Logo of jester cap with thought bubble.

Image source: The Motley Fool.

DATE

Monday, May 11, 2026 at 4:30 p.m. ET

CALL PARTICIPANTS

  • Chief Executive Officer — Kevin Hykes
  • Chief Financial Officer — Jared Oasheim

TAKEAWAYS

  • Total Revenue -- $14.8 million, up 20%, driven primarily by U.S. heart failure business expansion.
  • U.S. Revenue -- $13.7 million, up 22%, attributed to new sales territories, additional accounts, and increased Barostim awareness.
  • Active Implanting Centers -- 257 at quarter end, compared to 252 on December 31, 2025.
  • U.S. Sales Territories -- 56 at quarter end, up from 53 at year-end 2025 and 45 one year earlier.
  • European Revenue -- $1.1 million, down 2%, as total revenue units decreased to 56 from 59.
  • Gross Profit -- $12.9 million, up 25%.
  • Gross Margin -- 87%, an increase from 84%, reflecting higher average selling price and improved manufacturing efficiency.
  • R&D Expenses -- $3.1 million, up 23%, with increases in consulting, compensation, and non-cash stock-based compensation; partially offset by lower clinical trial expenses.
  • SG&A Expenses -- $22.0 million, up 3%, due to higher compensation and non-cash stock-based compensation, offset by lower consulting and advertising expenses.
  • Interest Expense -- $1.6 million, up $94 thousand, reflecting increased borrowings under the term loan agreement with Innovatus Capital Partners.
  • Other Income, Net -- $600 thousand, down from $1.1 million, due to a lower cash balance reducing interest income.
  • Net Loss -- $13.1 million or $0.50 per share, improved from $13.8 million or $0.53 per share on 26.4 million weighted average shares outstanding.
  • Cash and Cash Equivalents -- $72.3 million as of March 31, 2026.
  • Net Cash Used in Operating and Investing Activities -- $12.3 million, a reduction from $12.9 million in the comparable prior-year period.
  • 30-Day Medicare Advantage Prior Authorization Approval Rate -- 46% year-to-date, compared to 31% in 2024 and 44% in 2025; approval rate was 50% through February before a March decline.
  • Full-Year Revenue Guidance -- Maintained at $63 million to $67 million.
  • Full-Year Gross Margin Guidance -- Updated to 85%-87%.
  • Full-Year Operating Expense Guidance -- Maintained at $103 million to $107 million.
  • Next-Quarter Revenue Guidance -- $15.1 million to $16.1 million.
  • Barostim ASP (Average Selling Price) -- "close to $32 thousand" in the U.S., a sequential increase from 2025’s average of about $31.5 thousand; management does not expect to maintain this level for the full year.
  • BENEFIT-HF Trial Launch -- First site activated and initial patient enrolled; trial enrollment timeline projected at 5-7 years with a two-year follow-up per patient.
  • Addressable Market Expansion -- BENEFIT-HF could increase total addressable market from 339,000 to over 980,000 heart failure patients if successful, with an estimated market opportunity of about $30 billion.
  • Medicare Population Mix -- Traditional Medicare and Medicare Advantage each comprise roughly one-third of all patients; the remaining third includes private payers, VA, and others.
  • Active Center Adds Expectation -- Management continues to expect high single-digit net center adds per quarter, with potential for variability by quarter.
  • OPPS Rule Engagement -- Management described "very constructive engagement with CMS" around 2026 hospital outpatient payment rates, with all five coalition device companies starting the cycle in APC 1580.
  • Sales Organization -- Management highlighted "meaningful contributions from a broader and more experienced sales team," and expanded territory footprint.
  • Therapy Awareness Initiatives -- Expanded medical education, including focused outreach to advanced practice providers and registered nurse coordinators, as well as multiple key industry conference presentations.
  • BENEFIT-HF Center Impact -- Early trial activity is creating engagement with new clinical centers previously unfamiliar with Barostim.
  • AI in Administrative Appeals -- AI tools are now being used by both payers and CVRx’s market access team to address evolving prior authorization workflows.

Need a quote from a Motley Fool analyst? Email [email protected]

RISKS

  • Management explicitly noted a "prior authorization approval rate" in March, attributed to new automated administrative denial processes from payers, causing increased initial denials even for therapies with established codes.
  • "Interest expense increased $94 thousand" due to higher borrowings under the term loan agreement with Innovatus Capital Partners, raising financing costs.
  • Other income, net, declined to $600 thousand from $1.1 million "primarily driven by the lower cash balance."

SUMMARY

CVRx (CVRX +1.32%) reported double-digit revenue and gross profit growth, led by U.S. expansion and higher gross margin. The company activated the first site and enrolled its first patient in the BENEFIT-HF trial, aiming to triple its addressable heart failure market to nearly $30 billion. Medicare Advantage prior authorization approval rates improved year over year, despite a temporary March decline linked to payer-initiated automation and new regulations. Full-year revenue, gross margin, and operating expense guidance were reiterated, and Q2 revenue guidance was issued.

