Item
1. Business
Company
Overview
Encision
Inc. (“Encision”, “we”, “us”, “our” or the “Company"), a medical device
company based in Boulder, Colorado, has developed and markets innovative technology that provides unprecedented outcomes and patient
safety in minimally-invasive surgery. We believe that our patented Active Electrode Monitoring (AEM®) Surgical Instruments
are changing the marketplace for electrosurgical devices and laparoscopic instruments by providing a solution to a well-documented
hazard unique to laparoscopic surgery.
We
address market opportunities created by the increase in minimally-invasive surgery (“MIS”) and surgeons’ use
of electrosurgery devices in these procedures. The product opportunity exists in that monopolar electrosurgery instruments used
in laparoscopic procedures provide excellent clinical results, but are also susceptible to causing inadvertent collateral tissue
damage outside the surgeon’s field of view. The risk of unintended electrosurgical burn injury to the patient in laparoscopic
surgery has been well documented. This risk poses a threat to patient safety, including the risk of death, and creates liability
exposure for surgeons and hospitals, and increased and preventable readmissions. Our technology helps to reduce hospital risk
and liability.
Our
patented AEM technology provides surgeons with the desired tissue effects of cutting and coagulating tissue in laparoscopic procedures,
while preventing stray electrosurgical energy that can cause complications and even death. AEM Surgical Instruments are equivalent
to conventional instruments in size, shape, ergonomics and functionality, but they incorporate a proprietary shield and electrically
connect to an Active Electrode Monitor to dynamically and continuously monitor the flow of electrosurgical current, thereby preventing
patient injury from stray monopolar energy. With our “shielded and monitored” instruments, surgeons are able to perform
electrosurgical procedures more safely, effectively and economically than is possible using conventional instruments.
AEM
technology has been recommended and endorsed by sources from many groups involved in MIS. Surgeons, nurses, biomedical engineers,
the medicolegal community, malpractice insurance carriers and electrosurgical device manufacturers advocate the use of AEM technology.
In May 2018, the Food and Drug Administration issued a Safety Communication that stated that, "In addition to serving as
an ignition source, monopolar energy use can directly result in unintended patient burns from capacitive coupling and intra-operative
insulation failure.”
Business
Highlights
Proprietary,
Patented Technology
We
have developed and launched patented AEM Surgical Instruments and Monitors that enhance patient safety and patient outcomes in
laparoscopic surgical procedures. We have been issued 16 unexpired patents relating to AEM technology from the United States Patent
and Trademark Office, each encompassing multiple claims, and which have between four and twenty years remaining. We also have
patents relating to AEM technology issued in Europe, Japan, Canada and Australia.
Technology
Solves a Well Documented Risk in Minimally Invasive Surgery
MIS
offers significant benefits for patients by reducing trauma, hospital stays, recovery times and medical costs. However, these
benefits have not been achieved without the emergence of new risks. The risk of unintended tissue damage from stray electrosurgical
energy has been well documented. Such injuries can be especially troubling given that often these injuries are out of the field
of view, can go unrecognized at the time of surgery, and can lead to a cascade of adverse events, including death. Our patented
AEM technology eliminates the risk of stray electrosurgical burns in MIS while providing surgeons with the tissue effects they
desire.
Product
Line has been Developed and Launched
Our
AEM Surgical Instruments and Monitors have been engineered to provide a seamless transition for surgeons switching from conventional
laparoscopic instruments. AEM technology has been integrated into instruments that have the same look, feel and functionality
as conventional instruments that surgeons have been using for years. The AEM product line encompasses a full range of instrument
sizes, types and styles favored by surgeons. Additionally, we continued to improve quality and added our AEM EndoShield® 2
Burn Protection System (“EndoShield 2”) during our fiscal year ended March 31, 2018. The EndoShield 2 can be used
for a number of surgical procedures without reprocessing, reduces the customer’s cost per use significantly, and eliminates
a significant barrier to adoption. Thus, hospitals can make a complete and smooth conversion to our product line, thereby advancing
patient safety in MIS.
Emerging
as a Standard of Care
We
believe that AEM technology is following a similar path as previous technological developments in surgery. Throughout the history
of electrosurgery, companies that have developed significant technological breakthroughs in patient safety have seen their technologies
become widely used. As with “Isolated” electrosurgical generators in the 1970s and with “REM” technology
in the 1980s, AEM technology is receiving the broad endorsements that drove these previous new technologies to becoming a standard
of care. We believe that it is possible to follow a course similar to that of pulse oximetry in becoming a standard of care. Our
proprietary AEM technology enhances patient safety in MIS, especially in light of laparoscopic instruments being in closer proximity
with single-port and reduced-port approaches. As a result, knowledgeable clinicians are now advocating AEM technology’s
use.
Developing
Distribution Network is Advancing Utilization of AEM Technology
Our
AEM technology, in the hands of a sales network with broad access to the surgery marketplace, will help to increase utilization
and market share. Historically, our sales and marketing efforts have been hindered by our small size and limited distribution
channels. While these limitations continue, we improved our sales network which provided new hospital accounts with AEM technology
in our fiscal year ended March 31, 2019. Our supplier agreements with Group Purchasing Organizations (“GPOs”) and
other key hospitals systems are beginning to expose more hospitals to the benefits of our AEM technology. During the quarter ended
March 31, 2019, our proprietary patient safety technology was recognized by the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs and provides
us with the opportunity to market our instruments and monitors into VA Medical Centers. The VA is the largest medical system in
the U.S. providing service to more than nine million veterans across more than 1,200 facilities. Also, during the quarter, we
were awarded a prestigious Vizient Innovative Technology Contract for monopolar surgical instruments and monitors. Vizient represents
a diverse membership base that includes academic medical centers, pediatric facilities, community hospitals, integrated health
delivery networks and non-acute health care providers and represents approximately $100 billion in annual purchasing volume.
