR in the standard surgical risk patient population.

We have experienced considerable growth since we began commercializing our products in the United States in late 2015. Our revenue increased to $101.5 million for the year ended December 31, 2021 compared to $75.2 million and $63.4 million for the years ended December 31, 2020 and 2019, respectively, representing growth of 35% and 60%, respectively. Our net losses were $49.8 million, $47.4 million and $52.4 million for the years ended December 31, 2021, 2020 and 2019, respectively. As of December 31, 2021, 2020 and 2019, our accumulated deficit was $288.7 million, $238.9 million and $191.5 million, respectively.

Our Product Portfolio

TCAR is enabled by our proprietary portfolio of TCAR products designed to provide direct access to the carotid artery, effective reduction in stroke risk throughout the procedure, and long-term restraint of carotid plaque. In addition to enabling the safety and effectiveness of TCAR, our proprietary products are specifically designed to enable a short learning curve, consistent ease of use and physician comfort. Our products are also currently the only devices cleared and approved by the FDA specifically for transcarotid use.

Today, our product portfolio consists of the following four single use components. Based on our experience, the full product portfolio is used in the majority of TCAR procedures. In the future we plan to continue to expand our product portfolio to include additional tools and devices to support the TCAR procedure.

The ENROUTE NPS (510(k) K153485) is cleared for transcarotid vascular access, introduction of diagnostic agents and therapeutic devices, and embolic protection during carotid artery angioplasty and stenting procedures for patients diagnosed with carotid artery stenosis and who have appropriate anatomy, and the ENROUTE stent (PMA P140026) is approved for use in conjunction with the ENROUTE NPS for the treatment of patients at high risk for adverse events from CEA who require carotid revascularization and meet certain criteria.

Clinical Data

The safety, effectiveness and clinical advantages of TCAR have been demonstrated in multiple clinical trials, post-market studies and registries that have been published in peer-reviewed journals representing outcomes in more than 7,000 patients to date. Our first-in-human trial, the PROOF Study, was initiated as a feasibility study to assess the safety and performance of the ENROUTE NPS and later was expanded to support CE marking of the ENROUTE NPS. Data from the PROOF Study were also used to support FDA approval of the investigational device exemption, or IDE, for the ROADSTER Study. Data from the pivotal cohort of the ROADSTER Study supported FDA 510(k) clearance of the ENROUTE NPS, and a subset of the data supported pre-market, or PMA, approval of the ENROUTE stent. The results of the pivotal phase of the ROADSTER study were published in November 2015 in the Journal of Vascular Surgery. We have completed a post-market approval study, ROADSTER 2, which was designed to evaluate the outcomes in TCAR procedures using the ENROUTE stent used in conjunction with the ENROUTE NPS in broader, “real‑world” use in 692 patients. Data on TCAR outcomes also continues to accrue through the Society for Vascular Surgery-sponsored TCAR Surveillance Project, an ongoing real‑world, open-ended registry. The VQI stated that close to 28,000 TCAR procedures have been submitted to the registry as of January 19, 2022.

Summary of Key Clinical Trials

‎

Summary of TCAR Clinical Trial Outcomes

*Only tabulated for ITT population.

**Evaluated at 90 days.

PROOF First-in-human Clinical Trial

Our first-in-human trial, the PROOF Study, was a single-arm trial conducted at one trial site in Europe from 2009 to 2012. The PROOF Study was initiated as a feasibility study to assess the safety and performance of the ENROUTE NPS in a limited number of patients, initially enrolling 10 patients. The PROOF Study was later expanded to 75 patients to collect the clinical data necessary to support CE marking of the ENROUTE NPS. Data from the PROOF Study were also used to support FDA approval of the IDE for the ROADSTER Study.

The PROOF Study enrolled patients that were classified as high surgical risk, as well as patients classified as standard surgical risk. The results from the PROOF Study demonstrated that TCAR was technically feasible and resulted in a minor stroke incidence of 1.3% within 30 days (zero major strokes), which was significantly lower than that reported for CAS in prior clinical trials.

Additionally, a sub-study of 56 patients underwent pre- and post-procedure diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance image scanning, or DW-MRI, to detect new white lesions on the ipsilateral side of the brain as a sensitive surrogate marker of microemboli and brain injury. The analysis resulted in only 18% of the treatment population presenting with ipsilateral new white lesions, which was also comparable to that reported for CEA in prior clinical trials and significantly less than that reported in prior CAS trials.

Pivotal ROADSTER Clinical Trial

Our pivotal trial, the ROADSTER Study, was a single-arm trial conducted at 17 sites across the United States and one site in Europe from 2012 to 2014. The design of the ROADSTER Study, which was used to support FDA 510(k) clearance of the ENROUTE NPS, was largely based upon predicate embolic prevention studies and followed the relevant FDA guidance published in 2008. In the pivotal phase, the ROADSTER study enrolled 141 patients that were classified as being at high surgical risk.

The primary endpoint of the ROADSTER Study was a hierarchical composite of stroke, death or myocardial infarction within 30 days. Key secondary endpoints included acute device, technical and procedural success at 30 days, as well as cranial nerve injury at six months. The results of the ROADSTER Study were analyzed on an “intention to treat,” or ITT basis, as well as a “per protocol,” or PP basis. The ITT results accounted for all patients enrolled in the clinical trial, including patients treated despite major protocol deviations. The PP results included only patients that met all of the inclusion and none of the exclusion criteria and who were compliant with the protocol-mandated study medication regimen. There were no patients lost to follow-up in either the ITT or PP cohorts.

On an ITT basis, the primary endpoint event rate in the pivotal phase of the ROADSTER Study was a 3.5% hierarchical composite rate of stroke, death or myocardial infarction at 30 days, comprised of two strokes, or a 1.4% incidence, two deaths, or a 1.4% incidence, and one myocardial infarction, or a 0.7% incidence. Both deaths were respiratory in nature and were independently adjudicated as not related to the device. There were no site-reported cardiovascular or neurologic deaths, although our independent clinical events committee adjudicated one death as cardiovascular. There were no major strokes. There was one report of an acute cranial nerve injury, representing a 0.7% incidence, which resolved within six months. These data supported FDA 510(k) clearance of the ENROUTE NPS.

In the PP analysis, the primary endpoint event rate was 2.9%, comprised of one stroke, or a 0.7% incidence, two deaths, or a 1.5% incidence, and one myocardial infarction, or a 0.7% incidence.

A continued access phase of the ROADSTER Study was conducted during the time that the 510(k) premarket notification for the ENROUTE NPS was under review by FDA. This phase enrolled an additional 78 patients with the same primary and secondary endpoints as the pivotal phase of the ROADSTER Study. The results of the continued access phase were similar to those reported in the pivotal phase of the ROADSTER study. The ENROUTE NPS was 510(k) cleared by the FDA in February 2015.

Following a pre-submission interaction with the FDA, the FDA permitted data from a sub-analysis of 52 patients in the ROADSTER Study who were treated with the Cordis Precise Pro RX Carotid Stent System to be used, in conjunction with existing data from Cordis on CAS clinical trials performed with the Cordis Precise Pro RX, to support our pre-market approval application for the ENROUTE stent. The ENROUTE and Precise stent systems share the same design for the stent implant itself, and differ only in the design of the delivery system. Based on this data, the PMA for the ENROUTE stent was approved in May 2015.

We also initiated a separate sub-study of patients treated PP in the ROADSTER pivotal and continued access cohorts to assess the longer-term rate of ipsilateral stroke beyond 30 days. This sub-analysis, which consisted of 164 patients including 112 from the pivotal phase and 52 from the continued access phase, provided insight into the ability of TCAR to limit stroke incidence in longer-term follow-up. At one-year follow-up, the ipsilateral stroke rate was 0.6% and the mortality rate was 3.7% past 30 days.

ROADSTER 2 U.S. Post-Market Approval Study

The ROADSTER 2 Post Approval Study was a condition of PMA approval for the ENROUTE stent. The study evaluated the outcomes in TCAR using the ENROUTE stent in conjunction with the ENROUTE NPS in broader, “real world” use. Like the sub-analysis from the ROADSTER Study that led to PMA approval of the ENROUTE stent, the primary endpoint, which was assessed on a per-protocol (PP) basis, was the rate of procedural success at 30 days in high surgical risk patients with a three year minimum life expectancy.

The ROADSTER 2 post approval study enrolled 692 patients at 42 sites. 61.8% of the participating patients were treated by physicians who did not participate in the ROADSTER Study. The FDA mandated that at least 70% of the sites be new sites. Enrollment commenced in 2015. Enrollment and final 30-day follow-up assessments were completed in 2019 and the results were published in the journal Stroke in August 2020.

In the ROADSTER 2 final report submitted to the FDA in October 2019, data on 632 patients treated PP were presented. The procedural success rate in ROADSTER 2 was 97.9%. The lower bound of the 2-sided 95% exact binomial confidence intervals of the observed procedural success rate significantly exceeds the a priori threshold of 85% (p<0.0001). The primary endpoint of ROADSTER 2 was met and, as a result, the rate of procedural success in ROADSTER 2 compares favorably to the rate of procedural success in the ROADSTER Sub-Study population, which was 98.1%.

Data from a subset of ROADSTER 2 subjects (n=155) is being analyzed to assess the incidence of ipsilateral stroke from day 31 through day 365 post-procedure. These data are expected to be published in the future.

The Society for Vascular Surgery’s TCAR Surveillance Project

The TCAR Surveillance Project (TSP) was implemented in September 2016 as an initiative of the Society for Vascular Surgery Patient Safety Organization. The TCAR Surveillance Project is an ongoing, open-ended registry that was designed to monitor the safety and effectiveness of transcarotid stents placed directly into the carotid artery while reversing blood flow within the carotid artery. It is intended to compare TCAR with CEA in centers that participate in the Society for Vascular Surgery Vascular Quality Initiative, or VQI. The TCAR Surveillance Project was reviewed by the FDA

and deemed to be a scientifically valid extension study of TCAR, thereby allowing CMS to provide coverage within the parameters of the existing National Coverage Determination. The Society for Vascular Surgery VQI is designed to improve the quality, safety, effectiveness and cost of vascular health care by collecting and exchanging information, and is available to all providers of vascular health care and their respective institutions participating in the registry. Because data from CAS and CEA procedures are also collected in their respective registries within the Society for Vascular Surgery VQI, comparisons of TCAR to CAS or CEA can also be made.

Eligible patients must meet the inclusion criteria specified for the TCAR Surveillance Project. Generally, patients must be at high surgical risk and must have had their TCAR procedure performed using any FDA-cleared transcarotid proximal embolic protection device utilizing flow reversal, such as our ENROUTE NPS, and any FDA-approved transcarotid stent, such as our ENROUTE stent. To date, the ENROUTE stent and the ENROUTE NPS are the only such devices cleared and approved by the FDA. TCAR procedures entered into the Society for Vascular Surgery VQI CAS registry for the TCAR Surveillance Project are eligible for reimbursement by Medicare if the patients meet the requirements set forth above. We believe the TCAR Surveillance Project represents a unique collaboration between a physician specialty society, the FDA and CMS. We believe it also marks the first time that CMS has granted broader reimbursement for a stent-based treatment paradigm for carotid artery disease in a registry not managed by industry.

The TCAR Surveillance Project is intended to be a repository for TCAR procedures and outcomes data to broaden the clinical evidence base for TCAR. TCAR is one of many surgical and endovascular procedures that is tracked by the Society for Vascular Surgery VQI. Over time, it is expected that physicians and academic researchers will query the database and produce publications in peer review journals, and present data at medical conferences, regarding the safety and effectiveness of TCAR in real world use.

The primary outcome measure of the TCAR Surveillance Project is one-year ipsilateral stroke or death. The TCAR Surveillance Project also tracks in-hospital stroke, death and myocardial infarction. Other secondary outcomes, such as cranial nerve injury and re-intervention, are also being reported. For the secondary outcome measures, any stroke will be counted and in-hospital stroke events are not limited to the ipsilateral side.

The Society for Vascular Surgery Vascular Quality Initiative has reported that 565 centers have contributed almost 28,000 TCAR procedures to the CAS VQI registry as of January 19, 2022.

TCAR Surveillance Project: TCAR vs. CAS

In a study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association in December of 2019, TCAR was compared to CAS in a propensity score matched analysis with 3,286 pairs. TCAR was associated with a lower risk of in-hospital stroke or death (1.6% vs 3.1%; P < .001), stroke (1.3% vs 2.4%; P = .001), and death (0.4% vs 1.0%; P = .008). As expected with two minimally invasive procedures, there was no statistically significant difference in the risk of perioperative MI between the two cohorts (0.2% for TCAR vs. 0.3% for TFCAS; P = .47). At 1 year using Kaplan-Meier life-table estimation, TCAR was associated with a lower risk of ipsilateral stroke or death (5.1% vs 9.6%; hazard ratio, 0.52 [95%CI, 0.41 to 0.66]; P < .001). TFCAS was associated with more radiation (median fluoroscopy time, 5 minutes [interquartile range {IQR}, 3 to 7] vs 16 minutes [IQR, 11 to 23]; P < .001) and more contrast usage (median contrast used, 30 mL [IQR, 20 to 45] vs 80 mL [IQR, 55 to 122]; P < .001).

TCAR Surveillance Project: TCAR vs. CEA

In a study published in the Annals of Surgery in September of 2020, TCAR was compared to CEA in propensity score matched high surgical risk patients who underwent TCAR or CEA for carotid artery stenosis (2016-2019). Propensity scores were calculated based on baseline clinical variables and used to match patients in the two treatment groups (n=6,384 each). The primary endpoint was the combined outcome of perioperative stroke and/or death. No significant differences were observed between TCAR and CEA in terms of in-hospital stroke/death [TCAR,1.6% vs. CEA,1.6%, P=.945], stroke [1.4% vs. 1.4%, P=.881], or death [0.4% vs. 0.3%, P=.662]. Compared to CEA, TCAR was associated with lower rates of in-hospital myocardial infarction [0.5% vs. 0.9%, P=.005], cranial nerve injury [0.4% vs. 2.7%, P<.001], and post-procedural hypertension [13% vs.18.8%, P<.001]. They were also less likely to stay in the hospital for more than one day [26.4% vs. 30.1%, P<.001]. No significant interaction was observed between procedure and symptomatic status in predicting postoperative outcomes. At one year, the incidence of ipsilateral stroke or death was similar between the two groups [HR (95%CI): 1.09 (0.87-1.36), P=.44]. This propensity-score matched analysis demonstrated significant reduction in the risk of postoperative myocardial infarction and cranial nerve injury after TCAR compared to CEA, with no differences in the rates of stroke/death.

TCAR Surveillance Project: Learning Curve

In a study published in the Journal of the American College of Surgeons in January 2020, Kashyap, et al, examined the learning curve of TCAR performed by surgeons participating in the TCAR Surveillance Project. The authors reviewed 3,456 TCAR procedures performed by 417 unique practitioners at 178 centers. Patients were grouped into four levels based upon the physicians’ experience with TCAR at the time of procedure: novice (1-5 cases), intermediate (6-20 cases), advanced (20-30 cases) and expert (>30 cases). Of the patients analyzed, 41% of patients were treated by novice physicians, 40% of patients were treated by intermediate physicians, 9% of patients were treated by advanced physicians and 10% of patients were treated by expert physicians. There was no significant difference in the baseline characteristics by surgeon case experience with three exceptions; expert physicians were more likely to treat patients with moderate or severe congestive heart failure, novice and intermediate physicians were more likely to treat patients with prior CEA or CAS, and advanced and expert physicians were more likely to treat patients with CMS medical high-risk criteria. There was a statistically significant reduction in operative time (novice 81.7 mins, expert 59.6 mins; p<.001) and flow reversal time (novice 12.2 mins, expert 9.7 mins; p<.001) over the four levels. There was a decrease in fluoroscopy time and contrast usage up to the advanced level. Bleeding complications were significantly less frequent in the advanced and expert groups of physicians. There was no difference in the incidence of cranial nerve injury across the groups of physicians. Expert physicians were more likely to use local anesthesia compared to the other three categories of physicians. There was no difference in the technical failure rate across the four categories of physicians. The rate of composite stroke, stroke alone and death did not differ between the categories. The authors noted that TCAR novices can achieve the same clinical outcomes as expert practitioners, while in comparison, CAS requires more than 50 cases to achieve proficiency.

Ongoing and Planned TCAR Studies

DW-MRI Studies

In addition to the Society for Vascular Surgery’s TCAR Surveillance Project, we have two studies focused on evaluating the incidence of new white lesions using DW-MRI following the TCAR procedure. In both studies, the evaluation of the presence of new white lesions by DW-MRI is conducted by an independent neuroradiologist.

The EU DW-MRI study completed enrollment of 31 patients at three sites in the European Union in the first quarter of 2021. The objective was to evaluate the incidence of new white lesions, as detected on DW-MRI in recently symptomatic patients. The primary endpoint was the incidence of new white lesions by DW-MRI post-procedure. Study follow-up is complete and data from the study are under analysis.

A similar study was conducted at five hospitals in the United States and two in the European Union. The study completed enrollment of 55 patients in the fourth quarter of 2021. The objective was to also evaluate the incidence of post-procedure new white lesions by DW-MRI compared to baseline in asymptomatic or symptomatic patients who underwent the TCAR procedure. The primary endpoint was the incidence of ipsilateral new white lesions by DW-MRI post-procedure. Study follow-up is complete and data from the study are under analysis.

Our Commercial Strategy

We believe there are approximately 2,750 physicians that perform an estimated 80% of annual carotid revascularization procedures in the United States. Vascular surgeons, who we believe represent the specialty most frequently responsible for managing the care of and receiving referrals for patients with carotid artery disease, are skilled in endovascular procedures. Our sales, marketing, professional education and medical affairs efforts are focused on driving adoption and supporting their practice development by offering them an innovative, safe, effective and minimally-invasive alternative for treating carotid artery disease.

In the United States, we market and sell our portfolio of TCAR products through a direct sales organization consisting of 64 sales representatives, known as area managers, or AMs, as of December 31, 2021. The AMs are complemented by one or more Therapy Development Specialists in each territory. Our sales professionals have substantial experience launching and establishing new disruptive therapies and converting open surgical procedures to minimally-invasive alternatives. We primarily market our products directly to vascular surgeons, their staffs, operating room managers and hospital administrators. We also market to other specialists with experience in CEA and/or CAS with the appropriate skill set for TCAR, including neurosurgeons, cardiothoracic surgeons and non-surgical interventionalists in radiology, neuroradiology and cardiology. We do not currently sell our products in markets outside the United States.

Our AMs are responsible for developing territory business plans, targeting and opening new accounts, promoting the benefits of TCAR and our products, and driving adoption and penetration of TCAR. In addition, they help physicians and

their staff to build TCAR programs, drive certain referral initiatives, and provide resources to help with practice development, reimbursement and patient education. Together with the TDSs, they also support the training and proper use of our TCAR portfolio of products and provide clinically consultative support for patient selection, pre-procedure planning, procedure support, and post-procedure care. As we continue to grow the size of our U.S. sales organization, with a focus on increasing adoption of TCAR by existing customers and expanding our current customer base, we expect to focus on adding a strategic mix of area managers and therapy development specialists.

Additionally, we support our sales organization with marketing and market and practice development initiatives. We plan to continue to expand and enhance our marketing and analytics capabilities to support our growing commercial organization and customer base.

Professional Education and Sales Training

We are focused on developing strong relationships with our customers and devote significant resources to training and educating physicians in the use of TCAR and our associated products. Our Office of Medical Affairs leads our physician education and training programs in addition to disseminating the scientific information and clinical data supporting TCAR. The Office of Medical Affairs also leads compliance activities.

Our practice is to require physicians to complete a training program before performing TCAR, which is also a regulatory requirement derived from the PMA approval of the ENROUTE stent. To facilitate training, we have developed a robust training course including clinical and procedural details as well as hands-on workshops designed to provide the highest potential for successful outcomes. We conduct physician training courses in large group, in-person formats as well as virtual and small group, socially distanced formats as needs have dictated during the COVID-19 pandemic. We also provide training through physician proctors on an as needed basis. As of December 31, 2021, we have trained and certified over 2,000 physicians in the United States.

Through the Office of Medical Affairs, our highly specialized area managers and therapy development specialists, along with other key employees, receive in-depth training and develop a thorough understanding of carotid artery disease, patient selection, imaging interpretation, procedure planning, reimbursement and regulatory policies to meaningfully support our customers and maintain compliance. Our extensive training and continuous education program consists of foundational training, procedure observation, and sales skills development. Our personnel are selected based on their focus on patient outcomes and the entire customer experience in addition to their technical aptitude.

Coverage and Reimbursement

Since achieving regulatory clearances and approvals for our portfolio of TCAR products, we have made significant progress securing reimbursement codes and payer coverage.

During the ROADSTER trial, the Society for Vascular Surgery helped to guide modifications of existing CPT reimbursement coding descriptions to ensure their applicability to TCAR. In 2015, we also confirmed with CMS that TCAR, like CAS, was considered under the purview of the National Coverage Determination 20.7, or NCD, for Percutaneous Transluminal Angioplasty. 

According to the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project, CMS is the primary payer for carotid revascularization procedures, representing approximately 79% of the payer mix for CEA and CAS procedures in 2017. TCAR is currently covered by CMS in high surgical risk patients who are symptomatic with greater than or equal to 70% stenosis. As of September 2016, TCAR is also covered by CMS in the TCAR Surveillance Project for high surgical risk patients who are either symptomatic with greater than or equal to 50% stenosis or asymptomatic with greater than or equal to 80% stenosis. We intend to seek FDA label expansion for our ENROUTE stent and CMS coverage for TCAR in standard surgical risk patients, as well as seek new and expanded coverage for TCAR in commercial payer coverage policies.

TCAR, like CAS, is only reimbursed by Medicare as an inpatient procedure and therefore reimbursed to hospitals under the DRG system.

There are three key aspects of reimbursement in the United States: coding, coverage and payment.

•Coding refers to distinct numeric and alphanumeric billing codes that are used by healthcare providers to report the provision of medical procedures and the use of supplies for specific patients to payers. CPT codes are published by the American Medical Association and are used to report medical services and procedures

performed by or under the direction of physicians. Medicare pays physicians for services based on submission of a claim using one or more specific CPT codes. Physician payment for procedures may vary according to site of service. Hospitals are reimbursed for inpatient procedures based on Medicare Severity Diagnosis Related Group, or MS-DRG classifications derived from ICD-10-CM diagnosis and ICD-10-PCS codes that describe the patient’s diagnoses and procedure(s) performed during the hospital stay. MS-DRGs closely calibrate payment for groups of services based on the severity of a patient’s illness. One single MS-DRG payment is intended to cover all hospital costs associated with treating an individual during his or her hospital stay, except for physician charges associated with performing medical procedures, which are reimbursed through CPT codes and payments.

•Payment refers to the amount paid to providers for specific procedures and supplies. Payment is generally determined by the specific CPT and billing code. In addition, there may be separate numeric codes, under which the billing code is classified, to establish a payment amount.

•Coverage refers to decisions made by individual payers as to whether or not to pay for a specific procedure and related supplies and if so, under what conditions, including specific diagnoses and clinical indications.

Coding for Physicians

In 2014, the Society for Vascular Surgery helped to guide an editorial change by the American Medical Association to CPT 37215 to be inclusive of TCAR.  The Category I CPT code for TCAR, effective January 1, 2015, is CPT 37215: Transcatheter placement of intravascular stent(s), cervical carotid artery, open or percutaneous, including angioplasty, when performed, and radiological supervision and interpretation; with distal embolic protection. Published CMS guidance confirms that reverse flow embolic protection systems, such as our ENROUTE NPS, qualify as distal embolic protection under this code. This code has a 90-day global period. Coverage and payment for CPT code 37215 is only available from CMS in the inpatient setting, subject to the terms of the National Coverage Determination Manual Section 20.7, and only available in facilities certified to have met CMS’s minimum facility standards for performing carotid artery stenting, which include local credentialing requirements. Hospitals participating in the VQI are considered to meet CMS’s minimum facility standards.

Coding for Hospitals

There are a number of appropriate ICD-10-CM diagnosis codes that describe occlusions and stenosis of carotid arteries for asymptomatic patients as well as cerebral infarction due to embolus and thrombus of carotid arteries for symptomatic patients, which establish medical necessity.  As of October 1, 2020, the proper ICD-10-PCS procedure codes for TCAR includes a code for carotid stenting [e.g. 037(H/J/K/L)3(D/E/F/G)Z] and a code for extracorporeal reverse flow neuroprotection [e.g. X2(H/J) 336]. Based on the ICD 10 diagnosis and procedure codes, TCAR inpatient admissions are assigned to MS-DRG 034 when the patient presents with major complications or co-morbidities (MCC), 035 when the patient presents with a complication or co-morbidity (CC), or 036 for patients without complications or co-morbidities.

Payment for Physicians

The 2022 national average physician professional fee payment for CPT code 37215 is approximately $1,009. We believe physicians feel this level of payment represents a reasonable amount for TCAR. CEA procedures are reimbursed under CPT code 35301, for which the 2022 national average physician professional fee payment is $1,147.

Payment for Hospitals

The national unadjusted 2022 payment amounts for MS-DRGs 034, 035 and 036 are $26,233, $15,429 and $12,215, respectively.  Based on prior procedure volumes assigned to MS-DRGs, we estimate that the weighted average payment amount across MS-DRGs 034, 035 and 036 is $15,254 in 2022.  These MS DRG payments are intended to cover all hospital costs associated with treating an individual during his or her hospital stay, except for physician charges associated with performing medical procedures. We believe that facilities feel this level of payment represents a reasonable amount for the treatment of patients with TCAR. CEA procedures are reimbursed under MS-DRGs 037, 038 and 039.  We expect the national unadjusted 2022 payment amounts for MS-DRGs 037, 038 and 039 to be $21,614, $10,939 and $7,518, respectively.  Based on prior procedure volumes, we estimate that the weighted average payment amount across these three Extracranial Procedure MS-DRGs to be $9,920.  The base payment amounts for MS-DRGs may vary greatly by individual acute-care hospital for several reasons including but not limited to geographic, teaching status, case-mix index, and use of electronic health record systems.

Coverage

Pursuant to the NCD 20.7 for Percutaneous Transluminal Angioplasty, TCAR is TCAR is currently covered by CMS in high surgical risk patients who are symptomatic with greater than or equal to 70% stenosis. The TCAR Surveillance Project is an FDA-approved extension study, and as such, as of September 2016, TCAR is also covered by CMS in the VQI’s TCAR Surveillance Project for high surgical risk patients who are either symptomatic with greater than or equal to 50% stenosis or asymptomatic with greater than or equal to 80% stenosis. For billing purposes, facilities and providers can submit claims for the TCAR Surveillance Project using National Clinical Trial identifier NCT02850588.

Patients at high risk for adverse events from CEA are defined as having significant comorbidities or anatomic risk factors and would be poor candidates for CEA. Symptoms of carotid artery stenosis include carotid transient ischemic attack, focal cerebral ischemia producing a nondisabling stroke, and transient monocular blindness. The determination that a patient is at high risk for adverse events from CEA and the patient’s symptoms arising from carotid artery stenosis must be documented in the patient’s medical records.