  • Management cited "the most significant reimbursement advancement in our company’s history," with the January 1 transition to Category I CPT codes for Barostim.
  • The market access team reported a "very healthy overturn rate" on appeals, with the majority of initial denials overturned after additional documentation.
  • Category B designation for the BENEFIT-HF trial streamlines coverage, eliminating prior authorization requirements for enrolled patients.
  • The company’s sales and market access strategies include leveraging its own AI tools to proactively address evolving payer administrative processes.

INDUSTRY GLOSSARY

  • Category I CPT Code: A permanent, standardized medical procedure billing code widely accepted for reimbursement in the United States.
  • APC 1580: Ambulatory Payment Classification group used by CMS to set Medicare hospital outpatient payment rates for specific device-related procedures.
  • OPPS: Outpatient Prospective Payment System, the Medicare payment method for hospital outpatient services.
  • BENEFIT-HF Trial: A multi-year, randomized controlled trial evaluating Barostim in patients with heart failure and broader ejection fraction criteria.
  • NT-proBNP: N-terminal pro b-type natriuretic peptide, a biomarker for heart failure assessment.
  • Category B Designation: A CMS clinical trial status enabling coverage for certain investigational devices in pivotal trials.

Full Conference Call Transcript

Kevin Hykes: Thanks, Mike. Good afternoon, and thank you for joining our first quarter 2026 earnings call. We delivered a strong start to 2026, exceeding the high end of our guidance range, driven by 22% growth in the United States. The investments we made throughout 2025 are beginning to positively impact our results. Last year, we worked deliberately to strengthen our sales organization, refine our go-to-market approach, advance critical reimbursement initiatives, and to secure approval for our landmark clinical trial. This quarter shows early evidence that the foundation we have built is translating into results.

As we move through 2026, we remain focused on executing against the same three strategic priorities that have guided our work to date: building a world-class sales organization, driving deep adoption in targeted centers, and continuing to reduce the barriers to adoption of Barostim therapy. Starting with our sales organization, we are pleased with the progress we are seeing from the team. We are seeing meaningful contributions from a broader and more experienced sales team, reflecting the quality of talent we have been able to attract, the discipline we brought to onboarding and training, and the program-focused selling approach that the team is increasingly comfortable executing.

We continue to expand both our active implanting center base and our territory footprint during the quarter, and we expect to maintain this cadence of expansion through the balance of the year. Our second priority is driving deep adoption in the centers we have targeted. Our program-focused playbook emphasizes intentional targeting, building a redundant network of clinical and administrative stakeholders, and establishing a defined Barostim workflow. In the accounts where all of these elements are in place, we are seeing Barostim becoming part of how heart failure is routinely managed rather than an episodic consideration, resulting in higher utilization. This remains the foundation for the long-term growth of our business.

Our third priority is continuing to address the three fundamental barriers to the adoption of Barostim therapy: patient access, therapy awareness, and clinical evidence. We made meaningful progress on all three fronts in the first quarter. Starting with patient access, the transition to Category I CPT codes took effect on January 1, the most significant reimbursement advancement in our company’s history, and we are already beginning to see its impact. Our 30-day Medicare Advantage prior authorization approval rate for submissions managed by our in-house market access team was 46% for 2026, as compared to 31% in 2024 and 44% in 2025. Within the quarter, our approval rate was 50% through the first two months before declining in March.

While we are encouraged by the underlying year-over-year improvement tied to the new Category I code, the March softening reflects the impact of simultaneous changes in the broader reimbursement environment that are affecting our company and others across the medical device industry. Effective January 1, new regulations require Medicare Advantage payers to respond with a decision to a prior authorization request within three or seven days depending on urgency, as compared to the previous 14-day requirement. As a result, certain payers implemented new automated review processes beginning in late February in response to these compressed timeline requirements.

This has resulted in a higher rate of initial denials, particularly in March, on the basis of an experimental designation, even for therapies with established Category I codes and well-documented clinical evidence. Importantly, this is not a reflection of a change in the clinical or coverage rationale for Barostim. This is a new administrative dynamic that is being seen broadly across the device industry, which is not unique to our therapy. We believe that this is simply a timing issue and not a change to the ultimate approval rates because when our market access team appeals these decisions with additional clinical documentation, most of the initial denials are overturned successfully.

While the underlying coverage position for Barostim has never been stronger, our goal is to adapt to this changing environment and to ensure that every submission meets this increasing administrative scrutiny on the front end. Our market access team is implementing the approach with patients and providers through our in-house prior authorization service as well as supporting physician practices with their independent prior authorization efforts, to ensure that they effectively navigate this changing environment. We believe the long-term trajectory for patient access remains strongly positive, and we expect these payer processes to continue to normalize as the industry adjusts to the new regulatory framework.

As it relates to therapy awareness, we continued to expand our medical education efforts during the quarter, with a particular focus on the advanced practice providers who manage most of our indicated heart failure patients in the community. We also had a meaningful presence at several important cardiology meetings during the quarter, including multiple presentations at the THT and ACC meetings that reflect the growing body of clinical evidence supporting Barostim. These engagements continue to drive strong interest in Barostim therapy among the clinicians who are best positioned to identify candidates for treatment.