Market
Overview
We
believe that our patented AEM technology provides us with marketing leverage toward gaining an increased share, both in terms
of penetrations, as well as increasing our impact per procedure with AEM instrumentation.
In
the 1990s, surgeons began widespread use of minimally invasive surgical techniques. The benefits of MIS are substantial and include
reduced trauma for the patient, reduced hospital stay, shorter recovery time and lower medical costs. With improvements in the
surgical laparoscopic camera and in the variety of available instruments, laparoscopic surgery became popular among general surgeons,
gynecologic surgeons and other specialties. Laparoscopy now accounts for a large percentage of all surgical procedures performed
in the United States. Approximately 75% of surgeons employ monopolar electrosurgery for laparoscopy according to INTERactive SURVeys.
There are over 4.4 million laparoscopic procedures performed annually in the United States, and this number is increasing annually.
(Note: except as otherwise stated, market estimates in this section are as reported by Patient Safety & Quality Healthcare).
A
component of the endoscopic surgery products market includes laparoscopic hand instruments, including scissors, graspers, dissectors,
forceps, suction/irrigation devices, clip appliers and other surgical instruments of various designs, which provide a variety
of tissue effects. Among the laparoscopic hand instruments, approximately $500 million in sales annually are derived from instruments
designed for "monopolar" electrosurgical utility. This market for laparoscopic monopolar electrosurgical instruments
is the market we are targeting with our innovative AEM Surgical Instruments. Our proprietary AEM product line supplants the conventional
“non-shielded, non-monitored” electrosurgical instruments commonly used in laparoscopic surgery.
When
a hospital decides to use our AEM technology, we make recurring sales to such hospital for replacement instruments. Sales from
reusable and disposable AEM products in hospitals represented over 90% of our sales in the fiscal year ended March 31, 2019, and
we expect this sales stream to grow as new hospitals increasingly adopt AEM technology and existing hospitals increase usage of
AEM instrumentation. We also expect to increase the value per procedure delivered to our customers and, therefore, expect the
dollars per procedure to increase. AEM Instruments are competitively priced compared to conventional laparoscopic instruments.
We
aim to further develop the market by continuing to educate healthcare professionals about the benefits of AEM technology to advance
patient safety. We are developing new devices that integrate AEM technology, which we believe will have high surgeon appeal. We
are also working to improve the reach of our sales network to key decision makers who purchase or recommend the purchase of laparoscopic
instruments and electrosurgical devices. We are also pursuing relationships with selected GPOs, hospital systems and integrated
delivery networks to assist in promoting the benefits of AEM technology. We are seeking increasing international opportunities
for AEM technology sales. We estimate sales outside the U.S. to be at least as large as that of the U.S. market. We are growing
our presence in Australia and New Zealand and are seeking a new presence in the Middle East and Europe. As decisions are made
at a system level, our intent is to highlight the clinical, economic and safety benefits of using AEM technology.
The
Technology
Stray
Electrosurgical Burn Injury to the Patient
Electrosurgical
technology is a valuable and prevalent resource for surgeons. Since its introduction in the 1930s, electrosurgical technology
has continually evolved and is estimated to be used in over 75% of all surgeries.
The
primary form of electrosurgery, monopolar electrosurgery, is a standard tool for general surgeons throughout the world. In monopolar
electrosurgery, the surgeon uses an instrument (typically scissors, grasper/dissectors, spatula blades or suction-irrigation electrodes)
to deliver electrical current to patient tissue. This “active electrode” provides the surgeon with the ability to
cut, coagulate or ablate tissue as needed during the surgery. With the advent of MIS procedures, surgeons have continued using
monopolar electrosurgery as a primary tool for hemostatic incision, coagulation of bleeding tissues, excision and ablation. Unfortunately,
conventional laparoscopic electrosurgical instruments from competing manufacturers are susceptible to emitting stray electrical
currents during the procedure. This risk is exacerbated by the fact that laparoscopic camera systems limit the surgical field
of view. Ninety percent of the instrument may be outside the surgeon's field of view at any given time during the surgery.
The
dangers of stray energy are twofold. Not only is there the danger created by the burn injury itself, but there is the compounding
danger that the burn will go unnoticed during the surgery and be allowed to manifest post-operatively as fecal peritonitis or
other potentially deadly and devastating outcomes. In many cases, the surgeon cannot detect stray electrosurgical burns at the
time of the procedure because it is out of their field of visualization. The resulting complication usually presents itself days
later in the form of a severe infection or sepsis, which often results in a hospital readmission and a difficult course of remedial
surgeries and prolonged hospital recovery for the patient. This situation has even resulted in fatalities.
Stray
electrosurgical burn injury can result from two causes – instrument insulation failure and capacitive coupling. Instrument
insulation failure can be a common occurrence with laparoscopic instruments. Conventional active electrodes for laparoscopic surgery
are designed with the same basic construction – a single conductive element and an outer insulation coating. This insulation
can fail during the course of normal use during surgery. One university study found insulation defects in new disposable instruments
before they were used or after limited surgical use. It is also possible for instrument insulation to become flawed during the
handling, cleaning and sterilization process. This common insulation failure can allow electrical currents to "spark"
from the instrument to unintended and unseen tissue with potentially serious consequences for the patient, such as bowel perforations.
Four different studies indicate that the insulation failure rate in reusable instruments can be as high as one in five. Capacitive
coupling is another way stray electrosurgical energy can cause unintended burns during laparoscopy. Capacitive coupling is an
electrical phenomenon that occurs when current is induced from the instrument to nearby tissue or another instrument despite intact
insulation. This potential for capacitive coupling is present in all laparoscopic surgeries that utilize monopolar electrosurgery
devices and are likely to occur outside the surgeon’s field of view.