CMS has created a list of minimum standards modeled in part on professional society statements on competency. All facilities must at least meet CMS standards in order to receive coverage for CAS, inclusive of TCAR, for high surgical risk patients. Participation in the Society for Vascular Surgery’s Vascular Quality Initiative can provide evidence of compliance to these standards to CMS. The ENROUTE NPS and the ENROUTE stent are also included in the CREST-2 Companion Registry, or C2R, but not in the CREST 2 randomized clinical trial itself. The objective of C2R is to promote the rapid initiation and completion of enrollment in the CREST-2 randomized clinical trial (clinicaltrials.gov ID NCT02089217). Patient eligibility in C2R includes standard surgical risk and high surgical risk patients with symptomatic or asymptomatic carotid artery disease. Patients will be followed for the occurrence of post-procedural complications. The primary safety and quality endpoint for C2R is the occurrence of any stroke or death within the 30-day period following the stenting procedure. The safety and quality results from C2R will guide selection of interventionists for participation in the CREST-2 randomized clinical trial. Enrollment into C2R began in 2015 and will continue until publication of the primary results of the randomized trial. Providers can bill CMS for TCAR patients enrolled in this registry using NCT02240862.

Research, Development and Clinical Programs

Our research and development activities encompass basic research, clinical research and product development. Our engineering team has mechanical engineering, project management, materials science, and prototyping expertise. In addition, our clinical research organization has trial design and management, data collection and biostatistics expertise.

Our research and development efforts are currently focused on improving and expanding our portfolio of TCAR products and their labeled indications for use to further improve and simplify the treatment experience for a broad base of patients and physicians. We have worked together with vascular surgeons and other physicians to develop our products. We believe our research and development capabilities, clinical and regulatory organizations and unique insights will enable us to continue to lead this emerging category.

Following completion of our ROADSTER 2 Post-Approval Study and our US and European Union DW-MRI studies, our clinical programs are currently focused on applying our technology in the neurovascular space, specifically for the treatment of acute ischemic stroke patients, as well as preparing for a post-approval study in standard surgical risk patients following FDA approval of our PMA Supplement submission.

We also have a broad intellectual property platform addressing the transcarotid approach and, in the future, we intend to leverage our expertise to develop new products targeting market opportunities and disease states that could benefit from the physiologic and engineering advantages made possible by our transcarotid approach, including in the heart, aortic arch and brain.

For the fiscal years ended December 31, 2021, 2020 and 2019, our research, development and clinical expenses were $27.1 million, $21.3 million and $12.3 million, respectively.

Competition

TCAR is a relatively new procedure category and as such the basis of competition for our products is with respect to alternative carotid revascularization procedures. We are positioning TCAR as an alternative to the existing procedures CEA and CAS, and therefore compete primarily with manufacturers of medical devices used in those procedures.

The major manufacturers of products, such as patches and shunts, used in connection with CEA include LeMaitre Vascular, Getinge / Maquet, Baxter, Terumo, Gore and Edwards. Many of these companies are large public companies or divisions of publicly-traded companies and have several competitive advantages, including established relationships with vascular surgeons who commonly perform the CEA procedure, significantly greater name recognition and significantly greater sales and marketing resources.

Companies with actively marketed FDA-approved stents and embolic protection devices for use with CAS procedures include Abbott, Medtronic, Boston Scientific, and Cordis. Other companies have approved devices not currently marketed in the United States, including Gore, Terumo, Contego Medical and InspireMD. Additionally, some companies have stents and other products in ongoing IDE or planned IDE trials in the US, including Terumo and InspireMD. Many of these companies have several competitive advantages including the following: more established sales and marketing programs and networks, larger portfolio of products, longer operating histories, established relationships with healthcare professionals and greater name recognition.

In addition to competing for market share for TCAR, we also compete against these companies for personnel, including qualified personnel that are necessary to grow our business.

We believe the principal competitive factors in our market include the following:

•Patient outcomes and adverse event rates;

•Patient experience;

•Acceptance by treating physicians and referral sources;

•Physician learning curve;

•Ease-of-use and reliability;

•Patient recovery time and level of discomfort;

•Economic benefits and cost savings;

•Availability of reimbursement; and

•Strength of clinical evidence.

We also compete against manufacturers of medications used for medical management of carotid artery disease, including aspirin and statins. Many such companies are large public companies or divisions of publicly-traded companies and have several competitive advantages including the following: established treatment patterns where drugs are generally first-line therapy and invasive procedures or surgery are considered later; established relationships with general practitioners who commonly prescribe such medications; significantly greater name recognition; and significantly greater sales and marketing resources, including direct-to-consumer advertising.

Finally, we may compete with medical device and pharmaceutical manufacturers outside the United States when we pursue plans to market our products internationally. Among other competitive advantages, such companies may have more established sales and marketing programs and networks, established relationships with healthcare professionals and greater name recognition in such markets.

Intellectual Property

We actively seek to protect the intellectual property and proprietary technology that we believe is important to our business, which includes seeking and maintaining patents covering our technology and products, proprietary processes and any other inventions that are commercially or strategically important to the development of our business. We also rely upon trademarks to build and maintain the integrity of our brand, and we seek to protect the confidentiality of trade secrets that may be important to the development of our business.

To protect our proprietary rights, we rely on a combination of trademark, copyright, patent, trade secret and other intellectual property laws, employment, confidentiality and invention assignment agreements, and protective contractual provisions with our employees, contractors, consultants, suppliers, partners and other third parties.

As of December 31, 2021, we owned 112 patents globally, of which 69 were issued U.S. patents and 43 were patents outside of the United States.  Our patents expire between November 2024 and July 2039. Our material patents, their jurisdiction, expiration date and the product to which they relate, are listed in the table below:

As of December 31, 2021, we had 76 pending patent applications globally, including 38 in the United States and 38 outside the United States.

As of December 31, 2021, we had trademark registrations for “Silk Road Medical,” the “Silk Road Medical” logo, “TCAR,” “Enroute” and the “Enroute” logo and “Enhance” in the United States, and various other countries. Including these trademark registrations, our trademark portfolio contained 122 trademark registrations/ applications.

The term of individual patents depends on the legal term for patents in the countries in which they are granted. In most countries, including the United States, the patent term is generally 20 years from the earliest claimed filing date of a nonprovisional patent application in the applicable country. We cannot assure that patents will be issued from any of our pending applications or that, if patents are issued, they will be of sufficient scope or strength to provide meaningful protection for our technology. Notwithstanding the scope of the patent protection available to us, a competitor could develop treatment methods or devices that are not covered by our patents. Furthermore, numerous U.S. and foreign-issued patents and patent applications owned by third parties exist in the fields in which we are developing products. Because patent applications can take many years to issue, there may be applications unknown to us, which applications may later result in issued patents that our existing or future products or technologies may be alleged to infringe.

There has been substantial litigation regarding patent and other intellectual property rights in the medical device industry. In the future, we may need to engage in litigation to enforce patents issued or licensed to us, to protect our trade secrets or know-how, to defend against claims of infringement of the rights of others or to determine the scope and validity of the proprietary rights of others. Litigation could be costly and could divert our attention from other functions and responsibilities. Furthermore, even if our patents are found to be valid and infringed, a court may refuse to grant injunctive relief against the infringer and instead grant us monetary damages and/or ongoing royalties. Such monetary compensation may be insufficient to adequately offset the damage to our business caused by the infringer’s competition in the market.”

Adverse determinations in litigation could subject us to significant liabilities to third parties, could require us to seek licenses from third parties and could prevent us from manufacturing, selling or using the product, any of which could severely harm our business.

We also seek to maintain certain intellectual property and proprietary know-how as trade secrets, and generally require our partners to execute non-disclosure agreements prior to any substantive discussions or disclosures of our technology or business plans. Our trade secrets include proprietary account analytics, user training methods, and operational processes. For more information, please see “Risk Factors—Risks Related to Intellectual Property.”

Manufacturing and Supply

We currently manufacture the ENROUTE NPS at our approximately 31,000 square foot facility in Sunnyvale, California. This facility provides approximately 8,000 square feet of space for our production and distribution operations, including manufacturing, quality control and storage. In May 2021, we entered into a lease for a 63,000 square foot facility in Plymouth, Minnesota which will provide approximately 21,000 square feet of additional space for our production and distribution operations, including manufacturing, quality control and storage. We expect to begin commercial production in the second half of 2022. We also have right of first refusal on the remaining 21,500 square feet of unleased space in the Plymouth, Minnesota facility. We believe our combined facilities will be sufficient to meet our manufacturing needs for at least the next five years.

Our manufacturing and distribution operations are subject to regulatory requirements of the FDA’s Quality System Regulation, or QSR, for medical devices sold in the United States, set forth in 21 CFR part 820, and the European Medical Device Directive 93/42/EEC and amendments, or MDD, for medical devices marketed in the European Union. The new EU Medical Regulations took effect in May 2021, although our design examination certificates under the MDD remain valid until their expiration. Accordingly, we claim compliance with the EU MDR Article 120 and will be fully compliant with the EU MDR prior to the expiration of the current MDD certificates. We are also subject to applicable local regulations relating to the environment, waste management and health and safety matters, including measures relating to the release, use, storage, treatment, transportation, discharge, disposal, sale, labeling, collection, recycling, treatment and remediation of hazardous substances.

The FDA monitors compliance with the QSR through periodic inspections of our facilities. Our suppliers’ facilities are also subject to FDA regulations, including the QSR, and unannounced inspections by the FDA and other similar regulatory authorities. Our European Union Notified Body, British Standards Institute, or BSI, monitors compliance with the MDD requirements through both annual scheduled audits and periodic unannounced audits of our manufacturing facilities as well as our contract manufacturers’ facilities.

Our failure, or the failure of our suppliers, to maintain acceptable quality requirements and compliance with all applicable healthcare laws and regulatory requirements could result in the shutdown or significant disruption of our manufacturing operations or the voluntary or involuntary recall of our products, which could harm our business. In the event that one of our suppliers fails to maintain acceptable quality requirements or regulatory compliance, we may have to qualify a new supplier and could experience a material adverse effect to manufacturing and manufacturing delays as a result. For example, in the first quarter of 2021, we announced the voluntary recall of certain lots of our ENROUTE Transcarotid Stent System, manufactured by one of our third-party suppliers, Cordis Corporation, formerly a Cardinal Health Company, or Cordis. Our decision to recall these lots was based on complaints we received about tips detaching from the stent delivery system as well as internal testing that we conducted. Recalls like this one could interrupt the delivery of our TCAR products to customers or may cause us to have to qualify a new supplier, either of which could cause our results of operations to be adversely impacted.

Our quality management system is ISO 13485 and MDD Certified. We have been an FDA registered medical device establishment and California licensed medical device manufacturer since 2011. We moved to our current Sunnyvale, California facility in June 2018, which was registered with the FDA in June 2018 and was issued a California device manufacturing license in August 2018. An ISO 13485 audit was conducted in September 2018 and our facility was recommended for certification. 

The FDA conducted a total of five establishment inspections of our manufacturing facility in Sunnyvale, California in 2014, 2015, 2016 and 2020. A one-observation Form 483 Notice of Observation was issued in April 2015 relating to a transcription error in patient line listings and no additional follow up with the FDA was required. In February 2020, a one-observation Form 483 Notice of Observation was issued relating to the calibration method used for a specific type of measurement tool. In response, we initiated a Corrective and Preventive Action, or CAPA, and the Form 483 Notice of Observation was officially closed in June 2020. We believe that we are in compliance, in all material respects, with all applicable FDA requirements, including the QSR.

Since obtaining ISO 13485 certification in 2011, BSI has conducted scheduled surveillance audits annually, recertification audits every third year, and periodic unannounced audits since the initial certification period starting in 2011 for compliance with ISO 13485 and MDD. The most recent recertification audit was conducted in November 2020, and no major non-conformities were identified. The most recent surveillance audit was conducted in October 2019, and no major non-conformities were identified. The most recent unannounced audit was conducted in July 2014, and no major non-conformities were identified. We believe that we are in compliance, in all material respects, with all ISO 13485 and MDD requirements.

Manufacturing of the materials and components of the ENROUTE NPS are provided by approved suppliers, all of which are single source suppliers of key components, sub-assemblies and materials. We purchase finished transcarotid access kit, guidewires and stents through contract manufacturers. Cordis is our contract manufacturer and currently the sole source supplier for the ENROUTE stent. We typically maintain several months’ worth of ENROUTE stents in inventory, and we estimate that it would take between one and two years to qualify a second source supplier for our ENROUTE stent. The suppliers for the ENROUTE NPS and our other product lines are evaluated, qualified and approved through a stringent supplier management program, which includes various evaluations, assessments, qualifications, validations, testing and inspection to ensure the supplier can meet acceptable quality requirements. We ensure a strict change control policy with our key suppliers to ensure that no component or process changes are made without our prior approval.

Order quantities and lead times for components purchased from suppliers are based on our forecasts derived from historical demand and anticipated future demand. Lead times for components may vary depending on the size of the order, time required to fabricate and test the components, specific supplier requirements and current market demand for the components, sub-assemblies and materials. We typically stock several months of supply for components and raw materials to mitigate any supply delays or disruptions. Considering ongoing global supply chain constraints, we are working with all our suppliers on additional orders and forecasting to mitigate any potential supply issues. We perform assembly, testing, inspection and final product release activities for the ENROUTE NPS. Finished ENROUTE NPS devices are ethylene oxide sterilized at a qualified supplier.

Government Regulation

United States Food & Drug Administration

Our products and operations are subject to extensive and ongoing regulation by the FDA under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, or FDCA, and its implementing regulations, as well as other federal and state regulatory bodies in the United States. The laws and regulations govern, among other things, product design and development, pre-clinical and clinical testing, manufacturing, packaging, labeling, storage, record keeping and reporting, clearance or approval, marketing, distribution, promotion, import and export, and post-marketing surveillance.

Unless an exemption applies, each new or significantly modified medical device we seek to commercially distribute in the United States will require either a premarket notification to the FDA requesting permission for commercial distribution under Section 510(k) of the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act, or FDCA, also referred to as a 510(k) clearance, or approval from the FDA of a PMA application. Both the 510(k) clearance and PMA processes can be resource intensive, expensive, and lengthy, and require payment of significant user fees, unless an exemption is available.

Device Classification

Under the FDCA, medical devices are classified into one of three classes-Class I, Class II or Class III-depending on the degree of risk associated with each medical device and the extent of control needed to provide reasonable assurances with respect to safety and effectiveness.

Class I includes devices with the lowest risk to the patient and are those for which safety and effectiveness can be reasonably assured by adherence to a set of FDA regulations, referred to as the General Controls for Medical Devices, which require compliance with the applicable portions of the QSR, facility registration and product listing, reporting of adverse events and malfunctions, and appropriate, truthful and non-misleading labeling and promotional materials. Some Class I devices, also called Class I reserved devices, also require premarket clearance by the FDA through the 510(k) premarket notification process described below. Most Class I products are exempt from the premarket notification requirements.

Class II devices are those that are subject to the General Controls, and special controls as deemed necessary by the FDA to ensure the safety and effectiveness of the device. These special controls can include performance standards, patient registries, FDA guidance documents and post-market surveillance. Most Class II devices are subject to premarket review and clearance by the FDA. Premarket review and clearance by the FDA for Class II devices is accomplished through the 510(k) premarket notification process.

Class III devices include devices deemed by the FDA to pose the greatest risk such as life-supporting or life-sustaining devices, or implantable devices, in addition to those deemed novel and not substantially equivalent following the 510(k) process. The safety and effectiveness of Class III devices cannot be reasonably assured solely by the General

Controls and Special Controls described above. Therefore, these devices are subject to the PMA application process, which is generally more costly and time consuming than the 510(k) process. Through the PMA application process, the applicant must submit data and information demonstrating reasonable assurance of the safety and effectiveness of the device for its intended use to the FDA’s satisfaction. Accordingly, a PMA application typically includes, but is not limited to, extensive technical information regarding device design and development, pre-clinical and clinical trial data, manufacturing information, labeling and financial disclosure information for the clinical investigators in device studies. The PMA application must provide valid scientific evidence that demonstrates to the FDA’s satisfaction a reasonable assurance of the safety and effectiveness of the device for its intended use.

If a new medical device does not qualify for the 510(k) premarket notification process because no predicate device to which it is substantially equivalent can be identified, the device is automatically classified into Class III. The Food and Drug Administration Modernization Act of 1997 established a new route to market for low to moderate risk medical devices that are automatically placed into Class III due to the absence of a predicate device, called the “Request for Evaluation of Automatic Class III Designation,” or the de novo classification process. This process allows a manufacturer whose novel device is automatically classified into Class III to request down-classification of its medical device into Class I or Class II on the basis that the device presents low or moderate risk, rather than requiring the submission and approval of a PMA. If the manufacturer seeks reclassification into Class II, the manufacturer must include a draft proposal for special controls that are necessary to provide a reasonable assurance of the safety and effectiveness of the medical device. The FDA may reject the reclassification petition if it identifies a legally marketed predicate device that would be appropriate for a 510(k) or determines that the device is not low to moderate risk and requires PMA or that general controls would be inadequate to control the risks and special controls cannot be developed.

The Investigational Device Process

In the United States, absent certain limited exceptions, human clinical trials intended to support medical device clearance or approval require an IDE application. Some types of studies deemed to present “non-significant risk” are deemed to have an approved IDE once certain requirements are addressed and IRB approval is obtained. If the device presents a “significant risk” to human health, as defined by the FDA, the sponsor must submit an IDE application to the FDA and obtain IDE approval prior to commencing the human clinical trials. The IDE application must be supported by appropriate data, such as animal and laboratory testing results, showing that it is safe to test the device in humans and that the testing protocol is scientifically sound. The IDE application must be approved in advance by the FDA for a specified number of subjects. Generally, clinical trials for a significant risk device may begin once the IDE application is approved by the FDA and the study protocol and informed consent are approved by appropriate institutional review boards at the clinical trial sites. There can be no assurance that submission of an IDE will result in the ability to commence clinical trials, and although the FDA’s approval of an IDE allows clinical testing to go forward for a specified number of subjects, it does not bind the FDA to accept the results of the trial as sufficient to prove the product’s safety and effectiveness, even if the trial meets its intended success criteria.

All clinical trials must be conducted in accordance with the FDA’s IDE regulations that govern investigational device labeling, prohibit promotion and specify an array of recordkeeping, reporting and monitoring responsibilities of study sponsors and study investigators. Clinical trials must further comply with the FDA’s good clinical practice regulations for institutional review board approval and for informed consent and other human subject protections. Required records and reports are subject to inspection by the FDA. The results of clinical testing may be unfavorable, or, even if the intended safety and effectiveness success criteria are achieved, may not be considered sufficient for the FDA to grant marketing approval or clearance of a product. The commencement or completion of any clinical trial may be delayed or halted, or be inadequate to support approval of a PMA application, for numerous reasons, including, but not limited to, the following:

•The FDA or other regulatory authorities do not approve a clinical trial protocol or a clinical trial, or place a clinical trial on hold;

•Patients do not enroll in clinical trials at the rate expected;

•Patients do not comply with trial protocols;

•Patient follow-up is not at the rate expected;

•Patients experience adverse events;

•Patients die during a clinical trial, even though their death may not be related to the products that are part of the trial;

•Device malfunctions occur with unexpected frequency or potential adverse consequences;

•Side effects or device malfunctions of similar products already in the market that change the FDA’s view toward approval of new or similar PMAs or result in the imposition of new requirements or testing;

•Institutional review boards and third-party clinical investigators may delay or reject the trial protocol;

•Third-party clinical investigators decline to participate in a trial or do not perform a trial on the anticipated schedule or consistent with the clinical trial protocol, investigator agreement, investigational plan, good clinical practices, the IDE regulations, or other FDA or IRB requirements;

•Third-party investigators are disqualified by the FDA;

•We or third-party organizations do not perform data collection, monitoring and analysis in a timely or accurate manner or consistent with the clinical trial protocol or investigational or statistical plans, or otherwise fail to comply with the IDE regulations governing responsibilities, records, and reports of sponsors of clinical investigations;

•Third-party clinical investigators have significant financial interests related to us or our study such that the FDA deems the study results unreliable, or the company or investigators fail to disclose such interests;

•Regulatory inspections of our clinical trials or manufacturing facilities, which may, among other things, require us to undertake corrective action or suspend or terminate our clinical trials;

•Changes in government regulations or administrative actions;

•The interim or final results of the clinical trial are inconclusive or unfavorable as to safety or effectiveness; or

•The FDA concludes that our trial design is unreliable or inadequate to demonstrate safety and effectiveness.

The 510(k) Approval Process

Under the 510(k) process, the manufacturer must submit to the FDA a premarket notification, demonstrating that the device is “substantially equivalent,” as defined in the statute, to a legally marketed predicate device.

A predicate device is a legally marketed device that is not subject to premarket approval, i.e., a device that was legally marketed prior to May 28, 1976 (pre-amendments device) and for which a PMA is not required, a device that has been reclassified from Class III to Class II or I, or a device that was previously found substantially equivalent through the 510(k) process. To be “substantially equivalent,” the proposed device must have the same intended use as the predicate device, and either have the same technological characteristics as the predicate device or have different technological characteristics and not raise different questions of safety or effectiveness than the predicate device. Clinical data is sometimes required to support substantial equivalence.

After a 510(k) premarket notification is submitted, the FDA determines whether to accept it for substantive review. If it lacks necessary information for substantive review, the FDA will refuse to accept the 510(k) notification. If it is accepted for filing, the FDA begins a substantive review. The Medical Device User Fee Amendments sets a performance goal of 90 days for FDA review of a 510(k) submission, but the review time can be delayed if FDA raises questions or requests addition information during the review process. As a practical matter, clearance often takes longer, and clearance is never assured. Although many 510(k) premarket notifications are cleared without clinical data, the FDA may require further information, including clinical data, to make a determination regarding substantial equivalence, which may significantly prolong the review process. If the FDA agrees that the device is substantially equivalent, it will grant clearance to commercially market the device.

If the FDA determines that the device is not “substantially equivalent” to a predicate device, or if the device is automatically classified into Class III, the device sponsor must then fulfill the much more rigorous premarketing requirements of the PMA approval process, or seek reclassification of the device through the de novo process. A manufacturer can also submit a petition for direct de novo review if the manufacturer is unable to identify an appropriate predicate device and the new device or new use of the device presents a moderate or low risk.

After a device receives 510(k) clearance, any modification that could significantly affect its safety or effectiveness, or that would constitute a new or major change in its intended use, will require a new 510(k) clearance or, depending on the modification, could require a PMA application or de novo classification. The FDA requires each manufacturer to determine whether the proposed change requires submission of a 510(k) or a PMA in the first instance, but the FDA can review any such decision and disagree with a manufacturer’s determination. Many minor modifications are accomplished by a letter-to-file in which the manufacture documents the change in an internal letter-to-file. The letter-to-file is in lieu of submitting a new 510(k) to obtain clearance for such change. The FDA can always review these letters to file in an inspection. If the FDA disagrees with a manufacturer’s determination regarding whether a new premarket submission is required for the modification of an existing device, the FDA can require the manufacturer to cease marketing and/or recall the modified device until 510(k) clearance or approval of a PMA application is obtained.

Over the last several years, the FDA has proposed reforms to its 510(k) clearance process, and such proposals could include increased requirements for clinical data and a longer review period, or could make it more difficult for manufacturers to utilize the 510(k) clearance process for their products. For example, in November 2018, FDA officials announced forthcoming steps that the FDA intends to take to modernize the premarket notification pathway under Section 510(k) of the FDCA. Among other things, the FDA announced that it planned to develop proposals to drive manufacturers utilizing the 510(k) pathway toward the use of newer predicates. These proposals included plans to potentially sunset certain older devices that were used as predicates under the 510(k) clearance pathway, and to potentially publish a list of devices that have been cleared on the basis of demonstrated substantial equivalence to predicate devices that are more than 10 years old. In May 2019, the FDA solicited public feedback on these proposals. The FDA requested public feedback on whether it should consider certain actions that might require new authority, such as whether to sunset certain older devices that were used as predicates under the 510(k) clearance pathway. These proposals have not yet been finalized or adopted, and the FDA may work with Congress to implement such proposals through legislation.

More recently, in September 2019, the FDA finalized guidance describing an optional “safety and performance based” premarket review pathway for manufacturers of “certain, well-understood device types” to demonstrate substantial equivalence under the 510(k) clearance pathway by showing that such device meets objective safety and performance criteria established by the FDA, thereby obviating the need for manufacturers to compare the safety and performance of their medical devices to specific predicate devices in the clearance process. The FDA intends to develop and maintain a list device types appropriate for the “safety and performance based” pathway and will continue to develop product-specific guidance documents that identify the performance criteria for each such device type, as well as the testing methods recommended in the guidance documents, where feasible.

The PMA Approval Process

Following receipt of a PMA application, the FDA conducts an administrative review to determine whether the application is sufficiently complete to permit a substantive review. If it is not, the agency will refuse to file the PMA. If it is, the FDA will accept the application for filing and begin the review. The FDA, by statute and by regulation, has 180 days to review a filed PMA application, although the review of an application more often occurs over a significantly longer period of time. During this review period, the FDA may request additional information or clarification of information already provided, and the FDA may issue a major deficiency letter to the applicant, requesting the applicant’s response to deficiencies communicated by the FDA. The FDA considers a PMA or PMA supplement to have been voluntarily withdrawn if an applicant fails to respond to an FDA request for information (e.g., major deficiency letter) within a total of 360 days. Before approving or denying a PMA, an FDA advisory committee may review the PMA at a public meeting and provide the FDA with the committee’s recommendation on whether the FDA should approve the submission, approve it with specific conditions, or not approve it. The FDA is not bound by the recommendations of an advisory committee, but it considers such recommendations carefully when making decisions.

Prior to approval of a PMA, the FDA may conduct inspections of the clinical trial data and clinical trial sites, as well as inspections of the manufacturing facility and processes. Overall, the FDA review of a PMA application generally takes between one and three years, but may take significantly longer. The FDA can delay, limit or deny approval of a PMA application for many reasons, including:

•The device may not be shown safe or effective to the FDA’s satisfaction;

•The data from pre-clinical studies and/or clinical trials may be found unreliable or insufficient to support approval;

•The manufacturing process or facilities may not meet applicable requirements; and

•Changes in FDA approval policies or adoption of new regulations may require additional data.

If the FDA evaluation of a PMA is favorable, the FDA will issue either an approval letter, or an approvable letter, the latter of which usually contains a number of conditions that must be met in order to secure final approval of the PMA. When and if those conditions have been fulfilled to the satisfaction of the FDA, the agency will issue a PMA approval letter authorizing commercial marketing of the device, subject to the conditions of approval and the limitations established in the approval letter. If the FDA’s evaluation of a PMA application or manufacturing facilities is not favorable, the FDA will deny approval of the PMA or issue a not approvable letter. The FDA also may determine that additional tests or clinical trials are necessary, in which case the PMA approval may be delayed for several months or years while the trials are conducted and data is submitted in an amendment to the PMA, or the PMA is withdrawn and resubmitted when the data are available. The PMA process can be expensive, uncertain and lengthy and a number of devices for which the FDA approval has been sought by other companies have never been approved by the FDA for marketing.