Conventional,
“non-shielded, non-monitored” laparoscopic instruments are susceptible to causing unintended, unseen burn injuries
to the patient in MIS. Instrument insulation failure and capacitive coupling are the primary causes of stray electrosurgical burns
in laparoscopy and are the two events over which the surgical team has traditionally had no control. Although alternative forms
to monopolar electrosurgery energy exist, these alternative energies tend to be less effective, take longer to achieve the desired
surgical effect and are costlier.
Encision’s
AEM Surgical Instruments
AEM
technology eliminates the risk of stray electrical energy caused by instrument insulation failure and capacitive coupling, and
thus prevents unintended burn injuries to patients.
AEM
Surgical Instruments are an innovative solution to stray electrosurgical burns in laparoscopic surgery and are designed with the
same look, feel and functionality as conventional instruments. They direct electrosurgical energy where the surgeon desires, while
continuously monitoring the current flow to prevent stray electrosurgical energy from instrument insulation failure or capacitive
coupling.
Whereas
conventional instruments are simply a conductive element with a layer of insulation coating, AEM Surgical Instruments have a patented,
multi-layered design with a built-in “shield,” a concept much like the third-wire ground in standard electrical cords.
The shield in these instruments is electrically connected and referenced back to an AEM Monitor at the electrosurgical generator.
In the event of a harmful level of stray electrical energy, the monitor shuts down the power at the source, assuring patient safety.
If instrument insulation failure should occur, the AEM system, while continually monitoring the instrument, immediately interrupts
monopolar output from the electrosurgical generator and alerts the surgical staff. The AEM system protects against capacitive
coupling by providing a neutral return path for “capacitive” electrical energy. Capacitive energy is continually drained
away from the instrument and away from the patient through the protective shield built into all AEM instruments and the connected
AEM Monitor.
The
AEM system consists of shielded 5mm AEM Instruments and an AEM monitor. The AEM Instruments are designed to function identically
to the conventional 5mm instruments that surgeons are familiar with, but with the added benefit of enhanced patient safety. Our
entire line of laparoscopic instruments has the integrated AEM design and includes the full range of instruments that are common
in laparoscopic surgery today. The AEM monitor is compatible with most electrosurgical generators. AEM Surgical Instruments provide
enhanced patient safety, require no change in surgeon technique and are cost competitive. Thus, conversion to AEM Surgical Instruments
is easy and economical.
Historical
Perspective
We
were organized as a Colorado corporation in 1991 and spent several years developing the AEM monitoring system and protective sheaths
to adapt to conventional electrosurgical instruments. During this period, we conducted product trials and applied for patents
with the United States Patent and Trademark Office and with International
patent
agencies.
Our patents relate to the basic shielding and monitoring technologies that
we incorporate into our AEM products. As of March 31, 2019, we have 16 unexpired United States patents relating to specific implementations
of shielding and monitoring in instruments and continue to add patents as we further develop our proprietary technology and its
applications.
As
we evolved, it was clear to us that our “active electrode monitoring” technology needed to be integrated into the
standard laparoscopic instrument design. As the development program proceeded, it also became apparent that the merging of electrical
and mechanical engineering skills in the instrument development process for our patented, integrated electrosurgical instruments
was a complex and difficult task. As a result, instruments with integrated AEM technology were not completed for several years.
Prior to offering a full range of laparoscopic electrosurgical instrumentation, it was difficult for hospitals to commit to the
AEM solution, as we did not have adequate comparable surgical instrument options to match surgeon demand.
With
the broad array of AEM instruments now available, the surgeon has a wide choice of instrument options and does not have to change
surgical technique to use our AEM products. Since c
onversion
to AEM technology is transparent to the surgeon,
hospitals can now universally convert to
AEM technology, thus providing all of their laparoscopic surgery patients a higher level of safety.
This development coincides
with the continued expansion of independent endorsements for AEM technology. Recommendations from the malpractice insurance and
medicolegal communities complement the broad clinical endorsements that AEM technology has garnered over the past few years, leading
to better awareness for the benefits of the technology.
Products
We
produce and market a full line of AEM Instruments, which are “shielded and monitored” to prevent stray electrosurgical
burns from insulation failure and capacitive coupling. Our product line includes a broad range of endo-mechanical instruments
(scissors, graspers and dissectors), fixed-tip electrodes and suction-irrigation electrodes. These AEM Instruments are available
in a wide array of reusable and disposable options. Also, we have a line of handles that are used for advanced laparoscopic procedures
that incorporate stiffer shafts and ergonomic features. In addition, we market an AEM monitor product line that is used in conjunction
with AEM Instruments.
We introduced our
AEM EndoShield® 2 Burn Protection System
during our fiscal year ended March 31, 2018. The EndoShield 2 can be used for a number of surgical procedures without reprocessing,
reduces the customer’s cost per use significantly, and eliminates a significant barrier to adoption. Thus, hospitals can
make a complete and smooth conversion to our product line, thereby advancing patient safety in MIS. The EndoShield 2 integrates
our patented AEM technology into a disposable smart cord and eliminates the need for a separate AEM monitor. It is changing the
marketplace for electrosurgical devices and laparoscopic instruments by providing a solution to a well documented hazard unique
to laparascopic surgery.
Sales
and Marketing Overview
We
believe that AEM technology can become the standard of care in laparoscopic surgery worldwide. Our marketing efforts are focused
on building awareness by providing technical education for Health Care Providers on the dangers of stray electrosurgical energy
and in providing clinical and economic evidence to substantiate the value of AEM technology to Hospitals, their Staff, and their
patients. We also leverage relationships with prominent Hospitals and Surgeons where AEM Technology has increased their level
of patient care and improved their overall surgical outcomes.
In
addition, there is increasing public interest in the reduction of medical errors and the advancement of patient safety. For example,
the National Quality Forum and CMS (Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services) recognize “patient death or serious disability
associated with a burn incurred from any source while being cared for in a healthcare facility” as a “never-event”.
We believe that the credibility and importance of our technology is complemented by this expanding public interest in advancing
patient safety in new CMS Hospital Quality Metrics. The Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services published its Hospital-Acquired
Condition Reduction Program, effective October 1, 2014. At that time, the program began to levy as much as a 1% penalty on Medicare
reimbursements on hospitals in the lower quadrant of performance for selected quality indicators, including accidental puncture
and laceration (“APL”). An example of an APL includes the use of a cautery device (electrosurgery) or scissors to
dissect a tissue plane that errantly causes an injury to underlying bowels.
To
cost effectively expand market coverage, we focus on optimizing our distribution network comprised of direct and independent sales
representatives who are managed and directed by our regional sales managers throughout the United States. In some instances, customers
have recognized the patient safety risks inherent in monopolar electrosurgery and have accepted AEM technology as the way to eliminate
those risks. In other instances, we have found selling the concept behind AEM technology more difficult. This difficulty is due
to several factors, including the necessity to make surgeons, nurses and hospital risk managers aware of the potential for unintended
electrosurgical burns (which exists when conventional instruments are used during laparoscopic monopolar electrosurgery) and the
resulting increased patient injury and medicolegal liability exposure. Additionally, we must contend with the overall lack of
single purchasing points in the industry (surgeons, hospital personnel, and value analysis committees have to be in substantial
agreement as to the benefits of new technology), and the resulting need to make multiple sales calls on personnel with the authority
to commit to hospital expenditures. Other challenges include the fact that many hospitals have exclusive contractual agreements
with manufacturers of competing surgical instruments.
Our
goal is to optimize a network that has experience selling into the hospital operating room environment. We believe that improvement
in this network offers us the best opportunity to cost effectively broaden acceptance of our product line and generate increased
and recurring sales. Additionally, we are pursuing supplier agreements with the major selected GPOs, hospital systems and integrated
delivery networks.
In
addition to the efforts to broaden market acceptance in the United States, we have contracted with independent distributors in
Australia, New Zealand and the Netherlands to market our products internationally. We have achieved Conformité Européene
(“CE”) marking for our products so that we may sell into the European marketplace. The CE marking indicates that a
manufacturer has conformed to all of the obligations imposed by European health, safety and environmental legislation. While CE
certification opens up incremental markets in Europe, our distribution options in the European marketplace are developing, and
sales in international markets are small.
We
believe that the expanding awareness for AEM technology through education and the improved sales network of independent representatives
will provide the basis for increased sales and continuing profitable operations. However, these measures, or any others that we
may adopt, may not result in increased sales or profitable operations.
Research
and Development
We
aim to continually expand our AEM Instrument product line to satisfy the evolving needs of surgeons. For AEM technology to fully
become a standard of care, we must satisfy surgeons’ preferred instrument shapes, sizes, styles and functionality with integrated
AEM technology. This commitment includes expanding the styles of electrosurgical instruments available for MIS applications so
that the conversion to AEM technology is transparent to surgeons and does not require significant change in their current surgical
techniques. We employ full-time engineers and use independent contractors from time to time in our research and product development
efforts. This group continuously explores ways to broaden and enhance the product line. Current research and development efforts
are focused primarily on line-extension projects to further expand our AEM Instrument product offering to increase surgeons’
choices and options in laparoscopic surgery. Our research and development expenses were $779,493 in fiscal year 2019 and $842,081
in fiscal year 2018. We expense research and development costs for products and processes as incurred. Costs that are included
in research and development expenses include direct salaries, contractor fees, materials, facility costs and administrative expenses
that relate to research and development.
Manufacturing,
Regulatory Affairs and Quality Assurance
We
engage in various manufacturing and assembly activities at our leased facility in Boulder, Colorado. These operations include
disposable scissor inserts manufacturing and assembly of our AEM Instrument system as well as fabrication, assembly and test operations
for instruments, monitors and accessories. We also have relationships with a number of outside suppliers, including ATL Technology,
LLC who accounted for approximately 27% of our purchases in fiscal year 2019, who provide primary sub-assemblies, various electronic
and sheet metal components, and molded parts used in our products.
We
believe that the use of both internal and external manufacturing capabilities allows for increased flexibility in meeting our
customer delivery requirements and significantly reduces the need for investment in specialized capital equipment. We have developed
multiple sources of supply where possible. Our relationship with our suppliers is generally limited to individual purchase order
agreements supplemented, as appropriate, by contractual relationships to help ensure the availability and low cost of certain
products. All components, materials and sub-assemblies used in our products, whether produced in-house or obtained from others,
are inspected to ensure compliance with our specifications. All finished products are subject to our quality assurance and performance
testing procedures.
As
discussed in the section on Government Regulation, we are subject to the rules and regulations of the United States Food and Drug
Administration (“FDA”). Our leased facility of 28,696 square feet contains approximately 15,100 square feet of manufacturing,
regulatory affairs and quality assurance space. The facility is designed to comply with the Quality System Regulation (“QSR”),
as specified in published FDA regulations. Our latest inspection by the FDA occurred in October 2015.
We
achieved CE marking in August 2000, which required prior certification of our quality system and product documentation. Maintenance
of the CE marking status requires periodic audits of the quality system and technical documentation by our European Notified Body,
TUV Rheinland. The most recent audit was completed in February 2019.