New PMA applications or PMA supplements are required for modification to the manufacturing process, equipment or facility, quality control procedures, sterilization, packaging, expiration date, labeling, device specifications, ingredients, materials or design of a device that has been approved through the PMA process. PMA supplements often require submission of the same type of information as an initial PMA application, except that the supplement is limited to information needed to support any changes from the device covered by the approved PMA application and may or may not require as extensive technical or clinical data or the convening of an advisory panel, depending on the nature of the proposed change.

In approving a PMA application, as a condition of approval, the FDA may also require some form of post-approval study or post-market surveillance, whereby the applicant conducts a follow-up study or follows certain patient groups for a number of years and makes periodic reports to the FDA on the clinical status of those patients when necessary to protect the public health or to provide additional or longer term safety and effectiveness data for the device. The FDA may also require post-market surveillance for certain devices cleared under a 510(k) notification, such as implants or life-supporting or life-sustaining devices used outside a device user facility. The FDA may also approve a PMA application with other post-approval conditions intended to ensure the safety and effectiveness of the device, such as, among other things, restrictions on labeling, promotion, sale, distribution and use.

Pervasive and Continuing Regulation

After a device is placed on the market, numerous regulatory requirements continue to apply. These include:

•The FDA’s QSR, which requires manufacturers, including their suppliers, to follow stringent design, testing, control, documentation and other quality assurance procedures during all aspects of the manufacturing process;

•Labeling regulations and FDA prohibitions against the promotion of products for uncleared, unapproved or off-label uses;

•Medical device reporting, or MDR, regulations, which require that manufacturers report to the FDA if their device may have caused or contributed to a death or serious injury or malfunctioned in a way that would likely cause or contribute to a death or serious injury if the malfunction were to recur;

•Medical device recalls, which require that manufacturers report to the FDA any recall of a medical device, provided the recall was initiated to either reduce a risk to health posed by the device, or to remedy a violation of the FDCA caused by the device that may present a risk to health; and

•Post-market surveillance regulations, which apply when necessary to protect the public health or to provide additional safety and effectiveness data for the device.

We have registered with the FDA as a medical device manufacturer and a specification developer and have obtained a manufacturing license from the California Department of Public Health, or CDPH. The FDA and CDPH have broad post-market and regulatory enforcement powers. We are subject to unannounced inspections by the FDA and the Food and Drug Branch of CDPH to determine our compliance with the QSR and other regulations, and these inspections may include the manufacturing facilities of our suppliers. Additionally, our Notified Body, BSI, regularly inspects our manufacturing, design and operational facilities to ensure ongoing ISO 13485 compliance in order to maintain our CE mark.

Failure to comply with applicable regulatory requirements can result in enforcement action by the FDA, which may include any of the following sanctions:

•Warning letters, fines, injunctions, consent decrees and civil penalties;

•Repair, replacement, refunds, recall or seizure of our products;

•Operating restrictions, partial suspension or total shutdown of production;

•Refusing our requests for 510 (k) clearance or premarket approval of new products, new intended uses or modifications to existing products;

•Withdrawing 510 (k) clearance or premarket approvals that have already been granted; and

•Criminal prosecution.

European Union

Our portfolio of TCAR products is regulated in the European Union as a medical device per the European Union Directive 93/42/EEC, also known as the MDD. The MDD sets out the basic regulatory framework for medical devices in the European Union. The system of regulating medical devices operates by way of a certification for each medical device. Each certified device is marked with the CE mark which shows that the device has a Certificat de Conformité. There are national bodies known as Competent Authorities in each member state which oversee the implementation of the MDD within their jurisdiction. The means for achieving the requirements for the CE mark vary according to the nature of the device. Devices are classified in accordance with their perceived risks, similarly to the U.S. system. The class of a product determines the conformity assessment required before the CE mark can be placed on a product. Conformity assessments for our products are carried out as required by the MDD. Each member state can appoint Notified Bodies within its jurisdiction. If a Notified Body of one member state has issued a Certificat de Conformité, the device can be sold throughout the European Union without further conformance tests being required in other member states. The CE mark is contingent upon continued compliance with the applicable regulations and the quality system requirements of the ISO 13485 standard. Our current CE mark is issued by BSI. Although the new EU Medical Regulations were effective in May 2021, our design examination certificates under the MDD remain valid until their expiration. Compliance with the EU MDR will be executed prior to the expiration of the current MDD certificates.

Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act

The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, or HIPAA, as amended by the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act, or HITECH, established federal protection for the privacy and security of health information. Under HIPAA, the Department of Health and Human Services, or HHS, has issued regulations to protect the privacy and security of protected health information used or disclosed by “Covered Entities,” including healthcare providers and their Business Associates. HIPAA also regulates standardization of data content, codes and formats used in healthcare transactions and standardization of identifiers for health plans and providers. The privacy regulations protect medical records and other protected health information by limiting their use and release, giving patients the right to access their medical records and limiting most disclosures of health information to the minimum amount necessary to accomplish an intended purpose. The HIPAA security standards require the adoption of administrative, physical, and technical safeguards and the adoption of written security policies and procedures. HIPAA requires Covered Entities to execute Business Associate Agreements with their Business Associates and subcontractors, who provide services to Covered Entities and who need access to protected health information. In addition, companies that would not otherwise be subject to HIPAA may become contractually obligated to follow HIPAA requirements through agreements with Covered Entities and Business Associates, and some of our customers may require us to agree to these provisions.

In addition, HIPAA and other federal privacy regulations, such as Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act, there are a number of state laws regarding the privacy and security of health information and personal data that apply to us. The compliance requirements of these laws, including additional breach reporting requirements, and the penalties for violation vary widely, and new privacy and security laws in this area are evolving. Requirements of these laws and penalties for violations vary widely.

If we or our operations are found to be in violation of HIPAA, HITECH, or their implementing regulations, we may be subject to penalties, including civil and criminal penalties, fines, and exclusion from participation in federal or state

healthcare programs, and the curtailment or restructuring of our operations. HITECH increased the civil and criminal penalties that may be imposed against Covered Entities, their Business Associates and possibly other persons, and gave state attorneys general new authority to file civil actions for damages or injunctions in federal courts to enforce the federal HIPAA laws and seek attorney’s fees and costs associated with pursuing federal civil actions.

U.S. Federal, State and Foreign Fraud and Abuse Laws

The federal and state governments have enacted, and actively enforce, a number of laws to address fraud and abuse in federal healthcare programs. Our business is subject to compliance with these laws.

Anti-Kickback Statutes

The federal Anti-Kickback Statute prohibits persons from knowingly and willfully soliciting, offering, receiving or providing remuneration, directly or indirectly, in exchange for or to induce either the referral of an individual, or the furnishing or arranging for a good or service, for which payment may be made under a federal healthcare program, such as Medicare or Medicaid. A person or entity does not need to have actual knowledge of the statute or specific intent to violate it to have committed a violation.

The definition of “remuneration” has been broadly interpreted to include anything of value, including, for example, gifts, certain discounts, the furnishing of free supplies, equipment or services, credit arrangements, payment of cash and waivers of payments. Several courts have interpreted the statute’s intent requirement to mean that if any one purpose of an arrangement involving remuneration is to induce referrals of federal healthcare covered businesses, the statute has been violated. Violations of the federal Anti-Kickback Statute may result in civil monetary penalties per violation, plus up to three times the remuneration involved. Civil penalties for such conduct can further be assessed under the federal False Claims Act. Violations can also result in criminal penalties, including criminal fines and imprisonment. Similarly, violations can result in exclusion from participation in government healthcare programs, including Medicare and Medicaid. In addition, some kickback allegations have been claimed to violate the Federal False Claims Act.

The Office of Inspector General, or OIG, of the HHS has issued a series of regulations known as “safe harbors.” These safe harbors set forth provisions that, if all their applicable requirements are met, will assure healthcare providers and other parties that they will not be prosecuted under the Anti-Kickback Statute. The failure of a transaction or arrangement to fit precisely within one or more safe harbors does not necessarily mean that it is per se illegal or that prosecution will be pursued. However, conduct and business arrangements that do not fully satisfy an applicable safe harbor may result in increased scrutiny by government enforcement authorities such as OIG.

Many states have adopted laws similar to the Anti-Kickback Statute. Some of these state prohibitions apply to referral of recipients for healthcare products or services reimbursed by any source, not only government healthcare programs, and may apply to payments made directly by the patient.

Government officials have focused their enforcement efforts on the marketing of healthcare services and products, among other activities, and recently have brought cases against companies, and certain individual sales, marketing and executive personnel, for allegedly offering unlawful inducements to potential or existing customers in an attempt to procure their business.

Federal False Claims Act

The federal False Claims Act, or FCA, imposes liability on any person or entity that, among other things, knowingly presents, or causes to be presented, a false or fraudulent claim for payment by a federal healthcare program. The qui tam provisions of the FCA allow a private individual to bring actions on behalf of the federal government alleging that the defendant has violated the FCA and to share in any monetary recovery. In addition, various states have enacted false claims laws analogous to the FCA, and many of these state laws apply where a claim is submitted to any third-party payer and not only a federal healthcare program.

When an entity is determined to have violated the FCA, it may be required to pay up to three times the actual damages sustained by the government, plus civil fines and penalties for each false claim, subject to adjustment for inflation. As part of any settlement, the government may require the entity to enter into a corporate integrity agreement, which imposes certain compliance, certification and reporting obligations. There are many potential bases for liability under the FCA. Liability arises, primarily, when an entity knowingly submits, or causes another to submit, a false claim for reimbursement to the federal government. The federal government has used the FCA to assert liability on the basis of kickbacks, or in instances in which manufacturers have provided billing or coding advice to providers that the government

considered to be inaccurate. In these cases, the manufacturer faces liability for “causing” a false claim. In addition, the federal government has prosecuted companies under the FCA in connection with off-label promotion of products. Our activities relating to the reporting of discount and rebate information and other information affecting federal, state and third-party reimbursement of our products and the sale and marketing of our products may be subject to scrutiny under these laws.

We are exposed to the risk of fraud or other misconduct by our employees, collaborators, vendors, principal investigators, consultants, independent contractors, and commercial partners. It is not always possible to identify and deter employee misconduct, and the precautions we take to detect and prevent this activity may not be effective in controlling unknown or unmanaged risks or losses or in protecting us from governmental investigations or other actions or lawsuits stemming from a failure to comply with these laws or regulations. If any such actions are instituted against us, and we are not successful in defending ourselves or asserting our rights, those actions could have a significant impact on our business, including the imposition of significant fines or other sanctions. While we are unaware of any current matters, we are unable to predict whether we will be subject to actions under the FCA or a similar state law, or the impact of such actions. Whether or not we are successful in defending against any such actions or investigations, we could incur substantial costs, including legal fees, and divert the attention of management in defending ourselves against any of these claims or investigations, which could have a material adverse effect on our business and financial condition.

Civil Monetary Penalties

The Civil Monetary Penalty Act of 1981 imposes penalties against any person or entity that, among other things, is determined to have presented or caused to be presented a claim to a federal healthcare program that the person knows or should know is for an item or service that was not provided as claimed or is false or fraudulent, or offering or transferring remuneration to a federal healthcare beneficiary that a person knows or should know is likely to influence the beneficiary’s decision to order or receive items or services reimbursable by the government from a particular provider or supplier.

Open Payments

The Physician Payments Sunshine Act, known as “Open Payments” and enacted as part of the Affordable Care Act, requires all pharmaceutical and medical device manufacturers of products covered by Medicare, Medicaid or the Children’s Health Insurance Program to report annually to HHS: payments and transfers of value to physicians, certain other healthcare providers, and teaching hospitals, and ownership and investment interests held by physicians and their immediate family members. Additionally, on October 24, 2018, President Trump signed into law the “Substance Use-Disorder Prevention that Promoted Opioid Recovery and Treatment for Patients and Communities Act” which in part (under a provision entitled “Fighting the Opioid Epidemic with Sunshine”) extends the reporting and transparency requirements for physicians in the Physician Payments Sunshine Act to physician assistants, nurse practitioners, and other mid-level practitioners (with reporting requirements going into effect in 2022 for payments made in 2021). Applicable manufacturers are required to submit annual reports to CMS. Failure to submit required information on time may result in civil monetary penalties with additional amounts for knowingly failing to submit payment information. We are subject to Open Payments and the information we disclose may lead to greater scrutiny, which may result in modifications to established practices and additional costs. Additionally, similar reporting requirements have also been enacted on the state level domestically, and an increasing number of countries worldwide either have adopted or are considering similar laws requiring transparency of interactions with healthcare professionals.

Foreign Corrupt Practices Act

The Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, or FCPA, prohibits any U.S. individual or business from paying, offering, or authorizing payment or offering of anything of value, directly or indirectly, to any foreign official, political party or candidate for the purpose of influencing any act or decision of the foreign entity in order to assist the individual or business in obtaining or retaining business. The FCPA also obligates companies whose securities are listed in the United States to comply with accounting provisions requiring us to maintain books and records that accurately and fairly reflect all transactions of the corporation, including international subsidiaries, if any, and to devise and maintain an adequate system of internal accounting controls for international operations.

International Laws

In Europe, various countries have adopted anti-bribery laws providing for severe consequences in the form of criminal penalties and significant fines for individuals or companies committing a bribery offense. Violations of these anti-bribery laws, or allegations of such violations, could have a negative impact on our business, results of operations and reputation.

For instance, in the United Kingdom, under the U.K. Bribery Act 2010, a bribery occurs when a person offers, gives or promises to give a financial or other advantage to induce or reward another individual to improperly perform certain functions or activities, including any function of a public nature. Bribery of foreign public officials also falls within the scope of the U.K. Bribery Act 2010. An individual found in violation of the U.K. Bribery Act 2010, faces imprisonment of up to ten years. In addition, the individual can be subject to an unlimited fine, as can commercial organizations for failure to prevent bribery.

There are also international privacy laws that impose restrictions on the access, use, and disclosure of health information. All of these laws may impact our business. Our failure to comply with these privacy laws or significant changes in the laws restricting our ability to obtain required patient information could significantly impact our business and our future business plans.

U.S. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services

Medicare is a federal program administered by CMS through fiscal intermediaries and carriers. Available to individuals age 65 or over, and certain other individuals, the Medicare program provides, among other things, healthcare benefits that cover, within prescribed limits, the major costs of most medically necessary care for such individuals, subject to certain deductibles and copayments.

CMS has established guidelines for the coverage and reimbursement of certain products and procedures by Medicare. In general, in order to be reimbursed by Medicare, a healthcare procedure furnished to a Medicare beneficiary must be reasonable and necessary for the diagnosis or treatment of an illness or injury, or to improve the functioning of a malformed body part. The methodology for determining coverage status and the amount of Medicare reimbursement varies based upon, among other factors, the setting in which a Medicare beneficiary received healthcare products and services. Any changes in federal legislation, regulations and policy affecting CMS coverage and reimbursement relative to the procedure using our products could have a material effect on our performance.

CMS also administers the Medicaid program, a cooperative federal/state program that provides medical assistance benefits to qualifying low income and medically needy persons. State participation in Medicaid is optional, and each state is given discretion in developing and administering its own Medicaid program, subject to certain federal requirements pertaining to payment levels, eligibility criteria and minimum categories of services. The coverage, method and level of reimbursement vary from state to state and is subject to each state’s budget restraints. Changes to the availability of coverage, method or level of reimbursement for TCAR may affect future revenue negatively if reimbursement amounts are decreased or discontinued.

All CMS programs are subject to statutory and regulatory changes, retroactive and prospective rate adjustments, administrative rulings, interpretations of policy, intermediary determinations, and government funding restrictions, all of which may materially increase or decrease the rate of program payments to healthcare facilities and other healthcare providers, including those paid for TCAR.

United States Health Reform

Changes in healthcare policy could increase our costs and subject us to additional regulatory requirements that may interrupt commercialization of our current and future solutions. Changes in healthcare policy could increase our costs, decrease our revenue and impact sales of and reimbursement for our current and future products. The ACA substantially changes the way healthcare is financed by both governmental and private insurers, and significantly impacts our industry. The United States and some foreign jurisdictions are considering or have enacted a number of legislative and regulatory proposals to change the healthcare system in ways that could affect our ability to sell our products profitably. Among policy makers and payers in the United States and elsewhere, there is significant interest in promoting changes in healthcare systems with the stated goals of containing healthcare costs, improving quality or expanding access. Current and future legislative proposals to further reform healthcare or reduce healthcare costs may limit coverage of or lower reimbursement for the procedures associated with the use of our products. The cost containment measures that payers and providers are instituting and the effect of any healthcare reform initiative implemented in the future could impact our revenue from the sale of our products.

The implementation of the Affordable Care Act in the United States, for example, has changed healthcare financing and delivery by both governmental and private insurers substantially, and affected medical device manufacturers significantly. The Affordable Care Act imposed, among other things, a 2.3% federal excise tax, with limited exceptions, on any entity that manufactures or imports Class I, II and III medical devices offered for sale in the United States that began

on January 1, 2013. Through a series of legislative amendments, the tax was suspended for 2016 through 2019. In December 2019, this excise tax was permanently repealed for medical device sales, effective after December 31, 2019. The Affordable Care Act also provided incentives to programs that increase the federal government’s comparative effectiveness research, and implemented payment system reforms including a national pilot program on payment bundling to encourage hospitals, physicians and other providers to improve the coordination, quality and efficiency of certain healthcare services through bundled payment models. Additionally, the Affordable Care Act has expanded eligibility criteria for Medicaid programs and created a new Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute to oversee, identify priorities in, and conduct comparative clinical effectiveness research, along with funding for such research. We do not yet know the full impact that the Affordable Care Act will have on our business. There have been judicial and Congressional challenges to certain aspects of the Affordable Care Act, and we expect additional challenges and amendments in the future. It is unclear how efforts to repeal and replace the ACA will impact the healthcare industry or our business operations.

In addition, other legislative changes have been proposed and adopted since the Affordable Care Act was enacted. For example, the Budget Control Act of 2011, among other things, included reductions to CMS payments to providers of 2% per fiscal year, which went into effect on April 1, 2013 and, due to subsequent legislative amendments to the statute, will remain in effect through 2029 unless additional Congressional action is taken. Additionally, the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012, among other things, reduced CMS payments to several providers, including hospitals, and increased the statute of limitations period for the government to recover overpayments to providers from three to five years.

We believe that there will continue to be proposals by legislators at both the federal and state levels, regulators and third-party payers to reduce costs while expanding individual healthcare benefits. Certain of these changes could impose additional limitations on the rates we will be able to charge for our current and future products or the amounts of reimbursement available for our current and future products from governmental agencies or third-party payers. Current and future healthcare reform legislation and policies could have a material adverse effect on our business and financial condition.

Human Capital

Building and Supporting Human Capital

We understand the commitment our employees make to our company and we take our commitment to them very seriously. Consistent with this commitment, we strive to create a work environment in which everyone is empowered to develop, to contribute, and to thrive. We strongly believe our corporate culture is the operating system that powers the company. We talk about it, obsess over it, and have even given it a name – Cartwheel Culture.

Our Cartwheel Culture is uniquely ours and it’s one we love and nurture every day. Our Cartwheel Culture provides a shared set of beliefs that drives everyday behaviors. These include:

▪Courage: We think big. We act boldly. We take on new challenges. We challenge ourselves and our colleagues to try new things that are difficult. We take smart risks. We explore new ideas and do things differently.

▪Focus on Core Strength: We unleash our strengths and shore up weaknesses in our company, in every department and in each member of our company.

▪Flexibility: We view opportunities and challenge from all angles…even upside down. We explore all possibilities and are both willing and able to respond to changing circumstances and expectations. We make it a priority to listen and understand other people’s ideas and viewpoints.

▪Lend a Hand: We actively support each other to achieve our common goal. Teamwork Matters.

▪Persistence: We believe that innovation comes from persistence and learning from our mistakes. We are persistent in the pursuit of our goals and believe that it’s better to try and sometimes fail than to sit tight and fail for sure. We learn from the mistakes we make and move forward.

Code of Business Conduct and Business Ethics

All employees are expected to conduct business with the highest standards of business ethics. Each employee receives and agrees to follow our Code of Business Conduct and Ethics. Our Code of Conduct does more than just codify rules of conduct - it is the very foundation by which we conduct business every day. The Code of Conduct describes how

we put our values into practice, and it explains our commitments, our expectations and provides guidance for our employees and all others who work on our behalf.

We have an open access policy, signifying that employees are encouraged to discuss any related concerns with management or report concerns anonymously through an Integrity Helpline.

Commitment to Diversity and Inclusion

At December 31, 2021, we had 352 employees, all located within the United States. 210 employees were engaged in marketing, sales, and administrative activities, 72 were engaged in research and development activities, and 70 were engaged in manufacturing operations. During 2021, the number of employees increased by 71. Our workforce consists of a highly skilled, diverse, and engaged team dedicated to the company’s mission and goals. We are proud of the diversity in our organization with 39% of our organization ethnically diverse. In addition, women represented 48% of our organization. This ratio is consistent across leadership roles within the company, where women represent 50% of our people leaders and 50% of our executive leaders. We strive to create an inclusive work environment that represents the diversity in the communities where we live and work.

In addition, we actively recruit candidates from a variety of backgrounds and work to ensure a fair interview and selection process. We are also active in building a pipeline of diverse candidates through our Summer @ the Road internship program, through which we have partnered with organizations such as East Side Prep in East Palo Alto, California, and diversity groups at several universities from which we recruit students.

We strive to create an inclusive work environment that represents the diversity in the communities we live and work.

Commitment to a Workplace Free of Discrimination and Harassment

In addition to our focus on our Cartwheel Culture, we strive to create a workplace that is free of bias, prejudice, discrimination and harassment. Our employment policies are designed to protect all employees, provide for their welfare and guide our behaviors and interactions. All managers and employees are required to take sexual harassment training as required by state laws.  In 2022, we are adding a Managing within the Law course that will be offered to all managers. In short, we do not tolerate discrimination or harassment. We are also committed to maintaining a workplace free from harassment based on any protected characteristic.

Commitment to Equal Employment Opportunity

We are committed to maintaining a work environment in which all individuals are treated with respect and dignity. Everyone has the right to work in a professional atmosphere that promotes equal employment opportunities in all aspects of employment and personnel matters (including, without limitation, recruiting and hiring, job assignment, compensation, opportunities for advancement, evaluation, benefits, training, discipline, and termination), and prohibits discriminatory practices.

Commitment to Creating a Safe, Healthy and Secure Work Environment

We are committed to providing a safe, healthy and secure work environment for all employees and visitors. Safety is extremely important to the company and we comply with all applicable health, safety and environmental laws as well as our Safety Programs. These Safety Programs and associated procedures have been developed and implemented throughout the company’s facilities with employees’ safety in mind. These programs include an Injury and Illness Prevention Program, an Emergency Action Plan, an Exposure Control Plan, a Hazard Communication Program and a Hazardous Waste Management Program. In addition, any employee working in a hospital operating room is required to wear a dosimetry badge that monitors occupational radiation exposure and compliance with annual limits.

In addition, the COVID-19 pandemic required us to redouble our commitment to employee safety while we ensured business continuity for our physician customers and their patients. We have accepted new ways of working and interacting and this has caused a shift in how we operate in our two office locations and in the hospitals in which we work. We maintain important safety protocols including requiring all employees to be vaccinated against the COVID-19 virus and providing for a hybrid work schedule for positions where that is possible. This shift required that we and every member of our company embrace a new way of working and put new energy into creating an office environment that is safe, healthy, and inspiring to work in.

Commitment to Competitive and Fair Compensation

We believe that employees should be compensated fairly for their contributions to the company. We practice paying competitive salaries and hourly wages. In order to ensure we pay our employees competitively, annual benchmarking is completed on all positions throughout the company. We use external benchmarking surveys to guide our assessment of compensation competitiveness. Each position is evaluated based on level of the role, the complexity of the position, and years of experience required. Our compensation program consists of the three primary components: base salary, annual bonus targets (non-sales), commission plans (sales), and equity. The Compensation Committee is responsible for our executive compensation programs for our executive officers and reports to our board of directors on its discussions, decisions and other actions. We also offer all employees the option to participate in our Employee Stock Purchase Plan (ESPP). Participants in the ESPP may purchase our stock at a 15% discount to market price. We believe our ESPP plan, along with our new hire equity grants and refresh equity grants, helps to build an ownership mindset amongst participating employees.

Commitment to the Health and Wellbeing of our Employees

Our top priorities are to maintain the health and wellbeing of our employees and their families. To achieve this goal, we offer a comprehensive employee benefits package with a variety of options. These programs include Medical, Dental, Vision, Life Insurance, Disability Programs, Retirement Programs including a match on the 401(k), Flexible Spending Accounts, Health Savings Accounts with a generous employer contribution, and an Employee Assistance Program. We pay 91% of healthcare premium costs on behalf of our employees. For new parents, we offer up to 160 hours of child bonding leave and provide a benefit for new moms who travel for business that allows for them to pump milk and ship it back home. In addition, we provide paid vacation and holiday time.

Commitment to Learning and Development

We believe that the professional development of our employees is a critical element to the success of our company. We are investing in a robust learning and development program that provides employees at all levels of the company opportunities to build and grow their skills in their current roles and prepare them for future roles in the company.

We have an extensive training and development program in place for our salesforce that includes a robust clinical training continuum for our therapy development specialists, area managers and area directors. Upon hire, these employees attend a training program that includes intensive clinical/practical application training, the observation of live TCAR cases followed by intermediate training with advanced clinical education. Employees in these roles also attend regular continuing education courses on clinical topics to ensure their knowledge is current.

We also actively support the professional education of people managers through a leadership development program that builds important leadership skills through online and live training programs. In addition, we provide training that builds knowledge on our product design, manufacturing process and also enhances skills on daily tasks including software tools and applications.

Commitment to Corporate Philanthropy

Through our corporate philanthropy program, Lend a Hand, we are committed to supporting social causes and educational initiatives that help build stronger and healthier communities. Over the years, we have been involved in a variety of projects, including holiday gift drives, school backpack drives, the hand making and donation of blankets to a local rehabilitation and healthcare center near our Sunnyvale, California headquarters, participation in the Stroke Awareness Foundation’s Fight Stroke Walk, and building bikes for underprivileged children. In 2021, with in-person volunteer activities limited due to COVID-19, we provided financial support to the American Heart Association, Meals on Wheels America, and Stroke Awareness Foundation. During the COVID-19 pandemic, we made a monetary and in-kind donation to the Valley Medical Foundation and a monetary donation to Meals on Wheels. We also used our logistics team to distribute PPE Equipment, including face masks, frocks, gloves, shoe covers, beard covers and hair nets donated by a third party to hospitals around the U.S.