Patents,
Patent Applications and Intellectual Proprietary Rights
We
have invested heavily in an effort to protect our valuable technology, and, as a result of this effort, we have been issued 16
unexpired relevant patents that together form a significant intellectual property position. Our patents relate to the basic shielding
and monitoring technologies that we incorporate into our AEM products. As of March 31, 2019, we have 16 unexpired United States
patents relating to specific implementations of shielding and monitoring in instruments. As of March 31, 2019, there are between
four and twenty years remaining on our AEM patents. We have five patent applications in process and we have four trademarks.
Our
technical progress depends to a significant degree on our ability to maintain patent protection for products and processes, to
preserve our trade secrets and to operate without infringing the proprietary rights of third parties. Our policy is to attempt
to protect our technology by, among other things, filing patent applications for technology that we consider important to the
development of our business. The validity and breadth of claims covered in medical technology patents involve complex legal and
factual questions and, therefore, may be highly uncertain. Even though we hold patented technology, others might copy our technology
or otherwise incorporate our technology into their products.
We
require our employees to execute non-disclosure agreements upon commencement of employment. These agreements generally provide
that all confidential information developed or made known to the individual by us during the course of the individual's employment
is our property and is to be kept confidential and not to be disclosed to third parties.
Competition
The
electrosurgical device market is intensely competitive and tends to be dominated by a relatively small group of large and well-financed
companies. We compete directly for customers with those companies that currently make conventional electrosurgical instruments.
Larger competitors include Advanced Surgical Technologies Group (a division of Medtronic plc) and Ethicon Endo-Surgery (a division
of Johnson & Johnson). While we know of no competitor (including those referenced above) that can provide a continuous solution
to stray electrosurgical burns, the manufacturers of conventional (non-monitored, non-shielded) instruments will resist any loss
of market share resulting from the presence of our products in the marketplace. What clearly differentiates us from the competition
is that while competitive technologies may somewhat reduce the risk of stray energy burns, only AEM Technology completely eliminates
it.
We
also believe that manufacturers of products based on alternative technology to monopolar electrosurgery are our competitors. These
alternative technologies include other “advanced energy” technologies such as bipolar electrosurgery, laser surgery
and ultrasonic dissector sealers. Leading manufacturers in these areas include Advanced Surgical Technologies Group, Gyrus/ACMI
(a division of Olympus Corporation and a leader in bi-polar electrosurgery), Lumenis (laser surgery) and Ethicon Endo-Surgery
(a division of Johnson and Johnson, manufacturers of the harmonic scalpel). We believe that monopolar electrosurgery offers substantial
competitive, functional and financial advantages over these alternative energy technologies and will remain the primary tool for
the surgeon, as it has been for decades. However, the risk exists that these alternative technologies may gain greater market
share and that new competitive techniques may be developed and introduced.
As
mentioned in the Sales and Marketing discussion, the competitive issues involved in selling our AEM product line do not primarily
revolve around a comparison of cost or features, but rather involve generating an awareness of the inherent hazards of electrosurgery
and the potential for injury to the patient. This involves conceptual selling, rather than just product selling, which results
in a longer sales cycle and generally higher sales costs. Independent endorsements of AEM technology have greatly enhanced the
credibility of AEM Instruments. However, our efforts to increase market awareness of this technology may not be successful, and
our competitors may develop alternative strategies and/or products to counter our marketing efforts.
Many
of our competitors and potential competitors have widely-used products and significantly greater financial, technical, product
development, marketing and other resources. In addition to our direct sales force, we utilize a network of independent distributor
representatives in selected areas. In some cases, our options for independent distribution have conflicting and competing product
interests which compromise our ability to make market advances in certain areas. We may not be able to compete successfully against
current and future competitors, and competitive pressures faced by us may have a material adverse impact on our business, operating
results and financial condition.
Government
Regulation
Government
regulation in the United States and other countries is a significant factor in the development and marketing of our products and
in our ongoing manufacturing, research and development activities. The FDA regulates us and our products under a number of statutes,
including the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetics Act (the “FDC Act”). Under the FDC Act, medical devices are classified
as Class I, II or III on the basis of the controls deemed necessary to reasonably ensure their safety and effectiveness. Class
I devices are subject to the least extensive controls, as their safety and effectiveness can be reasonably assured through general
controls (e.g., labeling, pre-market notification and adherence to QSR). For Class II devices, safety and effectiveness can be
assured through the use of special controls (e.g., performance standards, post-market surveillance, patient registries and FDA
guidelines). Class III devices (e.g., life-sustaining or life-supporting implantable devices or new devices which have been found
not to be substantially equivalent to legally marketed devices) require the highest level of control, generally requiring pre-market
approval by the FDA to ensure their safety and effectiveness. Our products are Class II devices.
If
a manufacturer or distributor of medical devices can establish that a proposed device is "substantially equivalent"
to a legally marketed Class I or Class II medical device or to a Class III medical device for which the FDA has not required a
pre-market approval application, the manufacturer or distributor may seek FDA marketing clearance for the device by filing a 510(k)
pre-market notification. Following submission of the 510(k) notification, the manufacturer or distributor may not place the device
into commercial distribution in the United States until an order has been issued by the FDA. The FDA's target for issuing such
orders is within 90 days of submission, but the process can take significantly longer. The order may declare the FDA's determination
that the device is "substantially equivalent" to another legally marketed device and allow the proposed device to be
marketed in the United States. The FDA may, however, determine that the proposed device is not substantially equivalent or may
require further information, such as additional test data, before making a determination regarding substantial equivalence. Any
adverse determination or request for additional information could delay market introduction and have a material adverse effect
on our continued operations. We have received a favorable 510(k) notification for our AEM monitors and AEM Instruments, all of
which are designated as Class II medical devices.