Corporate and Other Information

We were incorporated in Delaware on March 21, 2007 as Silk Road Medical, Inc. Our principal executive offices are located at 1213 Innsbruck Drive, Sunnyvale, California 94089, and our telephone number is (408) 720-9002. Our website address is www.silkroadmed.com. Investors and others should note that we announce material financial information to our investors using SEC filings, press releases, our investor relations website, public conference calls and webcasts. We use

these channels as well as social media to communicate with investors, customers and the public about our company, our products and other issues. It is possible that information we post on social media channels could be deemed to be material information. We encourage investors, our customers and others interested in our company to review the information we post on our Facebook page (https://www.facebook.com/SilkRoadMed/), LinkedIn page (https://linkedin.com/company/silk-road-med), and Twitter feed (https://twitter.com/SilkRoadMed). The information on, or that may be accessed through, our website and social media channels is not incorporated by reference into this Annual Report on Form 10-K and should not be considered a part of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

Item 1A. Risk Factors

We have identified the following risks and uncertainties that may have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and future growth prospects. Our business could be harmed by any of these risks. The risks and uncertainties described below are not the only ones we face. The occurrence of any of the following risks or additional risks and uncertainties not presently known to us or that we currently believe to be immaterial could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and future prospects. The trading price of our common stock could decline due to any of these risks, and you may lose all or part of your investment. In assessing these risks, you should also refer to the other information contained in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, including our financial statements and related notes. Please also see “Cautionary Notes Regarding Forward-Looking Statements.”

Summary of Principal Risk Factors

The following risks and uncertainties are among the most significant we face. However, the risks and uncertainties identified in this subsection are not the only ones we face, and are qualified in their entirety by reference to all of the risk factors described in Item 1A.

General Risks Related to Our Business

•Our business is dependent upon the continued adoption of TCAR by hospitals and physicians.

•Adoption of TCAR depends upon positive clinical data and medical society recommendations, and negative clinical data or medical society recommendations would adversely affect our business.

•The COVID-19 pandemic and the spread of new variants continue to negatively impact our business and operations.

•We are experiencing inflationary pressures, caused by the COVID-19 pandemic or as a result of general macroeconomic factors, which could increase our manufacturing costs and operating expenses and have a material adverse impact on our profitability and results of operations.

•If we are not able to maintain adequate levels of third-party coverage and reimbursement for the procedures using our products, if third parties rescind or modify their coverage, or if patients are left with significant out-of-pocket costs, it would have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

•We rely on Cordis, to supply the ENROUTE stent, and if Cordis fails to supply the ENROUTE stent in sufficient quantities or at all, it will have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

•We depend on a limited number of single source suppliers to manufacture our components, sub-assemblies and materials, including Cordis, which makes us vulnerable to supply shortages and price fluctuations that could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

•We have a history of net losses, we expect to incur operating losses in the future and we may not be able to achieve or sustain profitability.

•The failure of third parties to meet their contractual, regulatory, and other obligations could adversely affect our business.

Intellectual Property Risks

•We may become a party to intellectual property litigation or administrative proceedings that could be costly and could interfere with our ability to sell and market our products.

•Our success will depend on our ability to obtain, maintain and protect our intellectual property rights.

•We may not be able to protect our intellectual property rights throughout the world.

Regulatory Risks

•Our products have in the past and could in the future be subject to product recalls that could harm our reputation or increase the probability of inspection by, or additional scrutiny from, the FDA or other relevant regulatory bodies.

•Changes in the CMS fee schedules may harm our revenue and operating results.

•If we fail to comply with broad based healthcare and other governmental regulations, we could face substantial fines and penalties and our business, results of operations and financial condition could be adversely affected.

•If we fail to obtain and maintain necessary regulatory clearances or approvals for our products, or if clearances or approvals for future products and indications are delayed or not issued, our commercial operations would be harmed.

•Our clinical trials may fail to demonstrate competent and reliable evidence of the safety and effectiveness of our products, which would prevent or delay commercialization of our products in development.

Risks Related to Our Business

We have a history of net losses, we expect to incur operating losses in the future and we may not be able to achieve or sustain profitability.

We have incurred net losses since our inception in March 2007. For the year ended December 31, 2021, we had a net loss of $49.8 million, and we expect to continue to incur additional losses in the future. As of December 31, 2021, we had an accumulated deficit of $288.7 million. To date, we have financed our operations primarily through equity and debt financings and from sales of our portfolio of TCAR products that enable transcarotid artery revascularization. The losses and accumulated deficit have primarily been due to the substantial investments we have made to develop our products, as well as for costs related to general research and development, including clinical and regulatory initiatives to obtain marketing approval, sales and marketing efforts, investments in manufacturing and distribution capacity, and other infrastructure improvements.

Over the next several years, we expect to continue to devote a substantial amount of our resources to increase adoption of TCAR using our products, expand commercialization efforts in the United States and select international markets, improve and expand reimbursement for TCAR, expand the labeled indications for our products, conduct clinical studies, and develop additional products. In addition, as a public company, we incur significant legal, accounting, director & officer liability insurance and other expenses that we did not incur as a private company, all of which continue to increase. Accordingly, we expect to continue to incur operating losses for the foreseeable future and we cannot assure you that we will achieve profitability in the future or that, if we do become profitable, we will sustain profitability. Our failure to achieve and sustain profitability in the future will make it more difficult to finance our business and accomplish our strategic objectives, which would have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations and cause the market price of our common stock to decline. In addition, failure of our products to significantly penetrate the target markets would negatively affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

We rely on, and currently sell products to enable, TCAR, which is our only product offering.

To date, all of our revenue has been derived, and we expect it to continue to be derived in the near term, from sales of our products that enable TCAR. TCAR is a relatively new treatment option for certain patients diagnosed with carotid artery disease and, as a result, physician awareness of TCAR and our products, and experience with TCAR and our products, is limited. A number of factors that are outside of our control may contribute to fluctuations in our financial results, including:

•Physician experience and hospital demand for our products and the extent of adoption of TCAR, including the rate at which physicians recommend our products and TCAR to their patients;

•Delays in, or failure to supply product, component and material deliveries by our third-party suppliers;

•Positive or negative media coverage, or public, patient and/or physician perception, of our products and TCAR or competing products and procedures;

•Any safety or effectiveness concerns that arise regarding our products or TCAR;

•Unanticipated delays in product development or product launches;

•Our ability to maintain our current or obtain further regulatory clearances or approvals; and

•Introduction of new products or procedures for treating carotid artery disease that compete with our products and the TCAR procedure.

It is therefore difficult to predict our future financial performance and growth, and such forecasts are inherently limited and subject to a number of uncertainties. If our assumptions regarding the risks and uncertainties we face, which we use to plan our business, are incorrect or change due to circumstances in our business or our markets, or if we do not address these risks successfully, our operating and financial results could differ materially from our expectations and our business could suffer.

In addition, because we devote substantially all of our resources to our products that enable TCAR and rely on our products and the adoption of TCAR as our sole source of revenue, any factors that negatively impact our products or TCAR, or result in a decrease in sales of products, could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Our business is dependent upon the continued adoption of TCAR by hospitals and physicians.

Our future growth and profitability largely depends on our ability to increase physician awareness and adoption of TCAR and on the willingness of physicians to recommend the procedure to more of their patients. Physicians may not use our products unless they are able to determine, based on experience, clinical data, medical society recommendations and other analyses, that our products provide a safe and effective treatment alternative for carotid artery disease. Even if we are able to raise awareness and increase adoption of TCAR among physicians, physicians tend to be slow in changing their medical treatment practices and may be hesitant to select our products or TCAR for recommendation to patients for a variety of reasons, including:

•Long-standing relationships with competing companies and distributors that sell other products, such as stents and embolic protection devices for transfemoral carotid artery stenting, or CAS;

•Competitive response and negative selling efforts from providers of alternative carotid revascularization products;

•Perceived liability risk generally associated with the use of new products and procedures;

•Lack or perceived lack of sufficient clinical evidence, including long-term data, supporting clinical benefits;

•Reluctance to change to or use new products and procedures; and

•Time commitment and skill development that may be required to gain familiarity and proficiency with TCAR and our products.

Physicians play a significant role in determining the course of a patient’s treatment for carotid artery disease and, as a result, the type of treatment that will be recommended or provided to a patient. We focus our sales, marketing and education efforts primarily on vascular surgeons, and aim to educate referring physicians such as cardiologists, radiologists, neurologists, and general practitioners regarding the patient population that would benefit from TCAR. However, we cannot assure you that we will achieve broad education or market acceptance among these practitioners. For example, if diagnosing physicians who serve as the primary point of contact for patients are not made aware of TCAR, they may not refer patients to physicians for treatment using our products, and those patients may instead not seek treatment at all or may be treated with alternative procedures. In addition, some physicians may choose to utilize TCAR on only a subset of their total patient population or may not adopt TCAR at all. If a physician experiences an adverse event in one or more of their TCAR patients or elects to convert TCAR to CEA mid-procedure, they may not continue offering and performing TCAR at the same rate or at all. Further, as TCAR is a new procedure, it may not fit into the workstreams of certain physicians. If we are not able to effectively demonstrate that TCAR is beneficial in a broad range of patients, adoption of TCAR will be limited and may not occur as rapidly as we anticipate, which would have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. We cannot assure you that TCAR or our products will achieve broad market acceptance among hospitals and physicians. Any failure of TCAR or our products to satisfy demand or to achieve meaningful market acceptance and penetration will harm our future prospects and have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

In addition, the medical device industry’s relationship with physicians is under increasing scrutiny by the Health and Human Services Office of the Inspector General, or OIG, the Department of Justice, or DOJ, state attorneys general, and other foreign and domestic government agencies. Our failure to comply with laws, rules and regulations governing our

relationships with physicians, or an investigation into our compliance by the OIG, DOJ, state attorneys general or other government agencies, could significantly harm our business.

In most cases, before physicians can use our products for the first time, our products must be approved for use by a hospital's new product or value analysis committee, or the staff of a hospital or health system. Following such approval, we may be required to enter into a purchase contract. Such approvals or requirements to enter into a purchase contract could deter or delay the use of our products by physicians. We cannot provide assurance that our efforts to obtain such approvals, enter into purchase contracts, or generate adoption will be successful or increase the use of our products, and if we are not successful, it could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Adoption of TCAR depends upon positive clinical data and medical society recommendations, and negative clinical data or medical society recommendations would adversely affect our business.

The rate of adoption of TCAR and sales of our products that facilitate the procedure is heavily influenced by clinical data. Although the Society for Vascular Surgery’s Vascular Quality Initiative contains real world data retrospectively comparing carotid revascularization procedures including TCAR, we have not conducted head-to-head clinical trials to prospectively compare TCAR to the procedures historically available to patients, such as CEA or CAS, which may limit the adoption of TCAR. Additionally, the Carotid Revascularization and Medical Management for Asymptomatic Carotid Stenosis 2, or CREST-2, clinical trial currently funded by the National Institutes of Health, is ongoing and is designed to compare the effectiveness of each of CEA and CAS with best medical management solutions in standard surgical risk asymptomatic patients with carotid artery disease. Although we estimate that enrollment will not be completed until sometime after 2026, interim results have been released from time to time. At the completion of the four-year follow-up, the trial could conclude that medical management alone achieves the same therapeutic results as CEA and/or CAS, which could have an adverse impact on the adoption of TCAR. Finally, our competitors and third parties may also conduct clinical trials of our products without our participation. Unfavorable or inconsistent clinical data from existing or future clinical trials conducted by us, our competitors or third parties, the interpretation of our or other clinical data or findings of new or more frequent adverse events, could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

As physicians are influenced by guidelines issued by physician organizations, such as the Society for Vascular Surgery, the rate of adoption of TCAR and sales of our products that facilitate the procedure are also influenced by medical society recommendations. We believe the Society for Vascular Surgery’s Clinical Practice Guidelines, or SVS Guidelines, are of importance to the broader market acceptance of TCAR. The revised SVS Guidelines on the management of carotid artery disease were published in June 2021. Like previous versions of the guidelines, it generally discusses CAS and embolic protection methods, including flow reversal. The 2021 edition does state that TCAR is preferred over CEA and CAS in anatomically or physiologically high surgical risk patients, whether symptomatic or asymptomatic. If subsequent versions of the SVS Guidelines do not recommend TCAR, or if the Society for Vascular Surgery issues a negative or more limited statement regarding TCAR, physicians may not adopt or continue to use TCAR or our products at the same rate or at all, which would have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. Additionally, if key opinion leaders who currently support TCAR cease to recommend TCAR or our products, our business, financial condition and results of operations will be adversely affected.

Adoption of TCAR depends upon appropriate physician training, and inadequate training may lead to negative patient outcomes, affect adoption of TCAR and adversely affect our business.

The success of TCAR depends in part on the skill of the physician performing the procedure and on our customers’ adherence to appropriate patient selection and proper techniques provided in training sessions conducted by our training faculty. For example, we train our customers to ensure correct use of our ENROUTE NPS and proper deployment of our ENROUTE stent. However, physicians rely on their previous medical training and experience when performing TCAR, and we cannot guarantee that all such physicians will have the necessary surgical and endovascular skills to perform the procedure. While we mandate physician attendance at our TCAR training program or training with proctors, we do not control which physicians perform TCAR or how much training they receive. Physicians who have not completed our training sessions may nonetheless attempt to perform TCAR. If physicians perform TCAR in a manner that is inconsistent with its labeled indications, with components that are not our products or without adhering to or completing our training sessions, their patient outcomes may not be consistent with the outcomes achieved in our and other clinical trials, studies or registries of TCAR. This result may negatively impact the perception of patient benefit and safety and limit adoption of TCAR and our products that facilitate the procedure, which would have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. Additionally, hospitals and physician organizations may adopt physician credentialing guidelines requiring TCAR training that is more extensive than our training program. If physicians conclude that we do not provide adequate TCAR training, they may be less likely to adopt TCAR and our products, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

The COVID-19 pandemic and the spread of new variants continue to negatively impact our business and operations.

The spread of COVID-19 and its variants, or COVID-19, in the United States has continued to result in intermittent travel restrictions and restrictive hospital policies impacting our sales professionals and therapy development specialists who support them. New virus variants, including the Delta and Omicron variants, and increased infection and related hospitalization rates throughout the pandemic have increased the volatility and uncertainty in the number of TCAR procedures and demand for our products. Our field-based team continues to be available to support TCAR procedures, either in person or virtually. Members of our field team may, however, choose not to enter hospitals due to preexisting conditions, personal choice, or on doctors’ orders or may be unable to enter hospitals due to hospital policy. In addition, hospitals have and continue to experience staffing shortages that cause problems scheduling or rescheduling TCAR procedures. Physicians or their patients may postpone TCAR procedures in response to COVID-19 or divert resources to treat patients with COVID-19 or other conditions deemed higher priority. Some hospitals have also restricted or limited access for non-patients, including our sales professionals and therapy development specialists, which has negatively impacted our access to physicians and their staff. Our business and operations may be impacted by competition for operating room and hybrid operating rooms within hospitals that have dedicated certain resources only to COVID-19 patients. As hospitals cancel and defer elective surgeries, it reduces their revenue and impacts their financial results, which could result in pricing pressure on our products as they seek cost savings. Prolonged restrictions relating to COVID-19 could adversely affect our procedures and the revenue we derive as a result. Additionally, some hospitals may have cash flow problems or cease doing business due to the impact of COVID-19 on their operations, which could reduce the number of hospitals where TCAR is performed and adversely affect our ability to collect amounts due to us and our revenue as a result.

We expect these challenges to continue to impact the number of TCAR procedures for the foreseeable future, with procedure volumes impacted by increased COVID-19 hospitalizations and hospital capacity and staffing constraints due to recent COVID-19 variants. Patients may also be reluctant to visit their physicians at their offices or in hospitals due to fear of contracting COVID-19. Physicians may not be performing as many diagnostic tests for their patients and the labs where these tests are performed may not be open, staffed adequately or open the entire day. Even where physicians continue to treat symptomatic patients, treatment of asymptomatic patients is being deferred in many cases in areas where COVID-19 cases and hospitalizations are significant. The reduction in diagnostic testing and physician visits, the increase in deferred treatment, and patient behaviors are translating into fewer than expected TCAR procedures being performed in the current environment.

Governmental mandates related to COVID-19 or other infectious diseases have impacted, and we expect them to continue to impact, our personnel and personnel at third-party manufacturing facilities in the United States and other countries, and the availability or cost of materials, which could disrupt our supply chain and/or reduce our margins. An extended implementation of governmental mandates could impact our ability to operate effectively and conduct ongoing manufacturing or research and development activities. However, we are considered an essential business under applicable state rules and our manufacturing operations are ongoing. If key personnel or large groups of our employees contract the virus, that may also impact our business and operations. In the meantime, we have taken steps to provide for our employees, including providing the ability for employees to work remotely and implementing strategies to support a safe work environment for onsite employees. In addition, we have required our employees to get the COVID-19 vaccine. We are also assessing our business continuity plans in the context of this pandemic. We have implemented distancing policies and protocols established to continue manufacturing and other operations.

The outbreak and persistence of COVID-19 in international markets that we have targeted for our international expansion has delayed preparation for and launch of such expansion efforts. Regulatory timelines for approval in some countries have been delayed. Finally, we anticipate that the COVID-19 pandemic may continue to impact clinical and regulatory matters. COVID-19 is delaying enrollment in clinical trials across the medical device industry and may affect any new trials we decide to pursue. Additionally, we may experience regulatory delays in our effort to seek a label expansion for the ENROUTE stent in standard surgical risk patients, as the FDA has from time to time diverted resources to address the impact of COVID-19. COVID-19 may cause disruptions that could have a material adverse impact on our clinical trial plans and timelines, including:

•Delays in receiving authorizations from local regulatory authorities, ethics committees and institutional review boards to initiate planned clinical trials;

•Delays or difficulties in enrolling or follow up visits for patients in our clinical trials;

•Delays or difficulties in clinical site initiation, including difficulties in recruiting clinical site investigators and clinical site staff;

•Delays in clinical sites receiving the supplies and materials needed to conduct our clinical trials, including interruptions in global shipping that may affect the transport of clinical trial materials;

•Changes in local regulations as part of a response to the COVID-19 pandemic which may require us to change the ways in which our clinical trials are conducted, which may result in unexpected costs, or to discontinue the clinical trials altogether;

•Diversion of healthcare resources away from the conduct of clinical trials, including the diversion of hospitals serving as our clinical trial sites and hospital staff supporting the conduct of our clinical trials;

•Interruption of key clinical trial activities, such as clinical trial site monitoring, due to limitations on travel imposed or recommended by federal or state governments, employers and others, or interruption of clinical trial subject visits and study procedures, the occurrence of which could affect the integrity of clinical trial data;

•Risk that participants enrolled in our clinical trials will acquire COVID-19 while the clinical trial is ongoing, which could impact the results of the clinical trial, including by increasing the number of observed adverse events;

•Delays in necessary interactions with local regulators, ethics committees and other third parties and contractors due to limitations in employee resources or forced furlough of government employees;

•Limitations in employee resources that would otherwise be focused on the conduct of our clinical trials, including because of sickness of employees or their families or the desire of employees to avoid contact with large groups of people; and

•Refusal of the FDA to accept data from clinical trials in affected geographies.

Any of these occurrences may significantly harm our business, financial condition and prospects. In addition, many of the factors that cause, or lead to, a delay in the commencement or completion of clinical trials may also ultimately lead to the delay or denial of regulatory approvals or clearances of our product.

The extent to which COVID-19 impacts our business will depend on future developments, which are highly uncertain and cannot be predicted, including the duration and severity of the pandemic, the actions taken to reduce the transmission of COVID-19 or mitigate the burden on hospitals, and the speed with which normal economic, labor market and operating conditions resume, among others.

COVID-19 has created global supply chain constraints and constrained labor markets, which could result in the inability of our suppliers to deliver components, sub-assemblies and materials to us on a timely basis or at all.

We are concerned about ensuring an adequate supply of the components, sub-assemblies and materials that are used to manufacture our TCAR products as well as to support our research and development activities for new products. For example, certain liners and shrink tubing used in both the ENROUTE stent and ENROUTE NPS are in short supply and delivery of these materials are likely to be delayed, which could result in manufacturing delays for our TCAR products.  If there were a shortage of supply, the cost of components, sub-assemblies and materials may increase or we may need to pay a premium to obtain sufficient supply, either of which could harm our ability to provide our products on a cost-effective basis or at all or we may experience delays in providing our TCAR products to our customers. We also may experience delays in and increased costs for our research and development programs and clinical trials due to the inability to obtain the necessary materials to advance these programs and trials. In connection with any supply shortages, reliable and cost-effective replacement sources may not be available on short notice or at all, and this may force us to increase prices and face a corresponding decrease in demand for our TCAR products, or force us to absorb these increased costs. In the event that any of our suppliers were to discontinue production of our key product components, sub-assemblies or the materials used in our TCAR products, developing alternate sources of supply for these items would be time consuming, difficult and costly. If we were to experience a supply shortage with our components, sub-assemblies and the materials necessary to manufacture our TCAR products our reputation in the market, demand for our TCAR products and our operating results may be significantly and adversely affected and new products may be delayed.

We are experiencing inflationary pressures, caused by the COVID-19 pandemic or as a result of general macroeconomic factors, which could increase our manufacturing costs and operating expenses and have a material adverse impact on our profitability and results of operations.

We continuously monitor the effects of inflationary factors, such as increases in our cost of goods sold and selling and operating expenses, which may adversely affect our results of operations.  Specifically, we are experiencing inflationary pressure affecting the cost of the components for our TCAR products and in the wages that we pay our employees due to

challenging labor market conditions.  Competitive and regulatory conditions restrict our ability to fully recover, such as increased costs through price increases, higher costs of acquired goods and services resulting from inflation and other drivers of cost increases.  As a result, we are unlikely to be able to pass these increased costs along to our customers or fully offset the impact of persistent inflation. Our inability or failure to do so could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations or cause us to need to obtain additional capital earlier than anticipated.

Our results of operations could be materially harmed if we are unable to accurately forecast customer demand for our products and manage our inventory.

We seek to maintain sufficient levels of inventory in order to protect ourselves from supply interruptions, but keep limited components, sub-assemblies, materials and finished products on hand. To ensure adequate inventory supply and manage our operations with our manufacturing partners and suppliers, we forecast anticipated materials requirements and demand for our products in order to predict inventory needs and then place orders with our suppliers based on these predictions. Our ability to accurately forecast demand for our products would be negatively affected by many factors, including our rapid growth, product recalls, pandemics, failure to accurately manage our expansion strategy, product introductions by competitors, an increase or decrease in customer demand for our products, our failure to accurately forecast customer acceptance of new products, changes to hospital capacity, staffing, procedure and protocol changes, unanticipated changes in general market conditions or regulatory matters and weakening of economic conditions or consumer confidence in future economic conditions.

Inventory levels in excess of customer demand may result in a portion of our inventory becoming obsolete or expiring, as well as inventory write-downs or write-offs. Conversely, if we underestimate customer demand for our products or our own requirements for components, sub-assemblies and materials, our manufacturing partners and suppliers may not be able to deliver components, sub-assemblies and materials to meet our requirements and our manufacturing may be affected by the impact of COVID-19 on our suppliers. We have increased our inventory on hand in reaction to global supply chain constraints, but these inventory levels may prove to be inadequate. If we do not have adequate supply of components, sub-assemblies and materials there may be interruptions, delays or cancellations of deliveries of our TCAR products to our customers, any of which would damage our reputation, customer relationships and business. In addition, several components, sub-assemblies and materials incorporated into our products require lengthy order lead times, and additional supplies or materials may not be available when required on terms that are acceptable to us or our manufacturing partners, or at all, and our manufacturing partners and suppliers may not be able to allocate sufficient capacity in order to meet our increased requirements, any of which could have an adverse effect on our ability to meet customer demand for our products and our results of operations.

We have limited long-term data regarding the safety and effectiveness of our products, including our ENROUTE stent and TCAR generally.

Our products enable TCAR, which is a relatively new procedure, and our success depends on acceptance of our products and TCAR by the medical industry, including physicians and hospitals. The FDA reviews our products for safety and effectiveness, prior to commercial launch of these products. Thereafter, physicians, through their own use of the products and evaluation of clinical data, make their own decisions as to whether our products are safe and effective for their patients and improve their clinical outcomes. Important factors upon which the effectiveness of our products, including our ENROUTE stent, will be measured include but are not limited to long-term data regarding the risk of stroke and death and the rates of restenosis and reintervention following TCAR. The long-term clinical benefits of procedures that use our products are not fully known. Any late failure of our stent that results in a negative clinical outcome or need for reintervention could deter physicians from adopting our products and could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

The results of short-term clinical experience of our products do not necessarily predict long-term clinical benefit. We believe that physicians will compare the rates of long-term risk of stroke and death, as well as restenosis and reintervention for procedures using our products, against alternative procedures, such as CEA and CAS. If the long-term data do not meet physicians’ expectations, or if long-term data indicate that our products are not as safe or effective as other treatment options or as current short-term data would suggest, our products may not become widely adopted, physicians may recommend alternative treatments for their patients and our business could be harmed.

If we are not able to maintain adequate levels of third-party coverage and reimbursement for the procedures using our products, if third parties rescind or modify their coverage, or if patients are left with significant out-of-pocket costs, it would have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

TCAR is currently covered under certain circumstances for certain patients by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services under a National Coverage Determination, and has been covered by some commercial payers, independent networks and other entities not governed by the National Coverage Determination. In the United States, we derive our revenue from sales to hospitals and medical centers, which typically bill all or a portion of the costs and fees associated with our products to various third-party payers, including Medicare, Medicaid, Veterans’ Administration, private commercial insurance companies, health maintenance organizations and other healthcare-related organizations, and then bill patients for any applicable deductibles or co-payments. For example, our contracts are with the hospitals and medical centers that purchase our products for use with TCAR and not with the commercial payers. As a result, access to adequate coverage and reimbursement for our products by third-party payers is essential to the acceptance of our products by our customers.

However, in the United States, there is no uniform policy of coverage and reimbursement for medical device products and services among third-party payers, so coverage and reimbursement can differ significantly from payer to payer, and each coverage decision and level of reimbursement is independent. As a result, third-party reimbursement may not be available or adequate for our products, and there is no guarantee that we will be able to maintain our current levels of coverage or reimbursement or be able to expand coverage to other insurance carriers. Further, payers continually review new technologies for possible coverage and can, without notice, deny or limit coverage for products and procedures or delay coverage approval until further clinical data are available. As a result, the coverage determination process is often a time-consuming and costly process that may require us to provide scientific and clinical support for the use of our products to each payer separately, with no assurance that coverage and adequate reimbursement will be obtained, or maintained if obtained. If third-party reimbursement is not available or adequate for TCAR procedures using our products, or if there is any decline in the amount that payers are willing to reimburse our customers for TCAR, new customers may not adopt, or may reduce their rate of adoption of, our products and we could experience additional pricing pressure, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Products for carotid stenting including our TCAR products are covered for Medicare beneficiaries under a National Coverage Determination, or NCD, for Percutaneous Transluminal Angioplasty. Coverage for non-Medicare patients depend upon commercial and other payer policies. Based on reimbursement information regarding CEA and CAS, we estimate that approximately 79% of carotid procedures are reimbursed by the U.S. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, or CMS, and the remaining approximately 21% are reimbursed by commercial and other payers. Medicare is managed by CMS, which make the final determination regarding Medicare hospital and physician coverage and payment. Any future reconsideration of the applicable Medicare NCD may result in expansion of coverage of carotid stenting procedures including TCAR based on FDA-approved indications or continued coverage limitations to CMS approved CAS investigational studies. CMS reimburses hospital inpatient services based on Medicare Severity Diagnosis Related Groups, or MS-DRGs. All CAS, TCAR and CEA procedures are currently paid only as Medicare inpatient procedures. CMS policy focus on hospital price transparency, site (e.g. inpatient, outpatient, ambulatory surgery center and office) neutral payments and MS-DRG refinements may place additional downward pressure on future hospital inpatient payments. Medicare payments to physicians are based on a Resource Based Relative Value System. CMS policy changes to increase reimbursement for physician primary care services may result in reductions to physician payments for specialty services and procedures. As a result of any reductions in payments to hospitals and physicians for TCAR procedures, TCAR utilization may decline, which would have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. Additionally, patients may elect to reduce or defer out-of-pocket costs during times of economic uncertainty or periods of legislative change. If hospital, physician and/or patient demand for TCAR, and thus our products that facilitate the procedure, are adversely affected by third-party reimbursement policies and decisions, it will have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Internationally, reimbursement systems in foreign markets vary significantly by country and by region within some countries, and reimbursement approvals must be obtained on a country-by-country basis. In certain international markets, a product must be approved for reimbursement before it can be approved for sale in that country. Additionally, many international markets have government-managed healthcare systems that control reimbursement for products and procedures. In most markets there are both private insurance systems and government-managed systems. If sufficient levels of coverage and reimbursement are not available for TCAR or our current or future products, in either the United States or internationally, the demand for our products and our revenues will be adversely affected.

Additionally, when payers combine their operations, the combined company may elect to reimburse for TCAR at the lowest rate paid by any of the participants in the consolidation or use its increased size to negotiate reduced rates. If one of the payers participating in the consolidation does not reimburse for TCAR at all, the combined company may elect not to reimburse for TCAR, which would adversely impact our business, financial condition and results of operations.

If we fail to comply with our obligations in our intellectual property license from Cordis, we could lose license rights that are important to our business.

We are a party to a license agreement with Cordis, under which Cordis has granted us a worldwide, non-exclusive, royalty-bearing license, without the right to sublicense, to certain of its intellectual property related to the PRECISE® carotid stent for transcervical treatment of carotid artery disease with an intravascular stent for certain applications for accessing blood vessels through the neck and cervical area. In August 2021, Cardinal Health divested Cordis to private equity firm Hellman & Friedman LLC. Our license agreement with Cordis imposes, and we expect that any future license agreements will impose, certain diligence, royalty, and other obligations on us. If we fail to comply with these obligations, our licensors, including Cordis, may have the right to reduce the scope of our rights or terminate these agreements, in which event we may not be able to develop and market any product that is covered by these agreements. If not extended, this license will expire on a country-by-country basis upon the expiration of all applicable Cordis patents – in certain countries, for example, our rights are expected to expire within the next few years. Termination of this license for failure to comply with such obligations or for other reasons, or reduction, elimination or expiration of our licensed rights under it or any other license or agreement, may result in our having to negotiate new or reinstated licenses on less favorable terms or our not having sufficient intellectual property rights to operate our business or cause us to enter into new licenses for different stents. The occurrence of such events could materially harm our business and financial condition.

The risks described elsewhere pertaining to our intellectual property rights also apply to the intellectual property rights that we in-license, and any failure by us or our licensors, including Cordis, to obtain, maintain, defend and enforce these rights could have a material adverse effect on our business. In some cases we do not have control over the prosecution, maintenance or enforcement of the patents that we license, and may not have sufficient ability to provide input into the patent prosecution, maintenance and defense process with respect to such patents, and our licensors may fail to take the steps that we believe are necessary or desirable in order to obtain, maintain, defend and enforce the licensed patents.

We rely on Cordis to supply the ENROUTE stent, and if Cordis fails to supply the ENROUTE stent in sufficient quantities or at all, it will have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

We rely on Cordis to manufacture the ENROUTE stent pursuant to a supply agreement between us and Cordis Corporation. We strive to maintain an inventory of several months’ worth of ENROUTE stents to guard against potential shortfalls in supply, and we estimate that it would take one to two years to find an alternative supplier for our ENROUTE stent and multiple years to identify and seek approval for another stent, and in each case qualify it for use with our other products. In addition, Cordis currently manufactures the ENROUTE stent at a facility in Juarez, Mexico. This facility has previously and in the future could become subject to a COVID-19 outbreak which would cause Cordis to temporarily shut down manufacturing operations, which would in turn present risk to the ongoing supply of our stents used in TCAR procedures. If Cordis's ability to manufacture the ENROUTE stent is interrupted as a result, or if Cordis experiences a product recall or breaches its supply agreement with us, we may not have a sufficient number of stents for delivery to support TCAR procedures. Finally, if not extended, our supply agreement with Cordis will terminate when our license agreement with Cordis terminates and we can provide no assurance that we will be able to negotiate or enter into a new supply agreement with Cordis on terms that are acceptable to us, or at all. We or Cordis may wish to re-evaluate certain aspects of the supply agreement we have with Cordis which may lead to lengthy or costly negotiations and affect our ability to obtain the ENROUTE stent at an acceptable price or at all. Any shortfall in the supply of ENROUTE stents may result in lower adoption rates for TCAR, fewer TCAR procedures being performed generally, and a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

TCAR involves surgical risks and is contraindicated in certain patients, which may limit adoption.

Risks of TCAR using our products include the risks that are common to surgical and endovascular procedures, including perforation, dissection, embolization, bleeding, infection, nerve injury and restenosis. Endovascular procedures occurring in the carotid arteries also include the additional risks of stroke, heart attack and death. We are aware of certain characteristics and features of TCAR that may prevent widespread market adoption, including the fact that physicians would need to adopt a new procedure, and that training for physicians will be required to enable them to effectively operate our products.

Our current products are contraindicated, and therefore should not be used, in certain patients. Our ENROUTE NPS is contraindicated in patients in whom antiplatelet and/or anticoagulation therapy is contraindicated; patients with uncorrected bleeding disorders; patients with severe disease of the ipsilateral common carotid artery; and patients with uncontrollable intolerance to flow reversal. Our ENROUTE stent is contraindicated in patients in whom antiplatelet and/or anticoagulation therapy is contraindicated; patients in whom the ENROUTE NPS is unable to be placed; patients with uncorrected bleeding disorders; patients with known allergies to nitinol; and patients with lesions in the ostium of the common carotid artery. Our ENHANCE peripheral access kit is contraindicated in patients with a known or suspected obstruction in the vessel. Our ENROUTE guidewire is contraindicated in patients judged not acceptable for percutaneous

intervention. Additionally, patients that lack at least five centimeters of common carotid artery free of significant disease are not indicated for our ENROUTE NPS.

We face manufacturing risks that could adversely affect our ability to manufacture products and could reduce our gross margins and negatively affect our business and operating results.

Our business strategy depends on our ability to manufacture, and our contract manufacturers ability to manufacture, our current and future products in sufficient quantities and on a timely basis to meet customer demand, while adhering to product quality standards, complying with regulatory quality system requirements and managing manufacturing costs. We have a facility located in Sunnyvale, California, where we currently assemble and package certain of our products, and inspect, release and ship all of our products, either directly to our customers or to our facility in Plymouth, Minnesota. We currently produce our ENROUTE NPS at our Sunnyvale facility, and we and the contract manufacturers of our other products do not currently have redundant facilities although we expect to begin manufacturing of our ENROUTE NPS at our Plymouth facility in the second half of 2022. If our or our manufacturing partners’ facilities suffers damage, or a force majeure event, this could materially impact our ability to operate.

We are also subject to numerous other risks relating to our manufacturing capabilities, including:

•Quality and reliability of components, sub-assemblies and materials that we source from third-party suppliers, who are required to meet our quality specifications, the majority of which are our single source suppliers for the products they supply;

•Our or our manufacturing partners’ inability to secure components, sub-assemblies and materials in a timely manner, in sufficient quantities or on commercially reasonable terms;

•Our or our manufacturing partners’ inability to maintain compliance with quality system requirements or pass regulatory quality inspections;

•Our or our manufacturing partners’ failure to develop products in a timely manner or to required specifications or to increase production capacity or volumes to meet demand;

•Our or our manufacturing partners’ inability to design or modify production processes to enable us to produce future products efficiently or implement changes in current products in response to design or regulatory requirements; and

•Difficulty identifying and qualifying, and obtaining new regulatory approvals, for alternative suppliers for components in a timely manner.

As demand for our products increases, we will have to invest additional resources to purchase components, sub-assemblies and materials, hire and train employees and enhance our manufacturing processes. If we or our manufacturing partners fail to increase our production capacity efficiently, we may not be able to fill customer orders on a timely basis, our sales may not increase in line with our expectations and our operating margins could fluctuate or decline. In addition, although we expect some of our products in development to share product features, components, sub-assemblies and materials with our existing products, the manufacture of these products may require modification of our or our manufacturing partners’ current production processes or unique production processes, the hiring of specialized employees, the identification of new suppliers for specific components, sub-assemblies and materials or the development of new manufacturing technologies. It may not be possible for us or our manufacturing partners’ to manufacture these products at a cost or in quantities sufficient to make these products commercially viable or to maintain current operating margins, all of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

We depend on a limited number of single source suppliers to manufacture our components, sub-assemblies and provide other materials, which makes us vulnerable to supply shortages and price fluctuations that could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

We rely on single source suppliers for the components, sub-assemblies and materials for our products, such as our ENROUTE stent and for the key components, sub-assemblies and materials for our ENROUTE NPS. These components, sub-assemblies and materials are critical and there are relatively few alternative sources of supply. We have not qualified or obtained necessary regulatory approvals for additional suppliers for most of these components, sub-assemblies and materials, and we do not carry a significant inventory for some of these items. While we believe that alternative sources of supply may be available, we cannot be certain whether they will be available if and when we need them, or that any alternative suppliers would be able to provide the quantity and quality of components and materials that we would need to manufacture our products if our existing suppliers were unable to satisfy our supply requirements. To utilize other supply sources, we would need to identify and qualify new suppliers to our quality standards and obtain any

additional regulatory approvals required to change suppliers, which could result in manufacturing delays and increase our expenses. Our manufacturing partners rely on single source suppliers as well, and are subject to the foregoing risks.

Our and our manufacturing partners’ dependence on third-party suppliers subjects us to a number of risks that could impact our ability to manufacture our products and harm our business, including:

•Interruption of supply resulting from modifications to, or discontinuation of, a supplier’s operations;

•Delays in product shipments resulting from uncorrected defects, reliability issues or a supplier’s failure to produce components that consistently meet our quality specifications;

•Price fluctuations due to a lack of long-term supply arrangements with our suppliers for key components;

•Inability to obtain adequate supply in a timely manner or on commercially reasonable terms due to global supply chain constraints or other factors;

•Difficulty identifying and qualifying alternative suppliers for components in a timely manner;

•Inability of suppliers to comply with applicable provisions of the FDA’s Quality System Regulation, or QSR or other applicable laws or regulations enforced by the FDA and other state and applicable regulatory authorities;

•Inability to adequately ensure the quality of products and components manufactured by third parties;

•Production delays related to the evaluation and testing of products and components from alternative suppliers and corresponding regulatory qualifications;

•Delays in delivery by our suppliers due to changes in demand from us or their other customers; and

•An outbreak of disease or similar public health threat, such as the ongoing threat of new COVID-19 variants, particularly as it may impact our supply chain.

Although we require our third-party suppliers to supply us with components that meet our specifications and comply with applicable provisions of the QSR and other applicable legal and regulatory requirements in our agreements and contracts, and we perform incoming inspection, testing or other acceptance activities to ensure the components meet our requirements, there is a risk that our suppliers will not always act consistent with our best interests, and may not always supply components that meet our requirements or supply components in a timely manner. For example, in the first quarter of 2021, we announced the voluntary recall of certain lots of our ENROUTE Transcarotid Stent System, manufactured by Cordis. Our decision to recall these lots was based on complaints we received about tips detaching from the stent delivery system as well as internal testing that we conducted. We have determined the root cause of the detachment was a single operator at Cordis, who, over a specific timeframe, produced lots in which a small number of units were not reliably manufactured to specification. Recalls like this one could cause the supply of our TCAR products to customers to be interrupted, us to incur additional expenses, have to purchase replacement products, negative publicity or damage to our reputation, any of which could cause our results of operations to be adversely impacted.

Our quarterly and annual results may fluctuate significantly and may not fully reflect the underlying performance of our business.

Our quarterly and annual results of operations, including our revenue, net income or net loss and cash flow, may vary significantly in the future, and period-to-period comparisons of our operating results may not be meaningful. Accordingly, the results of any one quarter or period should not be relied upon as an indication of future performance. Our quarterly and annual financial results may fluctuate as a result of a variety of factors, many of which are outside our control and, as a result, may not fully reflect the underlying performance of our business. Fluctuations in quarterly and annual results may decrease the value of our common stock. Because our quarterly results may fluctuate, period-to-period comparisons may not be the best indication of the underlying results of our business and should only be relied upon as one factor in determining how our business is performing.

We have a limited total addressable market based on our current labeling restrictions.

The total addressable market for TCAR is limited by a number of factors. Approximately 169,000 patients with carotid artery disease in the United States received treatment in the form of surgical or endovascular intervention in 2021. Of this group, we estimate that approximately one-third would be outside the scope of the FDA-approved labeling for the ENROUTE stent, as those patients are not deemed to be at high risk for adverse events from CEA, or high surgical risk. Although we have submitted a PMA supplement to the FDA to expand the labeling for the ENROUTE stent to treat

patients at standard risk for adverse events from CEA, the current FDA-approved labeling for the ENROUTE stent is limited to patients at high risk for adverse events from CEA. Patients at high risk for adverse events from CEA are defined as having significant comorbidities and/or anatomic risk factors, and/or advanced age, that would make them riskier candidates for CEA. Furthermore, the safety and effectiveness of certain products for TCAR has not been established for certain patients. For example, the FDA-cleared labeling for the ENROUTE NPS states that patients should have at least five centimeters of common carotid artery free of significant disease for initial access to the artery and positioning of the ENROUTE sheath. In addition, per the FDA-approved labeling for the ENROUTE stent, TCAR is limited to asymptomatic patients with carotid artery stenosis of at least 80% and symptomatic patients with carotid artery stenosis of at least 50%, both of which must also be high surgical risk. In addition, physicians may choose to perform CEA in patients with certain anatomical characteristics, including heavily calcified carotid arteries, calcified lesions and severe vessel tortuosity. Finally, current labeling for our products includes contraindications for certain patients, thus further reducing our total addressable market.

Expanding the addressable market for TCAR is dependent upon labeling and reimbursement expansion initiatives.

The ENROUTE stent is not currently indicated for use in standard surgical risk patients. To access a larger portion of the market for carotid artery disease, we have filed a PMA supplement and will need to obtain approval by the FDA for a label expansion of the ENROUTE stent in standard surgical risk patients and obtain corresponding reimbursement coverage expansion for TCAR with CMS. As a condition of PMA approval, the FDA may require additional post-market data from clinical studies or registries, which we are preparing for. However, there are no guarantees that we will be able to obtain such FDA approval or CMS label expansion for the ENROUTE stent, or that any label expansion or additional reimbursement coverage will be sufficient to adequately access the standard risk portion of the market for carotid artery disease patients. If we are unable to obtain labeling and reimbursement coverage expansion, it may have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Changes in public health insurance coverage and government reimbursement rates for the TCAR procedures using our products could affect the adoption of our products and our future revenue.

The federal government is considering ways to change, and has changed, the manner in which healthcare services are paid for in the United States. Individual states may also enact legislation that impacts Medicaid payments to hospitals and physicians. In addition, CMS establishes Medicare payment levels for hospitals and physicians on an annual basis, which can increase or decrease payment to such entities. Internationally, medical reimbursement systems vary significantly from country to country, with some countries limiting medical centers’ spending through fixed budgets, regardless of levels of patient treatment, and other countries requiring application for, and approval of, government or third-party reimbursement. Even if we succeed in bringing our products to market in additional foreign countries, uncertainties regarding future healthcare policy, legislation and regulation, as well as private market practices, could affect our ability to sell our products in commercially acceptable quantities at acceptable prices.

Cost-containment efforts of our customers, purchasing groups and governmental organizations could have a material adverse effect on our sales and profitability.

In an effort to reduce costs, many hospitals in the United States have become members of Group Purchasing Organizations, or GPOs, and Integrated Delivery Networks, or IDNs. GPOs and IDNs negotiate pricing arrangements with medical device companies and distributors and then offer these negotiated prices to affiliated hospitals and other members. GPOs and IDNs typically award contracts on a category-by-category basis through a competitive bidding process. Bids are generally solicited from multiple providers with the intention of driving down pricing or reducing the number of vendors. Due to the highly competitive nature of the GPO and IDN contracting processes, we may not be able to obtain new, or maintain existing, contract positions with major GPOs and IDNs. Furthermore, the increasing leverage of organized buying groups reduces market prices for our products and/or require administrative fees, thereby reducing our revenue and/or margins.

While having a contract with a GPO or IDN for a given product category can facilitate sales to members of that GPO or IDN, such contract positions can offer no assurance that any level of sales will be achieved, as sales are typically made pursuant to individual purchase orders. Even when a provider is the sole contracted supplier of a GPO or IDN for a certain product category, members of the GPO or IDN are generally free to purchase from other suppliers. Furthermore, GPO and IDN contracts typically are terminable without cause by the GPO or IDN upon 60 to 90 days’ notice. Accordingly, the members of such groups may choose to purchase alternative products due to the price or quality offered by other companies, which could result in a decline in our revenue.

We may not be able to achieve or maintain satisfactory pricing and margins for our products.

Manufacturers of medical devices have a history of price competition, and we can give no assurance that we will be able to achieve satisfactory prices for our products or maintain prices at the levels we have historically achieved. Any decline in the amount that payers reimburse our customers for TCAR could make it difficult for customers to continue using, or to adopt, our products and could create additional pricing pressure for us. If we are forced to lower the price we charge for our products, our gross margins will decrease, which will adversely affect our ability to invest in and grow our business. If we are unable to maintain our prices, or if our costs increase and we are unable to offset such increase with an increase in our prices, our margins could erode. We will continue to be subject to significant pricing pressure, which could harm our business and results of operations.

If our manufacturing facility becomes damaged or inoperable, or if we are required to vacate a facility, we may be unable to produce the products we manufacture or we may experience delays in production or an increase in costs, which could adversely affect our results of operations.

We currently maintain our manufacturing and a portion of our research and development and non-field-based sales, general and administrative operations in a building located in Sunnyvale, California, which is situated on or near earthquake fault lines, and we do not yet have redundant manufacturing although we expect to begin manufacturing of our ENROUTE NPS at our Plymouth facility in the second half of 2022. Should our building be significantly damaged or destroyed by natural or man-made disasters, such as earthquakes, fires or other events, it could take months to relocate or rebuild, during which time our employees may seek other positions, our research, development and manufacturing would cease or be delayed and our products may be unavailable. Moreover, the use of a new facility or new manufacturing, quality control, or environmental control equipment or systems generally requires FDA review and, with respect to certain products, approval of a PMA supplement. Because of the time required to authorize manufacturing in a new facility under FDA, the State of California and non-U.S. regulatory requirements, we may not be able to resume production on a timely basis even if we are able to replace production capacity in the event we lose manufacturing capacity. While we maintain property and business interruption insurance, such insurance has limits and would only cover the cost of rebuilding and relocating and lost revenue, but not general damage, losses caused by earthquakes, losses we may suffer due to our products being replaced by competitors’ products or loss in value due to associated decreases in our stock price. The inability to perform our research, development and manufacturing activities, combined with our limited inventory of materials and components and manufactured products, may cause physicians to discontinue using our products or harm our reputation, and we may be unable to reestablish relationships with such physicians in the future. Consequently, a catastrophic event at our facilities could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Furthermore, the current lease for our Sunnyvale, California manufacturing facility expires in 2024, and our operations are growing at a pace that may require us to find a replacement or expansion facility in California sooner. We may be unable to renew our lease or find a new facility on commercially reasonable terms. If we were unable or unwilling to renew at the proposed rates, relocating our manufacturing facility would involve significant expense in connection with the movement and installation of key manufacturing equipment and any necessary recertification with regulatory bodies, and we cannot assure investors that such a move would not delay or otherwise adversely affect our manufacturing activities or operating results. If our manufacturing capabilities were impaired by our move, we may not be able to manufacture and ship our products in a timely manner, which would adversely impact our business.

In addition, we rely on our manufacturing partners to supply certain of our products, and our partners are subject to similar risks with respect to their facilities. If our manufacturing partners’ facilities are damaged or destroyed and their ability to supply products to us is limited, it could negatively affect our reputation, physician relationships and TCAR adoption, all of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. Several of our products are sterilized at a particular third party facility, with limited alternate facilities. If an event occurs that results in damage to or closure of one or more of such facilities, we may be unable to sterilize such products at the previous levels or at all. Because of the time required to approve and license a sterilization facility, a third party may not be available on a timely basis to replace capacity in the event sterilization capacity is lost.

If we fail in our training initiatives, to increase our sales and marketing capabilities or to develop broad brand awareness, our growth will be impeded and our business will suffer.

We currently rely on our direct sales force to sell our products in targeted geographic regions in the U.S., and any failure to maintain and grow our direct sales force could harm our business. The members of our direct sales force are highly trained and possess substantial technical and clinical expertise, which we believe is critical in driving adoption of TCAR. The members of our U.S. sales force are at-will employees. The loss of these personnel to competitors, or otherwise, could materially harm our business. If we are unable to retain our direct sales force personnel or replace them with individuals of equivalent technical and clinical expertise and qualifications, or if we are unable to successfully instill such technical and clinical expertise in replacement personnel, our revenues and results of operations could be materially harmed.

In order to generate future growth, we plan to continue to expand and leverage our sales, marketing, and medical affairs infrastructure to increase our trained physician and hospital customer base and our business. Identifying and recruiting qualified sales, marketing and medical affairs personnel and training them on TCAR, on applicable federal and state laws and regulations, and on our internal policies and procedures requires significant time, expense and attention. It often takes several months or more before a sales representative is fully trained and productive. Our business may be harmed if our efforts to expand and train our sales force do not generate a corresponding increase in revenue, and our higher fixed costs may slow our ability to reduce costs in the face of a sudden decline in demand for our products. Any failure to hire, develop and retain talented sales personnel, to achieve desired productivity levels in a reasonable period of time or timely reduce fixed costs, could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. Our medical affairs department may not train physicians at a rate sufficient to expand our physician base in a manner consistent with our business plan. Our ability to increase our customer base and achieve broader market acceptance of our products will depend to a significant extent on our ability to expand our marketing efforts. We plan to dedicate significant resources to our marketing programs. Our business may be harmed if our marketing efforts and expenditures do not generate a corresponding increase in revenue. In addition, we believe that developing and maintaining broad awareness of our brand is critical to achieving broad acceptance of our products and penetrating new accounts. Brand promotion activities may not generate patient or physician awareness or increase revenue, and even if they do, any increase in revenue may not offset the costs and expenses we incur in building our brand. If we fail to successfully promote, maintain and protect our brand, we may fail to attract or retain the physician acceptance necessary to realize a sufficient return on our brand building efforts, or to achieve the level of brand awareness that is critical for broad adoption of our products.

The market for our products is highly competitive. If our competitors are able to develop or market carotid artery disease treatments that are safer, more effective or gain greater acceptance in the marketplace, than any products we develop, our commercial opportunities will be reduced or eliminated.

Our industry is highly competitive, subject to change and significantly affected by new product introductions and other activities of industry participants. We are initially positioning TCAR as an alternative to CEA and CAS in high surgical risk patients. CEA has historically been performed by vascular surgeons as the primary surgical solution for carotid artery disease. The major manufacturers of products, such as patches and shunts, used in connection with CEA include LeMaitre Vascular, Getinge / Maquet, Baxter, Terumo, Gore and Edwards. Some competitors market products for use in CAS, such as peripheral access kits, stents, distal and proximal embolic protection devices, guidewires, balloons and sheaths. Such companies include Abbott, Boston Scientific, Cordis, Medtronic, Terumo, Gore, Contego Medical and InspireMD. These technologies, other products that are in ongoing clinical trials, new drugs or additional indications for existing drugs could demonstrate better safety, effectiveness, clinical results, lower costs or greater physician and patient acceptance.

We compete, or may compete in the future, against other companies which have longer operating histories, more established products and greater resources, which may prevent us from achieving significant market penetration or improved operating results. These companies enjoy several competitive advantages, including:

•Greater financial and human capital resources;

•Significantly greater name recognition;

•Established relationships with vascular surgeons and other treating specialties, referring physicians, customers and third-party payers;

•Additional lines of products, and the ability to offer rebates or bundle products to offer greater discounts or incentives to gain a competitive advantage; and

•Established sales, marketing and worldwide distribution networks.

Because of the size of the market opportunity for the treatment of carotid artery disease, we believe potential competitors have historically dedicated and will continue to dedicate significant resources to aggressively promote their products or develop new products. New treatment options may be developed that could compete more effectively with our products due to the prevalence of carotid artery disease and the extensive research efforts and technological progress that exist within the market.

Our ability to compete depends on our ability to innovate successfully and deliver any new products in a timely manner.

The market for our products is competitive, dynamic, and marked by rapid and substantial technological development and product innovation. New entrants or existing competitors could attempt to develop products that compete directly with

ours. Demand for our products and future related products could be diminished by equivalent or superior products and technologies offered by competitors. If we are unable to innovate successfully, our products could become obsolete and our revenue would decline as our customers purchase our competitors’ products.

We are currently focused on improving existing products for TCAR, developing new products for TCAR, and developing new products for other disease states beyond carotid artery disease. If we are unable to develop new products, applications or features due to constraints, such as insufficient cash resources, high employee turnover, inability to hire personnel with sufficient technical skills or a lack of other research and development resources, we may not be able to maintain our competitive position compared to other companies. Furthermore, many of our competitors devote a considerably greater amount of funds to their research and development programs than we do, and those that do not may be acquired by larger companies that would allocate greater resources to research and development programs. Our failure or inability to devote adequate research and development resources or compete effectively with the research and development programs of our competitors could harm our business.

Any significant delays in our product launches may significantly impede our ability to enter or compete in a given market and may reduce the sales that we are able to generate from these products. We may experience delays in any phase of a product development, including during research and development, clinical trials, regulatory review, manufacturing and marketing. Delays in product introductions could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Defects or failures associated with our products could lead to additional recalls, safety alerts or litigation, as well as significant costs and negative publicity.