Labeling
and promotional activities are subject to scrutiny by the FDA and, in certain instances, by the Federal Trade Commission. The
FDA also imposes post-marketing controls on us and our products, and registration, listing, medical device reporting, post-market
surveillance, device tracking and other requirements on medical devices. Failure to meet these pervasive FDA requirements or adverse
FDA determinations regarding our clinical and preclinical trials could subject us and/or our employees to injunction, prosecution,
civil fines, seizure or recall of products, prohibition of sales or suspension or withdrawal of any previously granted approvals,
which could lead to a material adverse impact on our financial position and results of operations.
The
FDA regulates our quality control and manufacturing procedures by requiring us and our contract manufacturers to demonstrate compliance
with the QSR as specified in published FDA regulations. The FDA requires manufacturers to register with the FDA, which subjects
them to periodic FDA inspections of manufacturing facilities. If violations of applicable regulations are noted during FDA inspections
of our manufacturing facilities or the facilities of our contract manufacturers, the continued marketing of our products may be
adversely affected. Such regulations are subject to change and depend heavily on administrative interpretations. In October 2015,
the FDA conducted a QSR inspection of our facilities. We believe that we have the internal resources and processes in place to
be reasonably assured that we are in compliance with all applicable United States regulations regarding the manufacture and sale
of medical devices. However, if we were found not to be in compliance with the QSR, in the future, such findings could result
in a material adverse impact on our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.
Sales
of medical devices outside of the United States are subject to United States export requirements and foreign regulatory requirements.
Legal restrictions on the sale of imported medical devices vary from country to country. The time required to obtain approval
by a foreign country may be longer or shorter than that required for FDA approval and the requirements may differ. Our Certificate
of Export from the United States Department of Health and Human Services has expired and we will seek to renew it. However, a
specific foreign country in which we wish to sell our products may not accept or continue to accept the Certificate of Export.
Entry into the European Economic Area market also requires prior certification of our quality system and product documentation.
We achieved CE marking in August 2000, allowing a launch into the European marketplace. Maintenance of the CE marking status requires
annual audits of the quality system and technical documentation by our European Notified Body, TUV Rheinland. The most recent
audit was completed in February 2019.
During
our March 31, 2018 quarter, we received a letter from the FDA. The letter contained a questionnaire regarding Stray Energy and
how to prevent patient injuries from Stray Energy during laparoscopic procedures. We provided the FDA with extensive information
on burns and our program for eliminating them. A Safety Communication was released by the FDA on May 29, 2018. It is on the FDA's
website at: https://www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/Safety/AlertsandNotices/ucm608637.htm. The Safety Communication states that, "In
addition to serving as an ignition source, monopolar energy use can directly result in unintended patient burns from capacitive
coupling and intra-operative insulation failure. If a monopolar electrosurgical units (ESU) is used: Do not activate when near
or in contact with other instruments.”
Environmental
Laws and Regulations
From
time to time we receive materials returned from customers, sales representatives and other sources which are potentially biologically
hazardous. These materials are segregated, and disposed of in accordance with specific procedures that minimize potential exposure
to employees. The costs of compliance with these procedures are not significant. Our operations, in general, do not involve the
use of environmentally sensitive materials.
Insurance
We
are covered under comprehensive general liability insurance policies, which have per occurrence and aggregate limits of $1 million
and $2 million, respectively, and a $10 million umbrella policy. We maintain customary property and casualty, workers’ compensation,
employer liability and other commercial insurance policies.
Employees
As
of March 31, 2019, we employed 36 full-time and 2 part-time individuals, of which 7 full-time are engaged directly in research,
development and regulatory activities, 15 full-time and 2 part-time in manufacturing/operations, 10 full-time in marketing and
sales, and 4 full-time time in administrative positions. None of our employees are covered by a collective bargaining agreement,
and we consider our relations with our employees to be good.
Available
information
Our
internet address is www.encision.com. We are not including the information contained in our website as part of, or incorporating
it by reference into, this document. We make available, free of charge, through our website our annual reports on Form 10-K, quarterly
reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K and amendments to these reports filed or furnished pursuant to Section 13(a)
or 15(d) of the Exchange Act, as soon as reasonably practicable after we electronically file such materials with, or furnish such
materials to, the SEC.
Item
1A. Risk Factors
You
should carefully consider the risk factors described below. If any of the following risk factors actually occur, our business,
prospects, financial condition or results of operations would likely suffer. In such case, the trading price of our common stock
could fall, resulting in the loss of all or part of your investment. You should look at all these risk factors in total. Some
risk factors may stand on their own. Some risk factors may affect (or be affected by) other risk factors. You should not assume
we have identified these connections. You should not assume that we will always update these and future risk factors in a timely
manner. We are not undertaking any obligation to update these risk factors to reflect events or circumstances after the date of
this report or to reflect the occurrence of unanticipated events.
Among
the factors that could cause future results and financial condition to be materially different from expectations are:
Our
products may not be accepted by the market
. The success of our products and our financial condition depends on the acceptance
of AEM products by the medical community in commercially viable quantities during fiscal year 2020 and beyond. We cannot predict
how quickly or how broadly AEM products will be accepted by the medical community. We need to continually educate the marketplace
about the potential hazards involved in the use of conventional electrosurgical products during MIS procedures and the expected
benefits associated with the use of AEM products. If we are unsuccessful in educating the marketplace about our technology and
the hazards of conventional instruments, we will not create sufficient demand by hospitals and surgeons for AEM products and our
financial condition, results of operations and cash flows could be adversely affected.
We
need to continually develop and train our network of direct and independent sales representatives and expand our distribution
efforts in order to be successful.