Our business is subject to significant risks associated with the manufacture, distribution and use of medical devices that are placed inside the human body, including the risk that patients may be severely injured by or even die from the misuse or malfunction of our products caused by design flaws or manufacturing defects. In addition, component failures, design defects, off-label uses or inadequate disclosure of product-related information could also result in an unsafe condition or the injury or death of a patient. These problems could lead to a recall or market withdrawal of, or issuance of a safety alert relating to, our products and could result in significant costs, negative publicity and adverse competitive pressure. For example, in the first quarter of 2021, we announced the voluntary recall of certain lots of our ENROUTE Transcarotid Stent System, manufactured by Cordis. The circumstances giving rise to recalls are unpredictable, and any recalls of existing or future products increase the probability of inspection by, or additional scrutiny from, the FDA and could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

We provide a limited warranty that our products are free of material defects and conform to specifications, and offer to repair, replace or refund the purchase price of defective products. As a result, we bear the risk of potential warranty claims on our products. In the event that we attempt to recover some or all of the expenses associated with a warranty claim against us from our suppliers or vendors, we may not be successful in claiming recovery under any warranty or indemnity provided to us by such suppliers or vendors and any recovery from such vendor or supplier may not be adequate.

The medical device industry has historically been subject to extensive litigation over product liability claims. Operating in the area of the neck with the brain as the end organ is dangerous and presents risks of adverse events such as bleeding, arterial dissection, cranial nerve injury, myocardial infarction, stroke and death, which subject us to a greater risk of being involved in litigation than companies with products used in less critical areas of the body. We may be subject to product liability claims if our products cause, or merely appear to have caused, an injury or death, even if due to physician error. In addition, an injury or death that is caused by the activities of our suppliers, such as those that provide us with components and materials, or by an aspect of a treatment used in combination with our products, such as a complementary drug or anesthesia, may be the basis for a claim against us by patients, hospitals, physicians or others purchasing or using our products, even if our products were not the actual cause of such injury or death. We may choose to settle any claims to avoid fault and complication not due to failure of our products. An adverse outcome involving one of our products could result in reduced market acceptance and demand for all of our products, and could harm our reputation and our ability to market our products in the future. In some circumstances, adverse events arising from or associated with the design, manufacture or marketing of our products could result in the suspension or delay of regulatory reviews of our premarket notifications or applications for marketing. Any of the foregoing problems could disrupt our business and have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Although we carry product liability insurance in the United States and in other countries in which we conduct business, including for clinical trials and product marketing, we can give no assurance that such coverage will be available or adequate to satisfy any claims. Product liability insurance is expensive, subject to significant deductibles and exclusions, and may not be available on acceptable terms, if at all. If we are unable to obtain or maintain insurance at an acceptable cost or on acceptable terms with adequate coverage or otherwise protect against potential product liability claims, we

could be exposed to significant liabilities. A product liability claim, recall or other claim with respect to uninsured liabilities or for amounts in excess of insured liabilities could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. Defending a suit, regardless of its merit or eventual outcome, could be costly, could divert management’s attention from our business and might result in adverse publicity, which could result in reduced acceptance of our products in the market, product recalls or market withdrawals.

We are required to file adverse event reports under Medical Device Reporting, or MDR, regulations with the FDA, which reports are publicly available on the FDA’s website. We are required to file MDRs if our products may have caused or contributed to a serious injury or death or malfunctioned in a way that could likely cause or contribute to a serious injury or death if it were to recur. Any such MDR that reports a significant adverse event could result in negative publicity, which could harm our reputation and future sales.

The failure of TCAR to meet patient expectations or the occurrence of adverse events from TCAR could impair our financial performance.

Our future success depends upon patients having an experience with TCAR that meets their expectations in order to increase physician demand for our products as a result of positive feedback, social media and word-of-mouth. Patients may be dissatisfied if their expectations of the procedure and results, among other things, are not met. Despite what we believe to be the safety profile of our products, patients may experience adverse events such as arterial restenosis or dissection, cranial nerve injury, wound complications, transient ischemic attacks, stroke, heart attack, and death. If the results of TCAR do not meet the expectations of the patients, or patients experience adverse events, it could discourage patients from referring TCAR to others. For example, although we have not received any reports of strokes, deaths or other long-term patient sequelae from the tip detachments that triggered our recent recall, if there were to be patient injury, dissatisfied patients may express negative opinions through social media or we may otherwise suffer reputational damage or become subject to product liability lawsuits. Any failure to meet patient expectations and any resulting negative publicity or lawsuits could harm our reputation and future sales.

We depend on our senior management team and the loss of one or more key employees or an inability to attract and retain highly skilled employees could harm our business.

Our success depends largely on the continued services of key members of our executive management team and others in key management positions. For example, the services of Erica Rogers, our Chief Executive Officer, and Lucas Buchanan, our Chief Financial and Chief Operating Officer, are essential to driving adoption of our products, executing on our corporate strategy and ensuring the continued operations and integrity of financial reporting within our company. In addition, the services of Andrew Davis, our Chief Commercial Officer, are critical to driving the growth in sales of our products. Any of our employees may terminate their employment with us at any time. We do not currently maintain key person life insurance policies on any of our employees. If we lose one or more key employees, we may experience difficulties in competing effectively, developing our technologies and implementing our business strategy.

In addition, our research and development programs, and sales efforts depend on our ability to attract and retain highly skilled engineers and sales professionals. We may not be able to attract or retain qualified engineers and sales professionals in the future due to the competition for qualified personnel. We have from time to time experienced, and we expect to continue to experience, difficulty in hiring and retaining employees with appropriate qualifications. Many of the companies with which we compete for experienced personnel have greater resources than we do. When we hire employees from competitors or other companies, their former employers have previously and may in the future attempt to assert that these employees or we have breached legal obligations, which may result in a diversion of our time and resources and, potentially, damages. In addition, job candidates and existing employees, particularly in the San Francisco Bay Area, often consider the value of the stock awards they receive in connection with their employment along with salary, benefits and other factors. If the perceived benefits of our stock awards decline, either because we are a public company or for other reasons, it may harm our ability to recruit and retain highly skilled employees. If we fail to attract new personnel or fail to retain and motivate our current personnel, our business and future growth prospects would be harmed.

The use, misuse or off-label use of our products may result in injuries that lead to product liability suits, which could be costly to our business.

The ENROUTE stent has been approved by the FDA for the treatment of high surgical risk patients who require carotid revascularization and meet certain treatment parameters. If physicians expand the patient population in which they elect to use our products that is outside of the intended use approved by the FDA, then the use, misuse, or off-label use of our products may result in outcomes and adverse events including stroke, myocardial infarction and death, potentially leading to product liability claims. Our products are not indicated for use in all patients with carotid artery disease, and therefore cannot be marketed or advertised in the United States for certain uses without additional approvals or clearances from the FDA. However, we cannot prevent a physician from using our products for off-label applications or

using components or products that are not our products when performing TCAR. In addition, we cannot guarantee that physicians are trained by us or their peers prior to utilizing our products. Complications resulting from the use of our products off-label or use by physicians who have not been trained appropriately, or at all, may expose us to product liability claims and harm our reputation. Moreover, if the FDA determines that our promotional materials or physician training, including our paid consultants’ educational materials, constitutes promotion of an off-label use, it could request that we modify our training or promotional materials or subject us to enforcement action, including warning letters, untitled letters, fines, penalties, or seizures. If we are found to have promoted such off-label uses, we may become subject to significant liability. The federal government has levied large civil and criminal fines and/or other penalties against companies for alleged improper promotion and has investigated, prosecuted, and/or enjoined several companies from engaging in off-label promotion.

In addition, if our products are defectively designed, manufactured or labeled, contain defective components or are misused, we may become subject to costly litigation initiated by physicians, hospitals or patients. Product liability claims are especially prevalent in the medical device industry and could harm our reputation, divert management’s attention from our core business, be expensive to defend and may result in sizable damage awards against us. Although we maintain product liability insurance, we may not have sufficient insurance coverage for future product liability claims. We may not be able to obtain insurance in amounts or scope sufficient to provide us with adequate coverage against all potential liabilities. Any product liability claims brought against us, with or without merit, could increase our product liability insurance rates or prevent us from securing continuing coverage, harm our reputation, significantly increase our expenses, and reduce product sales. Product liability claims could cause us to incur significant legal fees and deductibles and claims in excess of our insurance coverage would be paid out of cash reserves, harming our financial condition and operating results.

If we are unable to manage the anticipated growth of our business, our future revenue and operating results may be harmed.

Any growth that we experience in the future will require us to expand our sales, general and administrative personnel, manufacturing and distribution operations, and facilities and information technology infrastructure. In addition to the need to scale our organization, future growth will impose significant added responsibilities on management, including the need to identify, recruit, train and integrate additional employees. Rapid expansion in personnel could mean that less experienced people manufacture, market and sell our products, which could result in inefficiencies and unanticipated costs, reduced quality and disruptions to our operations. In addition, rapid and significant growth may strain our administrative and operational infrastructure. Our ability to manage our business and growth will require us to continue to improve our operational, financial and management controls, reporting systems and procedures. If we are unable to manage our growth effectively, it may be difficult for us to execute our business strategy and our business could be harmed.

As demand for our products or any of our future products increases, we will need to continue to scale our capacity, expand customer service, billing and systems processes and enhance our internal quality assurance program. We cannot assure you that any increases in scale, related improvements and quality assurance will be successfully implemented or that appropriate personnel will be available to facilitate the growth of our business. Failure to implement necessary procedures, transition to new processes or hire the necessary personnel could result in higher costs or inability to meet increased demand. If we encounter difficulty meeting market demand, quality standards or physician expectations, our reputation could be harmed and our business could suffer.

Due to our recent growth in our business, we have leased additional space to provide offices, manufacturing and distribution operations and facilities for the employees we expect to hire in Plymouth, Minnesota and are also considering additional leased facilities in the San Francisco Bay Area. There is competition for office, shipping and warehousing space in the San Francisco Bay area and elsewhere and we can provide no assurance that we will find additional space or that such space will be on reasonable terms. If we are unable to obtain additional space or support on commercially reasonable terms our costs may go up or our business operations may be adversely affected.

We may need substantial additional funding and may not be able to raise capital when needed, which could force us to delay, reduce or eliminate our product development programs and commercialization efforts.

We believe that our cash and cash equivalents and investments and expected revenue will be sufficient to meet our capital requirements and fund our operations for at least the next 12 months. However, we have based these estimates on assumptions that may prove to be incorrect, and we could spend our available financial resources much faster than we currently expect. Our future funding requirements will depend on many factors, including:

•The degree and rate of market acceptance of TCAR and our products;

•Whether we acquire third-party companies, products or technologies;

•Restructuring, refinancing or repayment of debt;

•The scope and timing of investment in our sales force, marketing initiatives and physician training programs;

•The scope, rate of progress and cost of our research and development activities, current or future clinical studies and additional regulatory clearances or approvals;

•The scope and timing of investment in acute ischemic stroke and other neurovascular and cardiac products we develop;

•The costs associated with any future product recall that may occur;

•The costs of attaining, defending and enforcing our intellectual property rights;

•The impact of COVID-19, including new variants, on our business and operations;

•The emergence of competing technologies or other adverse market developments; and

•The rate at which we expand internationally.

We may seek to raise additional capital through equity offerings or debt financings and such additional financing may not be available to us on acceptable terms, or at all. In addition, any additional equity or debt financing that we raise may contain terms that are not favorable to us or our stockholders. For example, if we raise funds by issuing equity or equity-linked securities, the issuance of such securities could result in dilution to our stockholders. Any equity securities issued also may provide for rights, preferences or privileges senior to those of holders of our common stock. In addition, the issuance of additional equity securities by us, or the possibility of such issuance, may cause the market price of our common stock to decline.

In addition, the terms of debt securities issued or borrowings could impose significant restrictions on our operations including restrictive covenants, such as limitations on our ability to, among other things, dispose of assets, effect certain mergers, incur debt, grant liens, pay dividends and distributions on capital stock, make investments and acquisitions, and enter into transactions with affiliates, and other operating restrictions that could adversely affect our ability to conduct our business.

In the event that we enter into collaborations or licensing arrangements to raise capital, we may be required to accept unfavorable terms, such as relinquishment or licensing of certain technologies or products that we otherwise would seek to develop or commercialize ourselves, or reserve for future potential arrangements when we might otherwise be able to achieve more favorable terms. In addition, we may be forced to work with a partner on one or more of our products or market development programs, which could lower the economic value of those programs to us.

If we are unable to obtain adequate financing on terms satisfactory to us when we require it, we may terminate or delay the development of one or more of our products, delay clinical trials necessary to market our products, or delay establishment of sales and marketing capabilities or other activities necessary to commercialize our products. If this were to occur, our ability to grow and support our business and to respond to market challenges could be significantly limited, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

As international expansion of our business occurs, it will expose us to market, regulatory, political, operational, financial, legal and economic risks associated with doing business outside of the United States.

Our long-term strategy is to increase our international presence, including but not limited to securing regulatory approvals in Japan and China. We currently have the right to affix the CE Mark to our products, allowing us to commercialize in Europe in the future if we choose to do so. This strategy may include establishing and maintaining physician outreach and education capabilities outside of the United States and expanding our relationships with international distributors, providers and payers. Doing business internationally involves a number of risks, including:

•Difficulties in staffing and managing our international operations;

•Multiple, conflicting and changing laws and regulations such as tax laws, privacy laws, export and import restrictions, employment laws, regulatory requirements and other governmental approvals, permits and licenses;

•Reduced or varied protection for intellectual property rights in some countries;

•Obtaining regulatory clearance where required for our products in various countries;

•Requirements to maintain data and the processing of that data on servers located within such countries;

•Complexities associated with managing multiple payer reimbursement regimes, government payers or patient self-pay systems;

•Difficulties in adequately training and managing international distributors;

•Limits on our ability to penetrate international markets if we are required to manufacture our products locally;

•Financial risks, such as longer payment cycles, difficulty collecting accounts receivable, foreign tax laws and complexities of foreign value-added tax systems, the effect of local and regional financial pressures on demand and payment for our products and exposure to foreign currency exchange rate fluctuations;

•Restrictions on the site-of-service for use of our products and the economics related thereto for physicians, providers and payers;

•Natural disasters, political and economic instability, including wars, terrorism, political unrest, outbreak of disease, boycotts, curtailment of trade and other market restrictions; and

•Regulatory and compliance risks that relate to maintaining accurate information and control over activities subject to regulation under the United States Foreign Corrupt Practices Act of 1977, or FCPA, U.K. Bribery Act of 2010 and comparable laws and regulations in other countries.

Any of these factors could significantly harm our future international expansion and operations and, consequently, have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Additionally, pursuant to the terms of our existing intellectual property license and supply agreement with Cordis, there are certain restrictions on our ability to sell the ENROUTE stent through select direct competitors of Cordis Corporation. If we are unable to locate international distributors that are not select direct competitors to Cordis Corporation, to market and sell our ENROUTE stent, our ability to expand our business internationally may be harmed, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

We have a significant amount of debt, which may affect our ability to operate our business and secure additional financing in the future.

As of December 31, 2021, we had an aggregate of approximately $49.0 million in principal outstanding under our Loan Agreement with Stifel Bank. We must make significant interest-only monthly payments under the Loan Agreement, which has diverted and will continue to divert resources from other activities. Our obligations under the Loan Agreement are collateralized by substantially all of our assets, excluding intellectual property, and we are subject to customary affirmative and negative covenants, including covenants limiting our ability and the ability of our subsidiaries to, among other things, dispose of assets, effect certain mergers, incur debt, grant liens, pay dividends and distributions on capital stock, make investments and acquisitions, and enter into transactions with affiliates, in each case subject to customary exceptions for a loan facility of this size and type. The covenants related to the Loan Agreement, as well as any future financing agreements into which we may enter, may restrict our ability to finance our operations and engage in, expand or otherwise pursue our business activities and strategies. While we have not previously breached and are not currently in breach of these or any other covenants contained in our Loan Agreement, there can be no guarantee that we will not breach these covenants in the future. Our ability to comply with these covenants may be affected by events beyond our control, and future breaches of any of these covenants could result in a default under the Loan Agreement. If not waived, future defaults could cause all of the outstanding indebtedness under the Loan Agreement to become immediately due and payable, termination of commitments to extend further credit, a 5% increase in the applicable rate of interest and the exercise by the lender of other rights and remedies provided for under the Loan Agreement. If we do not have or are unable to generate sufficient cash available to repay our debt obligations when they become due and payable, either upon maturity or in the event of a default, our assets could be foreclosed upon and we may not be able to obtain additional debt or equity financing on favorable terms, if at all, which may negatively impact our ability to operate and continue our business as a going concern.

We may acquire other companies or technologies, or enter into license agreements, distribution arrangements or strategic partnerships, which could fail to result in a commercial product or generate sales, divert our management’s attention, result in additional dilution to our stockholders and otherwise disrupt our operations and harm our operating results.

Although we currently have no agreements or commitments to complete any such transactions, we may in the future seek to acquire, license or invest in businesses, products or technologies that we believe could complement or expand our portfolio, enhance our technical capabilities or otherwise offer growth opportunities. We could also seek to enter into distribution arrangements or strategic partnerships with third parties that we believe could increase our revenue or offer other commercial benefits. However, we cannot assure you that we would be able to successfully complete any acquisition, license agreement or distribution agreement we choose to pursue, or that we would be able to successfully integrate any business or product or technology in a cost-effective and non-disruptive manner. Similarly, we cannot guarantee that we would derive benefits from any distribution arrangement or other strategic partnership. The pursuit of potential acquisition, license or partnering opportunities may divert the attention of management and cause us to incur various costs and expenses in identifying, investigating and pursuing suitable transactions, whether or not they are consummated. We may not be able to identify desirable acquisition targets or strategic partners, or be successful in entering into an agreement with any particular target or partner, or obtain the expected benefits of any acquisition, license, investment or other strategic partnership arrangement.

To date, the growth of our operations has been largely organic, and we have limited experience in acquiring other businesses or technologies. We may not be able to successfully integrate any acquired personnel, operations and technologies, or effectively manage the combined business following an acquisition. Acquisitions could also result in dilutive issuances of equity securities, the use of our available cash, or the incurrence of debt, which could harm our operating results. In addition, if an acquired business, product or technology fails to meet our expectations, our operating results, business and financial condition may suffer.

Our ability to utilize our net operating loss carryforwards may be limited.

As of December 31, 2021, we had U.S. federal and state net operating loss carryforwards, or NOLs, of $301.3 million and $254.5 million, respectively. Our U.S. federal NOLs arising in tax years ending on or before December 31, 2017 are subject to expiration and will begin to expire in 2027 (U.S. federal NOLs arising in tax years ending after December 31, 2017 are not subject to expiration) and our state NOLs will begin to expire in 2028. We may use these NOLs to offset taxable income for U.S. federal and state income tax purposes. However, Section 382 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, or the Code, may limit the NOLs we may use in any year for U.S. federal income tax purposes in the event of certain changes in ownership of our company. An “ownership change” pursuant to Section 382 of the Code generally occurs if one or more stockholders or groups of stockholders who own at least 5% of a company’s stock increase their ownership by more than 50 percentage points over their lowest ownership percentage within a rolling three-year period. Similar rules may apply under state tax laws. Although we have not performed a formal study under Section 382 of the Code, we believe we may have experienced at least one “ownership change” in the past and may have experienced others. In addition, future issuances or sales of our stock, including certain transactions involving our stock that are outside of our control, could result in future “ownership changes.” “Ownership changes” that have occurred in the past or that may occur in the future could result in the imposition of an annual limit on the amount of pre-ownership change NOLs and other tax attributes we can use to reduce our taxable income or income tax liability, potentially increasing and accelerating our liability for income taxes, and also potentially causing those tax attributes to expire unused. Any limitation on using NOLs could, depending on the extent of such limitation and the NOLs previously used, result in our retaining less cash after payment of U.S. federal and state income taxes during any year in which we have taxable income, rather than losses, than we would be entitled to retain if such NOLs were available as an offset against such income for U.S. federal and state income tax reporting purposes, which could adversely impact our operating results. Furthermore, under the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017, although the treatment of U.S. federal NOLs arising in tax years beginning on or before December 31, 2017 has generally not changed, U.S. federal NOLs arising in tax years beginning after December 31, 2017 may only be used to offset 80% of our taxable income. This change may require us to pay U.S. federal income taxes in future years despite generating a loss for federal income tax purposes in prior years.

Security breaches, loss of data and other disruptions could compromise sensitive information related to our business or our customers or patients, or prevent us from accessing critical information and expose us to liability, which could adversely affect our business and our reputation.

In the ordinary course of our business, we may become exposed to, or collect and store sensitive data, including procedure-based information and legally-protected health information, credit card, and other financial information, insurance information, and other potentially personally identifiable information. We also store sensitive intellectual property and other proprietary business information. Although we take measures to protect sensitive information from unauthorized access or disclosure, our information technology, or IT, and infrastructure, and that of our other technology partners, may be vulnerable to cyber attacks by hackers or viruses or breached due to employee error, malfeasance or other disruptions. We rely extensively on IT systems, networks and services, including internet sites, data hosting and processing facilities and tools, physical security systems and other hardware, software and technical applications and platforms, some of which are managed, hosted, provided and/or used by third-parties or their vendors, to assist in

conducting our business. A significant breakdown, invasion, corruption, destruction or interruption of critical information technology systems or infrastructure, by our workforce, others with authorized access to our systems or unauthorized persons could negatively impact operations. The ever-increasing use and evolution of technology, including cloud-based computing, creates opportunities for the unintentional dissemination or intentional destruction of confidential information stored in our or our third-party providers' systems, portable media or storage devices. We could also experience a business interruption, theft of confidential information or reputational damage from industrial espionage attacks, malware or other cyber-attacks, which may compromise our system infrastructure or lead to data leakage, either internally or at our third-party providers. Although the aggregate impact on our operations and financial condition has not been material to date, we have been the target of events of this nature and expect them to continue as cybersecurity threats have been rapidly evolving in sophistication and becoming more prevalent in the industry. We are investing in protections and monitoring practices with respect to our data and IT to reduce these risks and continue to monitor our systems on an ongoing basis for any current or potential threats. There can be no assurance, however, that our efforts will prevent breakdowns or breaches to our or our third-party providers’ databases or systems that could adversely affect our business.

We could be adversely affected by violations of the FCPA and similar worldwide anti-bribery laws and any investigation, and the outcome of any investigation, by government agencies of possible violations by us of the FCPA could have a material adverse effect on our business.

The FCPA and similar worldwide anti-bribery laws prohibit companies and their intermediaries from corruptly providing any benefits to government officials for the purpose of obtaining or retaining business. We are in the process of further enhancing policies and procedures intended to help ensure compliance with these laws. In the future, we may operate in parts of the world that have experienced governmental corruption to some degree. Moreover, because of the significant role government entities play in the regulation of many foreign healthcare markets, we may be exposed to heightened FCPA and similar risks arising from our efforts to seek regulatory approval of and reimbursement for our products in such countries. We cannot assure you that our internal control policies and procedures will protect us from improper acts committed by our employees or agents. Violations of these laws, or allegations of such violations, would significantly disrupt our business and have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Risks Related to Our Intellectual Property

We may become a party to intellectual property litigation or administrative proceedings that could be costly and could interfere with our ability to sell and market our products.

The medical device industry has been characterized by extensive litigation regarding patents, trademarks, trade secrets, and other intellectual property rights, and companies in the industry have used intellectual property litigation to gain a competitive advantage. It is possible that U.S. and foreign patents and pending patent applications or trademarks controlled by third parties may be alleged to cover our products, or that we may be accused of misappropriating third parties’ trade secrets. Additionally, our products include components that we purchase from vendors, and may include design components that are outside of our direct control. Our competitors, many of which have substantially greater resources and have made substantial investments in patent portfolios, trade secrets, trademarks, and competing technologies, may have applied for or obtained, or may in the future apply for or obtain, patents or trademarks that will prevent, limit or otherwise interfere with our ability to make, use, sell and/or export our products or to use product names. Moreover, in recent years, individuals and groups that are non-practicing entities have purchased patents and other intellectual property assets for the purpose of making claims of infringement in order to extract settlements. From time to time, we may receive threatening letters, notices or “invitations to license,” or may be the subject of claims that our products and business operations infringe or violate the intellectual property rights of others. The defense of these matters can be time consuming, costly to defend in litigation, divert management’s attention and resources, damage our reputation and brand and cause us to incur significant expenses or make substantial payments. Vendors from whom we purchase hardware or software may not indemnify us in the event that such hardware or software is accused of infringing a third-party’s patent or trademark or of misappropriating a third-party’s trade secret.

Since some patent applications are confidential for a period of time after filing, we cannot be certain that we were the first to file any patent application related to our products. Competitors may also contest our patents, if issued, by showing the patent examiner that the invention was not novel or was obvious. In litigation, a competitor could claim that our patents, if issued, are not valid for a number of reasons. If a court agrees, we would lose our rights to those challenged patents.

In addition, we may in the future be subject to claims by our former employees or consultants asserting an ownership right in our patents or patent applications, as a result of the work they performed on our behalf. Although we generally require all of our employees and consultants and any other partners or collaborators who have access to our proprietary know-how, information or technology to assign or grant similar rights to their inventions to us, we cannot be certain that we

have executed such agreements with all parties who may have contributed to our intellectual property, nor can we be certain that our agreements with such parties will be upheld in the face of a potential challenge, or that they will not be breached, for which we may not have an adequate remedy.

Further, if patents, trademarks, or trade secrets are successfully asserted against us, this may harm our business and result in injunctions preventing us from selling our products, license fees, damages and the payment of attorney fees and court costs. In addition, if we are found to willfully infringe third-party patents or trademarks or to have misappropriated trade secrets, we could be required to pay treble damages in addition to other penalties. Although patent, trademark, trade secret, and other intellectual property disputes in the medical device area have often been settled through licensing or similar arrangements, costs associated with such arrangements may be substantial and could include ongoing royalties. We may be unable to obtain necessary licenses on satisfactory terms, if at all. If we do not obtain necessary licenses, we may not be able to redesign our products to avoid infringement.

Similarly, interference or derivation proceedings provoked by third parties or brought by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, or USPTO, may be necessary to determine priority with respect to our patents, patent applications, trademarks or trademark applications. We may also become involved in other proceedings, such as reexamination, inter parties review, derivation or opposition proceedings before the USPTO or other jurisdictional body relating to our intellectual property rights or the intellectual property rights of others. Adverse determinations in a judicial or administrative proceeding or failure to obtain necessary licenses could prevent us from manufacturing our products or using product names, which would have a significant adverse impact on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Additionally, we may file lawsuits or initiate other proceedings to protect or enforce our patents, trademarks or other intellectual property rights, which could be expensive, time consuming and unsuccessful. Competitors may infringe our issued patents, trademarks or other intellectual property. To counter infringement or unauthorized use, we may be required to file infringement claims, which can be expensive and time-consuming. Any claims we assert against perceived infringers could provoke these parties to assert counterclaims against us alleging that we infringe their intellectual property. In addition, in a patent infringement proceeding, a court may decide that a patent of ours is invalid or unenforceable, in whole or in part, construe the patent’s claims narrowly or refuse to stop the other party from using the technology at issue on the grounds that our patents do not cover the technology in question. Furthermore, even if our patents are found to be valid and infringed, a court may refuse to grant injunctive relief against the infringer and instead grant us monetary damages and/or ongoing royalties. Such monetary compensation may be insufficient to adequately offset the damage to our business caused by the infringer’s competition in the market. An adverse result in any litigation proceeding could put one or more of our patents at risk of being invalidated or interpreted narrowly, which could adversely affect our competitive business position, financial condition and results of operations.