Our attempts to develop and train a network of direct and independent sales representatives
in the U.S. and to expand our international distribution efforts may take longer than expected and may result in considerable
amounts of retraining effort as the direct and independent sales representatives change their product lines, product focus and
personnel. We may not be able to obtain full coverage of the U.S. by direct and independent sales representatives as quickly as
anticipated. The independent sales representative network has inherent flaws and inefficiencies, which can include conflicts of
interest and competing products. Optimizing the quality of the network and the performance of direct and independent sales representatives
in the U.S. is an ongoing challenge. We may also encounter difficulties in developing our international presence due to regulatory
issues and our ability to successfully develop international distribution options. Our inability to expand our network of direct
and independent sales representatives and optimize their performance could adversely affect our financial results.
We
may need additional funding to support our operations.
We were formed in 1991 and have incurred losses of approximately $22
million since that date. We have primarily financed research, development and operational activities with issuances of our common
stock and warrants, the exercise of stock options to purchase our common stock, stock-based compensation expense related to stock
options and, in some years, by operating profits. At March 31, 2019, we had $273,348 in cash available to fund future operations
and, in addition, access to a line of credit for $1 million. We may find that investment in sales, marketing, research and development
initiatives, merited by market opportunity, may result in our operating at a net loss from quarter to quarter. We may also find
ourselves at a competitive disadvantage due to our constrained liquidity. On July 31, 2018, we signed a new line of credit agreement
with Bank of America Merrill Lynch. The facility provides for up to $1 million revolving line of credit. The interest rate is
a rate per year equal to the LIBOR Daily Floating Rate plus 2.75 percentage points. There is a minimum quarterly EBITDA covenant
and a minimum Collateral Coverage ratio of 2. Minimum Collateral Coverage is the ratio of gross accounts receivable plus inventory
to the line of credit commitment. As of March 31, 2019, we had no borrowings from the credit facility and had an additional $1
million available to borrow. For the quarters ended December 31, 2018 and March 31, 2019, we were not in compliance with the minimum
quarterly EBITDA covenant. There can be no assurance that we would be successful in obtaining alternative sources of funding to
repay this obligation. Should we need additional financing, we may not be able to obtain it on terms acceptable to us or at all.
We
may not be able to compete successfully against current manufacturers of conventional (“unshielded, unmonitored”)
electrosurgical instruments or against competitors who manufacture products that are based on surgical technologies that are alternatives
to monopolar electrosurgery.
The electrosurgical products market is intensely competitive. We expect that manufacturers of
“unshielded, unmonitored” electrosurgical instruments will resist any loss of market share that might result from
the presence of our “shielded and monitored” instruments in the marketplace. We also believe that manufacturers of
products that are based upon surgical technologies that are alternatives to monopolar electrosurgery are our competitors. These
technologies include bipolar electrosurgery, the harmonic scalpel and lasers. The alternative technologies may gain market share
and new competitive technologies may be developed and introduced. Most of our competitors and potential competitors have significantly
greater financial, technical, product development, marketing and other resources than we do. Most of our competitors also currently
have substantial customer bases in the medical products market and have significantly greater market recognition than we have.
As a result of these factors, our competitors may be able to respond more quickly to new or emerging technologies and changes
in customer requirements or to devote greater resources to the development, promotion and sale of their products. It is possible
that new competitors or new alliances among competitors may emerge and rapidly acquire significant market share. The competitive
pressures we face may materially adversely affect our financial position, results of operations and cash flows, and this may hinder
our ability to respond to competitive threats.
If
we do not continually enhance our products and keep pace with rapid technological changes, we may not be able to attract and retain
customers.
Our future success and financial performance will depend in part on our ability to meet the increasingly sophisticated
needs of customers through the timely development and successful introduction of product upgrades, enhancements and new products.
These upgrades, enhancements and new products are subject to significant technological risks. The medical device market is subject
to rapid technological change, resulting in frequent new product introductions and enhancements of existing products, as well
as the risk of product obsolescence. While we are currently developing new products and enhancing our existing product lines,
we may not be successful in completing the development of new products or enhancements. In addition, we must respond effectively
to technological changes by continuing to enhance our existing products to incorporate emerging or evolving standards. We may
not be successful in developing and marketing product enhancements or new products that respond to technological changes or evolving
industry standards. We may experience difficulties that could delay or prevent the successful development, introduction and marketing
of those products, and our new products and product enhancements may not adequately meet the requirements of the marketplace and
achieve commercially viable levels of market acceptance. If any potential new products, upgrades, or enhancements are delayed,
or if any potential new products, upgrades, or enhancements experience quality problems or do not achieve market acceptance, or
if new products make our existing products obsolete, our financial position, results of operations and cash flows would be materially
adversely affected.
If
government regulations change or if we fail to comply with existing and/or new regulations, we might miss market opportunities
and experience increased costs and limited growth.
The research, development, manufacturing, marketing and distribution of
our products in the United States and other countries are subject to extensive regulation by numerous governmental authorities
including, but not limited to, the Food and Drug Administration. Under the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act, medical devices
must receive clearance from the Food and Drug Administration through the Section 510(k) pre-market notification process or through
the more lengthy pre-market approval process before they can be sold in the United States. The process of obtaining required regulatory
approvals is lengthy and has required the expenditure of substantial resources. There can be no assurance that we will be able
to continue to obtain the necessary approvals. As part of our strategy, we also intend to pursue commercialization of our products
in international markets. Our products are subject to regulations that vary from country to country. The process of obtaining
foreign regulatory approvals in certain countries can be lengthy and require the expenditure of substantial resources. We may
not be able to obtain necessary regulatory approvals or clearances on a timely basis or at all, and delays in receipt of or failure
to receive such approvals or clearances, or failure to comply with existing or future regulatory requirements would have a material
adverse effect on our financial position, results of operations and cash flows. Tariffs will increase our material costs and,
if they are fully absorbed by us, then they will negatively affect our gross profit margins.
If
we fail to comply with the extensive regulatory requirements governing the manufacturing of our products, we could be subject
to fines, suspensions or withdrawals of regulatory approvals, product recalls, suspension of manufacturing, operating restrictions
and/or criminal prosecution.
The manufacturing of our products is subject to extensive regulatory requirements administered
by the Food and Drug Administration and other regulatory agencies. Inspection of our manufacturing facilities and processes can
be conducted at any time, without prior notice, by the Food and Drug Administration and such regulatory agencies. In addition,
future changes in regulations or interpretations made by the Food and Drug Administration or other regulatory agencies, with possible
retroactive effect, could adversely affect us. Changes in existing regulations or adoption of new regulations or policies could
prevent us from obtaining, or affect the timing of, future regulatory approvals or clearances. We may not be able to obtain necessary
regulatory approvals or clearances on a timely basis in the future, or at all. Delays in receipt of, failure to receive such approvals
or clearances and/or failure to comply with existing or future regulatory requirements would have a material adverse effect on
our financial position, results of operations and cash flows.
Our
current patents, trade secrets and know-how may not provide a competitive advantage, the pending applications may not result in
patents being issued, and our competitors may design around any patents issued to us.
Our success will continue to depend
in part on our ability to maintain patent protection for our products and processes, to preserve our trade secrets and to operate
without infringing the proprietary rights of third parties. We have 16 issued U.S. patents on several technologies embodied in
our AEM Monitoring System, AEM Instruments and related accessories and we have applied for additional U.S. patents. In addition,
we have four issued foreign patents. The validity and breadth of claims coverage in medical technology patents involve complex
legal and factual questions and may be highly uncertain. Also, patents may not protect our proprietary information and know-how
or provide adequate remedies for us in the event of unauthorized use or disclosure of such information, and others may be able
to develop competing technology, independent of such information. There has been substantial litigation regarding patent and other
intellectual property rights in the medical device industry. Litigation may be necessary to enforce patents issued to us, to protect
trade secrets or know-how owned by us, to defend us against claimed infringement of the rights of others or to determine the ownership,
scope or validity of our proprietary rights or those of others. Any such claims may require us to incur substantial litigation
expenses and to divert substantial time and effort of management personnel and could substantially decrease the amount of capital
available for our operations. An adverse determination in litigation involving the proprietary rights of others 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 our products. The occurrence of any such actual or threatened litigation or the effect on our
business of such litigation may materially adversely affect our financial position, results of operations and cash flows. Additionally,
our assessment that a patent is no longer of value could result in a significant charge against our earnings.
We
depend on single source suppliers for certain of the key components of our products and sub-contractors to provide much of the
materials used in the manufacturing of our products. The loss of a supplier or limitation in supply from existing suppliers could
have a material adverse effect on our ability to manufacture our products until a new source of supply is located.
Although
we believe that there are alternative suppliers, any interruption in the supply of key components could have a material adverse
effect on us. A sudden increase in customer demand may create a backorder situation as lead times for some of our critical materials
are in excess of 12 weeks. We rely on subcontractors to provide products, either in the form of finished goods or sub-assemblies
that we then assemble and test. While these sub-contractors reduce our total cost of manufacturing, they may not be as responsive
to increased demand as we would be if we had our manufacturing capacity entirely in-house, which may limit our growth strategy
and sales.
The
potential fluctuation in future quarterly results may cause our stock price to fluctuate.
We expect that our operating results
could fluctuate significantly from quarter to quarter in the future and will depend upon a number of factors, many of which are
outside our control. These factors include the extent to which our AEM technology and related accessories gain market acceptance;
our investments in marketing, sales, research and development and administrative personnel necessary to support growth; our ability
to expand our market share; actions of competitors; and, general economic conditions. The market value of our common stock has
dramatically fluctuated in the past and is likely to fluctuate in the future. Any of these factors, or factors not listed, could
have an immediate and significant negative impact on the market price of our stock.
Our
common stock is thinly traded, the prices at which it trades are volatile and the buying or selling actions of a few shareholders
may adversely affect our stock price.
As of May 31, 2019, we had a public float, which is defined as shares outstanding minus
shares held by our officers, directors, or beneficial holders of greater than 5% of our outstanding common stock, of 5,827,879
shares, or 50% of our outstanding common stock. The average number of shares traded in any given day over the past year has been
relatively small compared to the public float. Thus, the actions of a few shareholders either buying or selling shares of our
common stock may adversely affect the price of the shares. Historically, thinly-traded securities such as our common stock have
experienced extreme price and volume fluctuations that do not necessarily relate to operating performance.
Product
liability claims may exceed our current insurance coverage.
We face an inherent business risk of exposure to product liability
claims in the event that the use of our products is alleged to have resulted in adverse effects to a patient. We maintain a general
liability insurance policy up to the amount of $10,000,000 that includes coverage for product liability claims. Liability claims
may be excluded from the policy, may exceed the coverage limits of the policy, or the insurance may not continue to be available
on commercially reasonable terms or at all. Consequently, a product liability claim or other claim with respect to uninsured liabilities
or in excess of insured liabilities could have a material adverse effect on our financial position, results of operations and
cash flows.
We
depend on certain key personnel.
We are highly dependent on a limited number of key management personnel, particularly our
President and CEO, Gregory J. Trudel. Our loss of key personnel to death, disability or termination, or our inability to hire
and retain qualified personnel, could have a material adverse effect on our financial position, results of operations and cash
flow.