Our success will depend on our ability to obtain, maintain and protect our intellectual property rights.

In order to remain competitive, we must develop, maintain and protect the proprietary aspects of our brands, technologies and data. We rely on a combination of contractual provisions, confidentiality procedures and patent, copyright, trademark, trade secret and other intellectual property laws to protect the proprietary aspects of our brands, technologies and data. These legal measures afford only limited protection, and competitors or others may gain access to or use our intellectual property and proprietary information. Our success will depend, in part, on preserving our trade secrets, maintaining the security of our data and know-how and obtaining and maintaining other intellectual property rights. We may not be able to obtain or maintain intellectual property or other proprietary rights necessary to our business or in a form that provides us with a competitive advantage. In addition, our trade secrets, data and know-how could be subject to unauthorized use, misappropriation, or disclosure to unauthorized parties, despite our efforts to enter into confidentiality agreements with our employees, consultants, clients and other vendors who have access to such information, and could otherwise become known or be independently discovered by third parties. Our intellectual property, including trademarks, could be challenged, invalidated, infringed, and circumvented by third parties, and our trademarks could also be diluted, declared generic or found to be infringing on other marks. If any of the foregoing occurs, we could be forced to re-brand our products, resulting in loss of brand recognition and requiring us to devote resources to advertising and marketing new brands, and suffer other competitive harm. Third parties may also adopt trademarks similar to ours, which could harm our brand identity and lead to market confusion. Failure to obtain and maintain intellectual property rights necessary to our business and failure to protect, monitor and control the use of our intellectual property rights could negatively impact our ability to compete and cause us to incur significant expenses. The intellectual property laws and other statutory and contractual arrangements in the United States and other jurisdictions we depend upon may not provide sufficient protection in the future to prevent the infringement, use, violation or misappropriation of our trademarks, data, technology and other intellectual property and services, and may not provide an adequate remedy if our intellectual property rights are infringed, misappropriated or otherwise violated.

We rely, in part, on our ability to obtain, maintain, expand, enforce, and defend the scope of our intellectual property portfolio or other proprietary rights, including the amount and timing of any payments we may be required to make in connection with the licensing, filing, defense and enforcement of any patents or other intellectual property rights. The process of applying for and obtaining a patent is expensive, time consuming and complex, and we may not be able to file, prosecute, maintain, enforce or license all necessary or desirable patent applications at a reasonable cost, in a timely manner, or in all jurisdictions where protection may be commercially advantageous, or we may not be able to protect our proprietary rights at all. Despite our efforts to protect our proprietary rights, unauthorized parties may be able to obtain and use information that we regard as proprietary. In addition, the issuance of a patent does not ensure that it is valid or enforceable, so even if we obtain patents, they may not be valid or enforceable against third parties. Our patent applications may not result in issued patents and our patents may not be sufficiently broad to protect our technology. Moreover, even if we are able to obtain patent protection, such patent protection may be of insufficient scope to achieve our business objectives. Issued patents may be challenged, narrowed, invalidated or circumvented. Decisions by courts and governmental patent agencies may introduce uncertainty in the enforceability or scope of patents owned by or licensed to us. Furthermore, the issuance of a patent does not give us the right to practice the patented invention. Third parties may have blocking patents that could prevent us from marketing our own products and practicing our own technology. Alternatively, third parties may seek approval to market their own products similar to or otherwise competitive with our products. In these circumstances, we may need to defend and/or assert our patents, including by filing lawsuits alleging patent infringement. In any of these types of proceedings, a court or agency with jurisdiction may find our patents invalid, unenforceable or not infringed; competitors may then be able to market products and use manufacturing and analytical processes that are substantially similar to ours. Even if we have valid and enforceable patents, these patents still may not provide protection against competing products or processes sufficient to achieve our business objectives.

If we are unable to protect the confidentiality of our other proprietary information, our business and competitive position may be harmed.

In addition to patent protection, we also rely on other proprietary rights, including protection of trade secrets, and other proprietary information that is not patentable or that we elect not to patent. However, trade secrets can be difficult to protect and some courts are less willing or unwilling to protect trade secrets. To maintain the confidentiality of our trade secrets and proprietary information, we rely heavily on confidentiality provisions that we have in contracts with our employees, consultants, collaborators and others upon the commencement of their relationship with us. We cannot guarantee that we have entered into such agreements with each party that may have or have had access to our trade secrets or proprietary technology and processes. We may not be able to prevent the unauthorized disclosure or use of our technical knowledge or other trade secrets by such third parties, despite the existence generally of these confidentiality restrictions. These contracts may not provide meaningful protection for our trade secrets, know-how, or other proprietary information in the event of any unauthorized use, misappropriation, or disclosure of such trade secrets, know-how, or other proprietary information. There can be no assurance that such third parties will not breach their agreements with us, that we will have adequate remedies for any breach, or that our trade secrets will not otherwise become known or independently developed by competitors. Despite the protections we do place on our intellectual property or other proprietary rights, monitoring unauthorized use and disclosure of our intellectual property is difficult, and we do not know whether the steps we have taken to protect our intellectual property or other proprietary rights will be adequate. In addition, the laws of many foreign countries may not protect our intellectual property or other proprietary rights to the same extent as the laws of the United States. Consequently, we may be unable to prevent our proprietary technology from being exploited abroad, which could affect our ability to expand to international markets or require costly efforts to protect our technology.

To the extent our intellectual property or other proprietary information protection is incomplete, we are exposed to a greater risk of direct competition. A third party could, without authorization, copy or otherwise obtain and use our products or technology, or develop similar technology. Our competitors could purchase our products and attempt to replicate some or all of the competitive advantages we derive from our development efforts or design around our protected technology. Our failure to secure, protect and enforce our intellectual property rights could substantially harm the value of our products, brand and business. The theft or unauthorized use or publication of our trade secrets and other confidential business information could reduce the differentiation of our products and harm our business, the value of our investment in research and development or acquisitions could be reduced and third parties might make claims against us related to losses of their confidential or proprietary information. Any of the foregoing could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Further, it is possible that others will independently develop the same or similar technology or otherwise obtain access to our unpatented technology, and in such cases we could not assert any trade secret rights against such parties. Costly and time consuming litigation could be necessary to enforce and determine the scope of our trade secret rights and related confidentiality and nondisclosure provisions. If we fail to obtain or maintain trade secret protection, or if our competitors obtain our trade secrets or independently develop technology similar to ours or competing technologies, our

competitive market position could be materially and adversely affected. In addition, some courts are less willing or unwilling to protect trade secrets and agreement terms that address non-competition are difficult to enforce in many jurisdictions and might not be enforceable in certain cases.

We also seek to preserve the integrity and confidentiality of our data and other confidential information by maintaining physical security of our premises and physical and electronic security of our information technology systems. While we have confidence in these individuals, organizations and systems, agreements or security measures may be breached and detecting the disclosure or misappropriation of confidential information and enforcing a claim that a party illegally disclosed or misappropriated confidential information is difficult, expensive and time-consuming, and the outcome is unpredictable. Further, we may not be able to obtain adequate remedies for any breach.

Obtaining and maintaining patent protection depends on compliance with various procedural, document submission, fee payment and other requirements imposed by governmental patent agencies, and our patent protection could be reduced or eliminated for non-compliance with these requirements.

The USPTO and various foreign governmental patent agencies require compliance with a number of procedural, documentary, fee payment and other similar provisions during the patent application process. In addition, periodic maintenance fees on issued patents often must be paid to the USPTO and foreign patent agencies over the lifetime of the patent. While an unintentional lapse can in many cases be cured by payment of a late fee or by other means in accordance with the applicable rules, there are situations in which noncompliance can result in abandonment or lapse of the patent or patent application, resulting in partial or complete loss of patent rights in the relevant jurisdiction. Non-compliance events that could result in abandonment or lapse of a patent or patent application include, but are not limited to, failure to respond to official actions within prescribed time limits, non-payment of fees and failure to properly legalize and submit formal documents. If we fail to maintain the patents and patent applications covering our products, we may not be able to stop a competitor from marketing products that are the same as or similar to our products, which would have a material adverse effect on our business.

We may not be able to protect our intellectual property rights throughout the world.

A company may attempt to commercialize competing products utilizing our proprietary design, trademarks or tradenames in foreign countries where we do not have sufficient patent protection and where legal recourse may be limited. This may have a significant commercial impact on our foreign business operations.

Filing, prosecuting and defending patents or trademarks on our current and future products in all countries throughout the world would be prohibitively expensive. The requirements for patentability and trademarking may differ in certain countries, particularly developing countries. The laws of some foreign countries do not protect intellectual property rights to the same extent as laws in the United States. Consequently, we may not be able to prevent third parties from utilizing our inventions and trademarks in all countries outside the United States. Competitors may use our technologies or trademarks in jurisdictions where we have not obtained patent or trademark protection to develop or market their own products and further, may export otherwise infringing products to territories where we have patent and trademark protection, but enforcement on infringing activities is inadequate. These products or trademarks may compete with our products or trademarks, and our patents, trademarks or other intellectual property rights may not be effective or sufficient to prevent them from competing.

Many companies have encountered significant problems in protecting and defending intellectual property rights in foreign jurisdictions. The legal systems of certain countries, particularly certain developing countries, do not favor the enforcement of patents, trademarks and other intellectual property protection, which could make it difficult for us to stop the infringement of our patents and trademarks or marketing of competing products in violation of our proprietary rights generally. Proceedings to enforce our patent and trademarks rights in foreign jurisdictions could result in substantial costs and divert our efforts and attention from other aspects of our business, could put our patents and trademarks at risk of being invalidated or interpreted narrowly and our patent or trademark applications at risk, and could provoke third parties to assert claims against us. We may not prevail in any lawsuits that we initiate and the damages or other remedies awarded, if any, may not be commercially meaningful. In addition, certain countries in Europe and certain developing countries, including India and China, have compulsory licensing laws under which a patent owner may be compelled to grant licenses to third parties. In those countries, we may have limited remedies if our patents are infringed or if we are compelled to grant a license to our patents to a third party, which could materially diminish the value of those patents. This could limit our potential revenue opportunities. Accordingly, our efforts to enforce our intellectual property rights around the world may be inadequate to obtain a significant commercial advantage from the intellectual property that we own or license. Finally, our ability to protect and enforce our intellectual property rights may be adversely affected by unforeseen changes in foreign intellectual property laws.

We may be subject to claims that we or our employees have misappropriated the intellectual property of a third party, including trade secrets or know-how, or are in breach of non-competition or non-solicitation agreements with our competitors and third parties may claim an ownership interest in intellectual property we regard as our own.

Many of our employees and consultants were previously employed at or engaged by other medical device, biotechnology or pharmaceutical companies, including our competitors or potential competitors. Some of these employees, consultants and contractors, may have executed proprietary rights, non-disclosure and non-competition agreements in connection with such previous employment. Although we try to ensure that our employees and consultants do not use the intellectual property, proprietary information, know-how or trade secrets of others in their work for us, we may be subject to claims that we or these individuals have, inadvertently or otherwise, misappropriated the intellectual property or disclosed the alleged trade secrets or other proprietary information, of these former employers or competitors.

Additionally, we may be subject to claims from third parties challenging our ownership interest in intellectual property we regard as our own, based on claims that our employees or consultants have breached an obligation to assign inventions to another employer, to a former employer, or to another person or entity. Litigation may be necessary to defend against any other claims, and it may be necessary or we may desire to enter into a license to settle any such claim; however, there can be no assurance that we would be able to obtain a license on commercially reasonable terms, if at all. If our defense to those claims fails, in addition to paying monetary damages, a court could prohibit us from using technologies or features that are essential to our products, if such technologies or features are found to incorporate or be derived from the trade secrets or other proprietary information of the former employers.

An inability to incorporate technologies or features that are important or essential to our products could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations, and may prevent us from selling our products. In addition, we may lose valuable intellectual property rights or personnel. Even if we are successful in defending against these claims, litigation could result in substantial costs and could be a distraction to management. Any litigation or the threat thereof may adversely affect our ability to hire employees or contract with independent sales representatives. A loss of key personnel or their work product could hamper or prevent our ability to commercialize our products, which could have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Changes in patent law could diminish the value of patents in general, thereby impairing our ability to protect our existing and future products.

Patent reform legislation could increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of patent applications and the enforcement or defense of issued patents. In 2011, the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act, or the Leahy-Smith Act, was signed into law. The Leahy-Smith Act includes a number of significant changes to U.S. patent law. These include provisions that affect the way patent applications are prosecuted and also may affect patent litigation. These also include provisions that switched the United States from a “first-to-invent” system to a “first-to-file” system, allow third-party submission of prior art to the USPTO during patent prosecution and set forth additional procedures to attack the validity of a patent by the USPTO administered post grant proceedings. Under a first-to-file system, assuming the other requirements for patentability are met, the first inventor to file a patent application generally will be entitled to the patent on an invention regardless of whether another inventor had made the invention earlier. The USPTO developed new regulations and procedures to govern administration of the Leahy-Smith Act, and many of the substantive changes to patent law associated with the Leahy-Smith Act, and in particular, the first to file provisions, only became effective in 2013. Accordingly, it is not clear what, if any, impact the Leahy-Smith Act will have on the operation of our business. The Leahy-Smith Act and its implementation could increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of our patent applications and the enforcement or defense of our issued patents, all of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

In addition, patent reform legislation may pass in the future that could lead to additional uncertainties and increased costs surrounding the prosecution, enforcement and defense of our patents and applications. Furthermore, the U.S. Supreme Court and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit have made, and will likely continue to make, changes in how the patent laws of the United States are interpreted. Similarly, foreign courts have made, and will likely continue to make, changes in how the patent laws in their respective jurisdictions are interpreted. We cannot predict future changes in the interpretation of patent laws or changes to patent laws that might be enacted into law by U.S. and foreign legislative bodies. Those changes may materially affect our patents or patent applications and our ability to obtain additional patent protection in the future.

The failure of third parties to meet their contractual, regulatory, and other obligations could adversely affect our business.

We rely on suppliers, vendors, outsourcing partners, consultants, alliance partners and other third parties to research, develop, manufacture and commercialize our products and manage certain parts of our business. Using these third parties poses a number of risks, such as: (i) they may not perform to our standards or legal requirements; (ii) they may not produce reliable results; (iii) they may not perform in a timely manner; (iv) they may not maintain confidentiality of our proprietary information; (v) disputes may arise with respect to ownership of rights to technology developed with our partners; and (vi) disagreements could cause delays in, or termination of, the research, development or commercialization of our products or result in litigation or arbitration. Moreover, some third parties are located in markets subject to political and social risk, corruption, infrastructure problems and natural disasters, in addition to country-specific privacy and data security risk given current legal and regulatory environments. Failure of third parties to meet their contractual, regulatory, and other obligations may materially affect our business.

If our trademarks and tradenames are not adequately protected, then we may not be able to build name recognition in our markets and our business may be adversely affected.

We rely on trademarks, service marks, tradenames and brand names to distinguish our products from the products of our competitors, and have registered or applied to register these trademarks. We cannot assure you that our trademark applications will be approved. During trademark registration proceedings, we may receive rejections. Although we are given an opportunity to respond to those rejections, we may be unable to overcome such rejections. In addition, in proceedings before the USPTO and comparable agencies in many foreign jurisdictions, third parties are given an opportunity to oppose pending trademark applications and to seek to cancel registered trademarks. Opposition or cancellation proceedings may be filed against our trademarks, and our trademarks may not survive such proceedings. In the event that our trademarks are successfully challenged, we could be forced to rebrand our products, which could result in loss of brand recognition and could require us to devote resources towards advertising and marketing new brands and managing through regulatory implications such as relabeling. At times, competitors may adopt trade names or trademarks similar to ours, thereby impeding our ability to build brand identity and possibly leading to market confusion. Certain of our current or future trademarks may become so well known by the public that their use becomes generic and they lose trademark protection. Over the long term, if we are unable to establish name recognition based on our trademarks and trade names, then we may not be able to compete effectively and our business, financial condition and results of operations may be adversely affected.

Risks Related to Government Regulation

Healthcare policy changes, including recently enacted legislation reforming the U.S. healthcare system, could harm our business, financial condition and results of operations.

In the United States, there have been and continue to be a number of legislative initiatives to contain healthcare costs. In March 2010, the Affordable Care Act was enacted in the United States, which made a number of substantial changes in the way healthcare is financed by both governmental and private insurers. Among other ways in which it may affect our business, the Affordable Care Act:

•Established a new Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute to oversee and identify priorities in comparative clinical effectiveness research in an effort to coordinate and develop such research;

•Implemented payment system reforms including a national pilot program on payment bundling to encourage hospitals, physicians and other providers to improve the coordination, quality and efficiency of certain healthcare services through bundled payment models; and

•Expanded the eligibility criteria for Medicaid programs.

We do not yet know the full impact that the Affordable Care Act will have on our business. The taxes imposed by the Affordable Care Act and the expansion in the government’s role in the U.S. healthcare industry may result in decreased sale of our products and, lower reimbursement by payers for our products, all of which may have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. The Biden Administration and the U.S. Congress may take further action regarding the Affordable Care Act, including, but not limited to, repeal or replacement. Most recently, the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 was enacted, which, among other things, removes penalties for not complying with the individual mandate to carry health insurance. Additionally, all or a portion of the Affordable Care Act and related subsequent legislation may be modified, repealed or otherwise invalidated through judicial challenge, which could result in lower numbers of insured individuals, reduced coverage for insured individuals and adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

In addition, other legislative changes have been proposed and adopted since the Affordable Care Act was enacted. On August 2, 2011, the Budget Control Act of 2011 was signed into law, which, among other things, reduced Medicare

payments to providers by 2% per fiscal year, effective on April 1, 2013 and, due to subsequent legislative amendments to the statute, will remain in effect through 2029 unless additional Congressional action is taken. On January 2, 2013, the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012 was signed into law, which, among other things, reduced Medicare payments to several providers, including hospitals, and increased the statute of limitations period for the government to recover overpayments to providers from three to five years. The Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act of 2015, or MACRA, enacted on April 16, 2015, repealed the formula by which Medicare made annual payment adjustments to physicians and replaced the former formula with fixed annual updates and a new system of incentive payments which began in 2019 that are based on various performance measures and physicians’ participation in alternative payment models such as accountable care organizations. It is unclear what effect new quality and payment programs, such as MACRA, may have on our business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.

We expect additional state and federal healthcare policies and reform measures to be adopted in the future.  Any of these could make it more difficult and costly for us to obtain regulatory clearances or approvals for our products or to manufacture, market or distribute our products after clearance or approval is obtained.  They could result in reduced demand for our products or result in additional pricing pressure.  Any such reforms could have a material adverse effect on our industry generally and on our customers.  Any changes of, or uncertainty with respect to, future coverage or reimbursement rates could affect demand for our products, which in turn could impact our ability to successfully commercialize our products and could have an adverse material effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.  Changes and reforms in the European Union and other countries where we may decide to commercialize could have similar effects.

Changes in the CMS fee schedules may harm our revenue and operating results.

Government payers, such as Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, or CMS, as well as insurers, have increased their efforts to control the cost, utilization and delivery of healthcare services. From time to time, the U.S. Congress has considered and implemented changes in the CMS fee schedules in conjunction with budgetary legislation. Reductions of reimbursement by Medicare or Medicaid for procedures that use our products or changes in policy regarding coverage of these procedures, such as adding requirements for payment, or prior authorizations, may be implemented from time to time. Reductions in the reimbursement rates and changes in payment policies of other third-party payers may occur as well. Similar changes in the past have resulted in reduced payments for procedures that use medical device products as well as added costs and have added more complex regulatory and administrative requirements. Further changes in federal, state, local and third-party payer regulations or policies may have a material adverse impact on the demand for our products and on our business. Actions by agencies regulating insurance or changes in other laws, regulations, or policies may also have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

If we fail to comply with broad based healthcare and other governmental regulations, we could face substantial fines and penalties and our business, results of operations and financial condition could be adversely affected.

The products we offer are highly regulated, and there can be no assurance that the regulatory environment in which we operate will not change significantly and adversely in the future. Our arrangements with physicians, hospitals and medical centers will expose us to broadly applicable fraud and abuse and other laws and regulations that may restrict the financial arrangements and relationships through which we market, sell and distribute our products. Our employees, consultants, and commercial partners may engage in misconduct or other improper activities, including non-compliance with regulatory standards and requirements. Federal and state healthcare laws and regulations that may affect our ability to conduct business, include, without limitation:

•Federal and state laws and regulations regarding billing and claims payment applicable to TCAR and regulatory agencies enforcing those laws and regulations;

•FDA prohibitions against the advertisement, promotion and labeling of our products for off-label uses, or uses outside the specific indications approved by the FDA;

•The federal Anti-Kickback Statute, which broadly prohibits, among other things, any person from knowingly and willfully offering, soliciting, receiving or providing remuneration, directly or indirectly, in exchange for or to induce either the referral of an individual for, or the purchase, order or recommendation of, any good or service for which payment may be made under federal healthcare programs, such as the CMS programs. A person or entity does not need to have actual knowledge of the statute or specific intent to violate it to have committed a violation. Moreover, the government may assert that a claim including items or services resulting from a violation of the federal Anti-Kickback Statute constitutes a false or fraudulent claim for purposes of the federal civil False Claims Act. Violations of the federal Anti-Kickback Statute may result in civil monetary penalties per violation, plus up to

three times the remuneration involved. Civil penalties for such conduct can further be assessed under the federal False Claims Act. Violations can also result in criminal penalties, including criminal fines and imprisonment. Similarly, violations can result in mandatory exclusion from participation in government healthcare programs, including Medicare and Medicaid;

•The federal False Claims Act, which prohibits, among other things, individuals or entities from knowingly presenting, or causing to be presented, false claims, or knowingly using false statements, to obtain payment from the federal government. These laws can apply to manufacturers who provide inaccurate information on coverage, coding, and reimbursement of their products to persons who bill third-party payers. Private individuals can bring False Claims Act “qui tam” actions, on behalf of the government and such individuals, commonly known as “whistleblowers,” may share in amounts paid by the entity to the government in fines or settlement. When an entity is determined to have violated the federal civil False Claims Act, the government may impose civil fines and penalties for each false claim, plus treble damages, and exclude the entity from participation in Medicare, Medicaid and other federal healthcare programs;

•Federal criminal laws that prohibit executing a scheme to defraud any healthcare benefit program or making, or causing to be made, false statements relating to healthcare matters;

•The federal Civil Monetary Penalties Law, which prohibits, among other things, offering or transferring remuneration to a federal healthcare beneficiary that a person knows or should know is likely to influence the beneficiary’s decision to order or receive items or services reimbursable by the government from a particular provider or supplier;

•The FCPA, the U.K. Bribery Act of 2010, and other local anti-corruption laws that apply to our international activities;

•The federal Physician Payment Sunshine Act, or Open Payments, created under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended by the Health Care and Education Affordability Reconciliation Act, or Affordable Care Act, and its implementing regulations, which requires manufacturers of drugs, medical devices, biologicals and medical supplies for which payment is available under Medicare, Medicaid, or the Children’s Health Insurance Program to report annually to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, or HHS, information related to payments or other transfers of value made to licensed physicians, certain other healthcare professionals, and teaching hospitals, and requires applicable manufacturers and group purchasing organizations, to report annually ownership and investment interests held by physicians and their immediate family members. Additionally, on October 24, 2018, President Trump signed into law the “Substance Use-Disorder Prevention that Promoted Opioid Recovery and Treatment for Patients and Communities Act” which in part (under a provision entitled “Fighting the Opioid Epidemic with Sunshine”) extends the reporting and transparency requirements for physicians in the Physician Payments Sunshine Act to physician assistants, nurse practitioners, and other mid-level practitioners (with reporting requirements going into effect in 2022 for payments made in 2021). Applicable manufacturers are required to submit annual reports to CMS. Our failure to submit required information on time may result in civil monetary penalties with additional amounts for “knowing failures”, for all payments, transfers of value or ownership or investment interests that are not timely, accurately, and completely reported in an annual submission, and may result in liability under other federal laws or regulations;

•HIPAA, as amended by the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act, and its implementing regulations, which impose certain requirements relating to the privacy, security and transmission of individually identifiable health information; HIPAA also created criminal liability for knowingly and willfully falsifying or concealing a material fact or making a materially false statement in connection with the delivery of or payment for healthcare benefits, items or services. Failure to comply with the HIPAA privacy and security standards when applicable can result in civil monetary penalties, and, in certain circumstances, criminal penalties including fines and/or imprisonment. State attorneys general can also bring a civil action to enjoin a HIPAA violation or to obtain statutory damages on behalf of residents of his or her state; and

•Analogous state and foreign law equivalents of each of the above federal laws, such as anti-kickback and false claims laws which may apply to items or services reimbursed by any third-party payer, including commercial insurers or patients; state laws that require device companies to comply with the industry’s voluntary compliance guidelines and the applicable compliance guidance promulgated by the federal government or otherwise restrict payments that may be made to healthcare providers and other potential referral sources; state laws that require device manufacturers to report information related to payments and other transfers of value to physicians and other healthcare providers or marketing expenditures; consumer protection and unfair competition laws, which broadly regulate marketplace activities and activities that potentially harm customers, foreign and state laws, including the E.U. General Data Protection Regulation, or GDPR, governing the privacy and security of health

information in certain circumstances, many of which differ from each other in significant ways and may not have the same effect, thus complicating compliance efforts; and state laws related to insurance fraud in the case of claims involving private insurers.

Because of the breadth of these laws and the narrowness of available statutory and regulatory exemptions or safe harbors, it is possible that some of our activities, such as stock-option compensation paid to physicians, could be subject to challenge under one or more of such laws. Any action brought against us for violations of these laws or regulations, even successfully defended, could cause us to incur significant legal expenses and divert our management’s attention from the operation of our business. We may be subject to private “qui tam” actions brought by individual whistleblowers on behalf of the federal or state governments.

The growth of our business and sales organization and our planned expansion outside of the United States may increase the potential of violating these laws or our internal policies and procedures. The risk of our being found in violation of these or other laws and regulations is further increased by the fact that many have not been fully interpreted by the regulatory authorities or the courts, and their provisions are open to a variety of interpretations. Any action brought against us for violation of these or other laws or regulations, even if we successfully defend against it, could cause us to incur significant legal expenses and divert our management’s attention from the operation of our business. If our operations are found to be in violation of any of the federal, state and foreign laws described above or any other current or future fraud and abuse or other healthcare laws and regulations that apply to us, we may be subject to penalties, including significant criminal, civil, and administrative penalties, damages, fines, imprisonment, for individuals, exclusion from participation in government programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid, and we could be required to curtail or cease our operations. Any of the foregoing consequences could seriously harm our business and our financial results.

If we fail to obtain and maintain necessary regulatory clearances or approvals for our products, or if clearances or approvals for future products and indications are delayed or not issued, our commercial operations would be harmed.

Our products are subject to extensive regulation by the FDA in the United States and by regulatory agencies in other countries where we do business. Government regulations specific to medical devices are wide ranging and govern, among other things:

•Product design, development and manufacture;

•Laboratory, preclinical and clinical testing, labeling, packaging, storage and distribution;

•Premarketing clearance or approval;

•Record keeping;

•Product marketing, promotion and advertising, sales and distribution; and

•Post-marketing surveillance, including reporting of deaths or serious injuries and recalls and correction and removals.

Before a new medical device, including our recently FDA approved IDE for our feasibility study in acute ischemic stroke, Neuroprotection in Transcarotid Embolectomy (NITE-1), or a new intended use for an existing product, can be marketed in the United States, a company must first submit and receive either 510(k) clearance pursuant to Section 510(k) of the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act, or the FDCA, or approval of a premarket approval, or PMA, application from the FDA, unless an exemption applies.

In many cases, the process of obtaining PMA approval, which was required for the ENROUTE stent, is much more rigorous, costly, lengthy and uncertain than the 510(k) clearance process. In the 510(k) clearance process, the FDA must determine that a proposed device is “substantially equivalent” to a device legally on the market, known as a “predicate” device, in order to clear the proposed device for marketing. To be “substantially equivalent,” the proposed device must have the same intended use as the predicate device, and either have the same technological characteristics as the predicate device or have different technological characteristics and not raise different questions of safety or effectiveness than the predicate device. Clinical data is sometimes required to support substantial equivalence. In the PMA approval process, the FDA must determine that a proposed device is safe and effective for its intended use based on extensive data, including technical, pre-clinical, clinical trial, manufacturing and labeling data. The PMA process is typically required for devices for which the 510(k) process cannot be used and that are deemed to pose the greatest risk. Modifications to products that are approved through a PMA application generally need prior FDA approval of a PMA supplement. Similarly, some modifications made to products cleared through a 510(k) may require a new 510(k), or such modification may put the device into class III and require PMA approval. The FDA’s 510(k) clearance process usually takes from three to 12

months, but may last longer. The process of obtaining a PMA generally takes from one to three years, or even longer, from the time the PMA is submitted to the FDA until an approval is obtained. Any delay or failure to obtain necessary regulatory approvals or clearances would have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

The FDA can delay, limit or deny clearance or approval of a device for many reasons, including:

•Our inability to demonstrate to the satisfaction of the FDA or the applicable regulatory entity or notified body that our products are safe or effective for their intended uses;

•The disagreement of the FDA or the applicable foreign regulatory body with the design, conduct or implementation of our clinical trials or the analyses or interpretation of data from pre-clinical studies or clinical trials;

•Serious and unexpected adverse device effects experienced by participants in our clinical trials;

•The data from our pre-clinical studies and clinical trials may be insufficient to support clearance or approval, where required;

•Our inability to demonstrate that the clinical and other benefits of the device outweigh the risks;

•An advisory committee, if convened by the applicable regulatory authority, may recommend against approval of our application or may recommend that the applicable regulatory authority require, as a condition of approval, additional preclinical studies or clinical trials, limitations on approved labeling or distribution and use restrictions, or even if an advisory committee, if convened, makes a favorable recommendation, the respective regulatory authority may still not approve the product;

•The applicable regulatory authority may identify significant deficiencies in our manufacturing processes, facilities or analytical methods or those of our third party contract manufacturers;

•The potential for approval policies or regulations of the FDA or applicable foreign regulatory bodies to change significantly in a manner rendering our clinical data or regulatory filings insufficient for clearance or approval; and

•The FDA or foreign regulatory authorities may audit our clinical trial data and conclude that the data is not sufficiently reliable to support approval or clearance.

Similarly, regulators may determine that our financial relationships with our principal investigators resulted in a perceived or actual conflict of interest that may have affected the interpretation of a study, the integrity of the data generated at the applicable clinical trial site or the utility of the clinical trial itself. Even if we are granted regulatory clearances or approvals, they may include significant limitations on the indicated uses for the product, which may limit the market for the product. Moreover, the FDA and European Union regulatory authorities strictly regulate the labeling, promotion and advertising of our products, including comparative and superiority claims vis a vis competitors’ products, that may be made about products.

As a condition of approving a PMA application, the FDA may also require some form of post-approval study or post-market surveillance, whereby the applicant conducts a follow-up study or follows certain patient groups for a number of years and makes periodic reports to the FDA on the clinical status of those patients when necessary to protect the public health or to provide additional safety and effectiveness data for the device. As a part of our PMA approval, we agreed with the FDA to conduct a post-approval study at a minimum of 30 sites in the United States to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of our products in at least 600 subjects. We completed enrollment in this study and submitted our final report to the FDA. In February 2020 we received notice from the FDA of their review and that we have fulfilled the post-approval study requirement. A PMA supplement with the updated labeling was submitted to FDA in December 2019 and subsequently approved by FDA in June 2020. The updated labeling included outcomes and adverse event data from the ROADSTER 2 Post-Approval Study. Failure to have conducted the post-approval study in compliance with applicable regulations or to have timely completed required post-approval studies or comply with other post-approval requirements could result in withdrawal of approval of the PMA, which would harm our business.

In addition, we are required to investigate all product complaints we receive, and timely file reports with the FDA, including MDRs that require that we report to regulatory authorities if our products may have caused or contributed to a death or serious injury or malfunctioned in a way that would likely cause or contribute to a death or serious injury if the malfunction were to recur.  If these reports are not submitted in a timely manner, regulators may impose sanctions and we may be subject to product liability or regulatory enforcement actions, including warning letters, untitled letters, fines, civil penalties, recalls, seizures, operating restrictions, denial of requests for 510(k) clearance or premarket approval of new

products, new intended uses or modifications to existing products, withdrawal of current 510(k) clearances or premarket approvals and narrowing of approved or cleared product labeling, all of which could harm our business.  In addition, the FDA may provide notice of and conduct additional inspections, such as “for cause” inspections, of our business, sites and facilities as part of its review process. As of February 28, 2022, we had filed 495 MDR reports with the FDA for adverse events and device malfunctions including, but not limited to, stroke, arterial dissection, tip detachment, stent thrombosis and wound complications.

If we initiate a correction or removal action for our products to reduce a significant risk to health posed by our products, we would be required to submit a publicly available correction and removal report to the FDA and, in many cases, similar reports to other regulatory agencies. This report could be classified by the FDA as a device recall which could lead to an additional inspection by, or increased scrutiny from, the FDA, other international regulatory agencies and our customers regarding the quality and safety of our products. Furthermore, the submission of these reports could be used by competitors against us and cause physicians to delay or cancel prescriptions, which could harm our reputation. For example, in the first quarter of 2021, we announced the voluntary recall of certain lots of our ENROUTE Transcarotid Stent System, manufactured by Cordis. Recalls like this one could cause the supply of our TCAR products to customers to be interrupted, us to incur additional expenses, negative publicity or damage to our reputation, any of which could cause our results of operations to be adversely impacted.

The FDA and the Federal Trade Commission, or FTC, also regulate the advertising, promotion and labeling of our products to ensure that the claims we make are consistent with our regulatory clearances and approvals, that there is adequate and reasonable scientific data to substantiate the claims and that our promotional labeling and advertising is neither false nor misleading in any respect. If the FDA or FTC determines that any of our advertising or promotional claims are misleading, not substantiated or not permissible, we may be subject to enforcement actions, including adverse publicity, warning letters, and we may be required to revise our promotional claims and make other corrections or restitutions.

The FDA and state authorities have broad investigation and enforcement powers. Our failure to comply with applicable regulatory requirements could result in enforcement action by the FDA or state agencies, which may include any of the following sanctions:

•Adverse publicity, warning letters, fines, injunctions, consent decrees and civil penalties;

•Repair, replacement, refunds, recalls, termination of distribution, administrative detention or seizure of our products;

•Operating restrictions, partial suspension or total shutdown of production;

•Denial of our requests for 510(k) clearance or premarket approval of new products, new intended uses or modifications to existing products;

•Withdrawal of 510(k) clearance or premarket approvals that have already been granted; and

•Criminal prosecution.

If any of these events were to occur, our business and financial condition could be harmed. In addition, the FDA’s and other regulatory authorities’ policies may change and additional government regulations may be enacted that could prevent, limit or delay regulatory approval of our products. If we are slow or unable to adapt to changes in existing requirements or the adoption of new requirements or policies, or if we are not able to maintain regulatory compliance, we may lose any marketing approval that we may have obtained and we may not achieve or sustain profitability, which would adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Our clinical trials may fail to demonstrate competent and reliable evidence of the safety and effectiveness of our products, which would prevent or delay commercialization of our products in development.

We may be required to conduct clinical studies that demonstrate competent and reliable evidence that our products are safe and effective before we can commercialize our products.  Clinical testing is expensive and can take many years to complete, and its outcome is inherently uncertain. We cannot be certain that our planned clinical trials or any other future clinical trials will be successful. In addition, even if such clinical trials are successfully completed, we cannot guarantee that the FDA or foreign regulatory authorities will interpret the results as we do, and more trials could be required before we submit our products for approval. To the extent that the results of the trials are not satisfactory to the FDA or foreign regulatory authorities for support of a marketing application, we may be required to expend significant resources, which may not be available to us, to conduct additional trials in support of potential approval of our products.

Even if regulatory approval is secured for any of our products, the terms of such approval may limit the scope and use of our products, which may also limit their commercial potential.

Material modifications to our products may require new 510(k) clearances, premarket approval, or CE Marks, or may require us to recall or cease marketing our products until new clearances or approvals are obtained.

Material modifications to the intended use or technological characteristics of our products will require new 510(k) clearances, premarket approvals or CE Marks prior to implementing the modifications, or require us to recall or cease marketing the modified devices until these clearances or approvals are obtained. Furthermore, changes to our manufacturing facility or supplier of components used in our products require prior FDA approval of a PMA supplement. The FDA requires device manufacturers to initially make and document a determination of whether or not a modification requires a new approval, supplement or clearance; however, the FDA can review a manufacturer’s decision. Any modification to an FDA cleared device that would significantly affect its safety or effectiveness or that would constitute a major change in its intended use would require a new 510(k) clearance or approval of a PMA supplement. We may not be able to obtain additional 510(k) clearances or premarket approvals for new products or for modifications to, or additional indications for, our products in a timely fashion, or at all. Delays in obtaining required future clearances would harm our ability to introduce new or enhanced products in a timely manner, which in turn would harm our future growth. We have made modifications to our products in the past that we believe do not require additional clearances or approvals, and we may make additional modifications in the future. If the FDA or an EU Notified Body disagrees and requires new clearances or approvals for any of these modifications, we may be required to recall and to stop selling or marketing our products as modified, which could harm our operating results and require us to redesign our products. In these circumstances, we may be subject to significant enforcement actions.

If we, or our suppliers, fail to comply with the FDA’s QSR, the European Union’s Medical Device Directive, or the European Union’s Medical Device Regulation, our manufacturing or distribution operations could be delayed or shut down and our revenue could suffer.

Our manufacturing and design processes and those of our third-party component suppliers are required to comply with the QSR and the European Union’s Medical Device Directive, or MDD, and the European Union’s Medical Device Regulation, or MDR, which cover procedures and documentation of the design, testing, production, control, quality assurance, labeling, packaging, storage and shipping of our products. We are also subject to similar state requirements and licenses, and to ongoing ISO 13485 compliance in our operations, including design, manufacturing, and service, to maintain our CE Mark. In addition, we must engage in extensive recordkeeping and reporting and must make available our facilities and records for periodic unannounced inspections by governmental agencies, including the FDA, state authorities, EU Notified Bodies and comparable agencies in other countries. If we fail a regulatory inspection, our operations could be disrupted and our manufacturing interrupted. Failure to take timely and adequate corrective action in response to an adverse regulatory inspection could result in, among other things, a shutdown of our manufacturing or product distribution operations, significant fines, suspension of marketing clearances and approvals, seizures or recalls of our device, operating restrictions and criminal prosecutions, any of which would cause our business to suffer. Furthermore, our key component suppliers may not currently be or may not continue to be in compliance with applicable regulatory requirements, which may result in manufacturing delays for our products and cause our revenue to decline.

We are registered with the FDA as a medical device specifications developer, manufacturer and complaint file establishment. The FDA has broad post-market and regulatory enforcement powers. We are subject to unannounced inspections by the FDA and the Food and Drug Branch of the California Department of Public Health, or CDPH, and our Notified Body to determine our compliance with the QSR and other regulations at both our design and manufacturing facilities, and these inspections may include the manufacturing facilities of our suppliers. These inspections may be initiated as a result of concerns regarding the safety of our products or the components thereof.

We can provide no assurance that we will continue to remain in material compliance with the QSR, MDD, or MDR. If the FDA, CDPH or our notified body in the European Union, BSI, inspect any of our facilities and discover compliance problems, we may have to cease manufacturing and product distribution until we can take the appropriate remedial steps to correct the audit findings. Taking corrective action may be expensive, time consuming and a distraction for management and if we experience a delay at our manufacturing facility we may be unable to produce our products, which would harm our business.

With the transition from the MDD to the new MDR, notified bodies are required to seek designation to operate as conformity assessment authorities under the new law, which was effective in May 2021. BSI, our notified body, successfully obtained designation to operate as conformity assessment authorities under the new law.

The impact of the new EU Medical Device Regulation may be costly and disruptive to our business.

The European Union has released regulations to ensure patient safety with the use of pharmaceuticals, medical devices and in-vitro diagnostics. The new regulations replace predecessor directives and emphasize a global convergence of regulations. Major changes include:

•Reclassification of some products;

•Greater emphasis on clinical data;

•Data transparency, including publication of clinical trial data and safety summaries;

•Defined content and structure for technical files to support registration;

•Unique device identification system;

•Greater burden on post-market surveillance and clinical follow-up;

•Reduction of adverse event reporting time from 30 to 15 days after the event; and

•More power to notified bodies.

Compliance with these new regulations may result in Europe being less attractive as a “first market” destination. Marketing authorization timelines will become more protracted and the costs of operating in Europe will increase. A significantly more costly path to regulatory compliance is anticipated. Adjusting to the new Medical Device Regulation may prove to be costly and disruptive to our business.

Our products have and may in the future be subject to product recalls that could harm our reputation.

The FDA and similar governmental authorities in other countries have the authority to require the recall of commercialized products in the event of material regulatory deficiencies or defects in design or manufacture. A government mandated or voluntary recall by us has occurred, and could occur again in the future, as a result of component failures, manufacturing errors or design or labeling defects. In January 2021, we announced the voluntary recall of certain lots of our ENROUTE Transcarotid Stent System. Additional recalls of our products would divert managerial attention, be expensive, harm our reputation with customers and harm our financial condition and results of operations. Additional recall announcements could also negatively affect our stock price.

Compliance with environmental laws and regulations could be expensive, and failure to comply with these laws and regulations could subject us to significant liability.

Our research and development and manufacturing operations involve the use of hazardous substances and are subject to a variety of federal, state, local and foreign environmental laws and regulations relating to the storage, use, discharge, disposal, remediation of, and human exposure to, hazardous substances and the sale, labeling, collection, recycling, treatment and disposal of products containing hazardous substances. Liability under environmental laws and regulations can be joint and several and without regard to fault or negligence. Compliance with environmental laws and regulations may be expensive and noncompliance could result in substantial liabilities, fines and penalties, personal injury and third-party property damage claims and substantial investigation and remediation costs. Environmental laws and regulations could become more stringent over time, imposing greater compliance costs and increasing risks and penalties associated with violations. We cannot assure you that violations of these laws and regulations will not occur in the future or have not occurred in the past as a result of human error, accidents, equipment failure or other causes. The expense associated with environmental regulation and remediation could harm our financial condition and operating results.

Risks Related to Ownership of Our Common Stock

The market price of our common stock may be volatile and fluctuate substantially, which could result in substantial losses for purchasers of our common stock.

•The market price of our common stock is likely to be highly volatile and may fluctuate substantially due to many factors, including:

•Changes in analysts’ estimates, investors’ perceptions, recommendations by securities analysts, the loss of analyst coverage or our failure to achieve analysts’ estimates;

•Quarterly variations in our or our competitors’ results of operations;

•Periodic fluctuations in our revenue, which could be due in part to the way in which we recognize revenue;

•The financial projections we may provide to the public, any changes in these projections or our failure to meet these projections;

•General market conditions and other factors unrelated to our operating performance or the operating performance of our competitors, including deteriorating market conditions due to investor concerns regarding inflation and hostilities between Russia and Ukraine;

•Changes in reimbursement by current or potential payers;

•Changes in operating performance and stock market valuations of other technology companies generally, or those in the medical device industry in particular;

•Actual or anticipated changes in regulatory oversight of our products;

•The results of our clinical trials;

•The loss of key personnel, including changes in our board of directors and management;

•Product recalls or other problems associated with our products;

•Legislation or regulation of our market;

•Lawsuits threatened or filed against us, including litigation by current or former employees alleging wrongful termination, sexual harassment, whistleblower or other claims;

•The announcement of new products, product enhancements or new product trials by us or our competitors;

•Announced or completed acquisitions of businesses or technologies by us or our competitors;

•Announcements related to patents issued to us or our competitors and related litigation; and

•Developments in our industry.

In recent years, the stock markets generally have experienced extreme price and volume fluctuations that have often been unrelated or disproportionate to the operating performance of listed companies. Broad market and industry factors may significantly affect the market price of our common stock, regardless of our actual operating performance.

In addition, in the past, stockholders have instituted securities class action litigation following periods of market volatility. If we were to become involved in securities litigation, it could subject us to substantial costs, divert resources and the attention of management from our business and harm our business, results of operations, financial condition and reputation. These factors may materially and adversely affect the market price of our common stock.

We are obligated to maintain proper and effective internal controls over financial reporting and any failure to maintain the adequacy of these internal controls may adversely affect investor confidence in our company and, as a result, the value of our common stock.

We are required, pursuant to Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, or Section 404, to furnish a report by management on the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting. This assessment includes disclosure of any material weaknesses identified by our management in our internal control over financial reporting. We are required to comply with, among other requirements, the auditor attestation requirements of Section 404. If we have a material weakness, we would receive an adverse opinion regarding our internal control over financial reporting from our independent registered accounting firm.

Our compliance with Section 404 requires that we incur substantial accounting expense and expend significant management efforts. We have engaged outside consultants who function in the capacity of an internal audit group, and we will continue to hire additional consultants, accounting and financial staff with appropriate public company experience and technical accounting knowledge as we maintain the system and process documentation necessary to perform the evaluation needed to comply with Section 404.

We cannot assure you that there will not be material weaknesses in our internal control over financial reporting in the future. Any failure to maintain internal control over financial reporting could severely inhibit our ability to accurately report our financial condition or results of operations. If we are unable to conclude that our internal control over financial reporting is effective, or if our independent registered public accounting firm determines we have a material weakness in our internal control over financial reporting, we could lose investor confidence in the accuracy and completeness of our

financial reports, the market price of our ordinary shares could decline, and we could be subject to sanctions or investigations by Nasdaq, the SEC or other regulatory authorities. Failure to remedy our current and any future material weakness in our internal control over financial reporting, or to implement or maintain other effective control systems required of public companies, could also restrict our future access to the capital markets.

Anti-takeover provisions in our amended and restated certificate of incorporation and bylaws, and Delaware law, could discourage a change in control of our company or a change in our management.

Our amended and restated certificate of incorporation and bylaws contain provisions that might enable our management to resist a takeover. These provisions include:

•Advance notice requirements applicable to stockholders for matters to be brought before a meeting of stockholders and requirements as to the form and content of a stockholders’ notice;

•A supermajority stockholder vote requirement for amending certain provisions of our amended and restated certificate of incorporation and bylaws;

•The right to issue preferred stock without stockholder approval, which could be used to dilute the stock ownership of a potential hostile acquirer;

•Allowing stockholders to remove directors only for cause;

•A requirement that the authorized number of directors may be changed only by resolution of the board of directors;

•Allowing all vacancies, including newly created directorships, to be filled by the affirmative vote of a majority of directors then in office, even if less than a quorum, except as otherwise required by law;

•A requirement that our stockholders may only take action at annual or special meetings of our stockholders and not by written consent;

•Limiting the forum to Delaware for certain litigation against us; and

•Limiting the persons that can call special meetings of our stockholders to our board of directors, the chairperson of our board of directors, the chief executive officer or the president, in the absence of a chief executive officer.

These provisions might discourage, delay or prevent a change in control of our company or a change in our management. The existence of these provisions could adversely affect the voting power of holders of common stock and limit the price that investors might be willing to pay in the future for shares of our common stock. In addition, because we are incorporated in Delaware, we are governed by the provisions of Section 203 of the Delaware General Corporation Law, which generally prohibits a Delaware corporation from engaging in any of a broad range of business combinations with any “interested” stockholder for a period of three years following the date on which the stockholder became an “interested” stockholder. See “Description of Capital Stock.”

Our amended and restated certificate of incorporation and bylaws provide that the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware will be the sole and exclusive forum for substantially all disputes between us and our stockholders, which could limit our stockholders’ abilities to obtain a favorable judicial forum for disputes with us or our directors, officers or employees.

Our amended and restated certificate of incorporation and bylaws provide that, unless we consent in writing to the selection of an alternative forum, the sole and exclusive forum, to the fullest extent permitted by law, for (1) any derivative action or proceeding brought on our behalf, (2) any action asserting a claim of breach of a fiduciary duty owed by any of our directors, officers or other employees to us or our stockholders, (3) any action asserting a claim against the company or any director or officer of the company arising pursuant to any provision of the Delaware General Corporation Law, (4) any action to interpret, apply, enforce or determine the validity of our amended and restated certificate of incorporation or bylaws, or (5) any other action asserting a claim that is governed by the internal affairs doctrine shall be the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware or federal court located within the State of Delaware if the Court of Chancery does not have jurisdiction, in all cases subject to the court’s having jurisdiction over indispensable parties named as defendants. A complaint asserting a cause of action under the Securities Act may be brought in state or federal court. With respect to the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, or Exchange Act, only claims brought derivatively under the Exchange Act would be subject to the forum selection clause described above. The enforceability of similar choice of forum provisions in other companies' certificates of incorporation and bylaws has been challenged in legal proceedings, and it is possible that, in connection with any action, a court could find the choice of forum provisions contained in our amended and restated

certificate of incorporation and bylaws to be inapplicable or unenforceable in such action. Although we believe these provisions benefit us by providing increased consistency in the application of Delaware law for the specified types of actions and proceedings, the provisions may have the effect of discouraging lawsuits against us or our directors and officers. Alternatively, if a court were to find the choice of forum provision contained in our amended and restated certificate of incorporation and bylaws to be inapplicable or unenforceable in an action, we may incur additional costs associated with resolving such action in other jurisdictions, which could harm our business, financial condition and operating results. Any person or entity purchasing or otherwise acquiring any interest in our shares of capital stock shall be deemed to have notice of and consented to this exclusive forum provision, but will not be deemed to have waived our compliance with the federal securities laws and the rules and regulations thereunder.

We have not paid dividends in the past and do not expect to pay dividends in the future, and, as a result, any return on investment may be limited to the value of our stock.

We have never paid cash dividends and do not anticipate paying cash dividends in the foreseeable future. The payment of dividends will depend on our earnings, capital requirements, financial condition, prospects for future earnings and other factors our board of directors may deem relevant. In addition, our loan agreement limits our ability to, among other things, pay dividends or make other distributions or payments on account of our common stock, in each case subject to certain exceptions. If we do not pay dividends, our stock may be less valuable because a return on your investment will only occur if our stock price appreciates and you then sell our common stock.

Item 1B. Unresolved Staff Comments

None.

Item 2. Properties

We currently lease approximately 31,000 square feet for our corporate headquarters and manufacturing facility located in Sunnyvale, California under a lease agreement which terminates in 2024. We have an additional option to extend the lease term for a period of five years. The option must be exercised no more than 12 months and no less than nine months prior to the expiration of the applicable term.

In May 2021, we entered into a lease agreement for approximately 63,000 square feet of office space located in Plymouth, Minnesota which terminates in November 2029. We have the option to extend the lease term for two additional five-year periods. The option must be exercised no more than 12 months and no less than nine months prior to the expiration of the applicable term. We believe that the above facilities meet our current and future anticipated needs.

Item 3. Legal Proceedings

We are not currently a party to any material legal proceedings. From time to time we may become involved in legal proceedings or investigations, which could have an adverse impact on our reputation, business and financial condition and divert the attention of our management from the operation of our business.

Item 4. Mine Safety Disclosures

Not applicable.

PART II

Item 5. Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities

Price Range of Common Stock

Our common stock began trading on the NASDAQ Global Select Market under the symbol “SILK” on April 4, 2019. Prior to that time, there was no public market for our common stock. In our initial public offering, our common stock priced at $20.00 per share on April 3, 2019. The following table sets forth on a per share basis, for the periods indicated, the low and high sale prices of our common stock as reported by the NASDAQ Global Select Market.

Holders of Record

At February 28, 2022, there were approximately 62 stockholders of record of our common stock, and the closing price per share of our common stock was $37.13. Since many of our shares of common stock are held by brokers and other institutions on behalf of stockholders, we are unable to estimate the total number of stockholders represented by these record holders.

Dividends

We have never declared or paid, and do not anticipate declaring or paying, any cash dividends on any of our capital stock. We do not anticipate paying any dividends in the foreseeable future, and we currently intend to retain all available funds and any future earnings for use in the operation of our business, to finance the growth and development of our business and for future repayment of debt. Future determinations as to the declaration and payment of dividends, if any, will be at the discretion of our board of directors and will depend on then-existing conditions, including our operating results, financial condition, contractual restrictions, capital requirements, business prospects and other factors our board of directors may deem relevant. In addition, our term loan agreement limits our ability to pay dividends or make other distributions or payments on account of our common stock, in each case subject to certain exceptions.

Securities Authorized for Issuance under Equity Compensation Plans

The information required by this Item 5 regarding equity compensation plans is incorporated by reference from the information under the captions “Equity Compensation Plan Information” and “Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management” that will be contained in the Proxy Statement.

Stock Performance Graph

The following graph illustrates a comparison of the total cumulative stockholder return on our stock with the total return for (i) the NASDAQ Composite Index (U.S.) and (ii) the NASDAQ U.S. Benchmark Medical Equipment TR Index for the period from April 4, 2019 (the first day of trading of our common stock), through December 31, 2021. The NASDAQ U.S. Benchmark Medical Equipment TR Index replaces the NASDAQ Medical Equipment Index in this analysis going forward, as the CRSP Index data is no longer accessible. The CRSP index has been included with data through 2020.The graph assumes an investment of $100 in our common stock at market close on April 4, 2019 and the reinvestment of dividends, if any. The comparisons in the table are not intended to forecast or be indicative of possible future performance of our common stock. This graph shall not be deemed “soliciting material” or be deemed “filed” for purposes of Section 18 of the Exchange Act, or otherwise subject to the liabilities under that Section, and shall not be deemed to be incorporated

by reference into any of our filings under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the "Securities Act"), whether made before or after the date hereof and irrespective of any general incorporation language in any such filing.