Additionally, shortly after the first quarter, we piloted our first educational symposium focused on nurses in community cardiology practices, extending our outreach beyond advanced practice providers to the registered nurse coordinators who also play a key role in managing heart failure patients in the community. In terms of clinical evidence, the recently initiated BENEFIT-HF trial is a landmark randomized controlled trial evaluating Barostim in an expanded population of heart failure patients with ejection fractions up to 50% and NT-proBNP levels up to 5 thousand. If successful, this trial would expand our prevalence-based addressable market from approximately 339 thousand patients today to over 980 thousand patients, effectively tripling our market opportunity to approximately $30 billion.

I am pleased to share we activated the first site in our BENEFIT-HF trial in the first quarter and enrolled our first patient last week. The feedback from the heart failure community on the rigor and scale of the trial design has been very positive. Beyond the clinical objectives of the trial, we are seeing meaningful engagement from centers that are interacting with us for the first time because of BENEFIT-HF, which we believe will contribute to broader awareness and visibility for Barostim therapy. To wrap up, the first quarter reflects positive momentum across every part of our business. Our sales team is executing, the reimbursement environment is improving, and our clinical evidence program is advancing on schedule.

We remain focused on continuing to execute through the balance of 2026, and we are confident in the path ahead. Now I would like to turn the call over to Jared for a financial review.

Jared Oasheim: Thanks, Kevin. Unless otherwise stated, year-over-year comparisons are for the three months ended 03/31/2026 compared to the three months ended 03/31/2025. In the first quarter, total revenue was $14.8 million, an increase of $2.4 million or 20%. Revenue in the United States was $13.7 million, an increase of $2.5 million or 22%. Revenue units in the United States totaled [inaudible] for the three months ended 03/31/2026 and 2025, respectively. The increases were primarily driven by continued growth in the U.S. heart failure business as a result of the expansion into new sales territories, new accounts, and increased physician and patient awareness of Barostim.

We ended the quarter with a total of 257 active implanting centers as compared to 252 as of 12/31/2025. We had 56 sales territories in the U.S. at the end of the quarter, compared to 53 at year-end 2025 and 45 on 03/31/2025. Revenue in Europe was $1.1 million, a decrease of $27 thousand or 2%. Total revenue units in Europe decreased to 56 from 59 in the prior-year period. The number of sales territories in Europe remained consistent at five. Gross profit was $12.9 million for the three months ended 03/31/2026, an increase of $2.6 million or 25%. Gross margin increased to 87% compared to 84% a year ago.

Gross margin was higher due to an increase in the average selling price and a decrease in the cost per unit, primarily due to an increase in manufacturing efficiency. R&D expenses increased $600 thousand or 23% to $3.1 million compared to the prior-year period. This change was driven by an increase in consulting expenses, compensation expenses, and non-cash stock-based compensation expenses, partially offset by a decrease in clinical trial expenses. SG&A expenses increased $700 thousand or 3% to $22.0 million compared to the prior-year period. This change was primarily driven by an increase in compensation expenses and non-cash stock-based compensation expenses, partially offset by a decrease in consulting expenses and advertising expenses.

Interest expense increased $94 thousand to $1.6 million compared to a year ago. This increase was driven by the increased borrowings under the term loan agreement with Innovatus Capital Partners. Other income, net, was $600 thousand compared to $1.1 million. These balances consisted of interest income on our interest-bearing accounts. The decrease was primarily driven by the lower cash balance. Net loss was $13.1 million or $0.50 per share for 2026, compared to a net loss of $13.8 million or $0.53 per share for 2025. Net loss per share was based on 26.4 million weighted average shares outstanding for 2026 and 25.9 million weighted average shares outstanding for 2025. As of 03/31/2026, cash and cash equivalents were $72.3 million.

Net cash used in operating and investing activities was $12.3 million for the three months ended 03/31/2026 as compared to $12.9 million for the three months ended 03/31/2025. Now turning to guidance. For the full year of 2026, we continue to expect total revenue between $63 million and $67 million, and we now expect full-year gross margin between 85% and 87%. We continue to expect operating expenses to be between $103 million and $107 million. For the [inaudible], we expect to report total revenue between $15.1 million and $16.1 million. With that, I will now turn the call back over to Kevin for closing remarks.

Kevin Hykes: Thank you, Jared. The first quarter reflects a strong start to the year and gives us confidence in the path ahead. Our sales organization is maturing, the reimbursement environment is improving, and the initiation of BENEFIT-HF opens a meaningful new chapter for our company and for the heart failure patients that we serve. We have more work to do, and we remain focused on execution as we continue to advance Barostim toward becoming a standard of care for the treatment of heart failure. Now I would like to open the line for questions. Operator?

Operator: Thank you. We will now open the call for questions. A confirmation tone will indicate your line is in the question queue. You may press star 2 if you would like to remove your question from the queue. For participants using speaker equipment, it may be necessary to pick up your handset before pressing the star keys. One moment please while we poll for questions. The first question is from Brandon Vazquez from William Blair. Please go ahead.

Max Smock: Hey, guys. It is Max on for Brandon. Thanks for taking the questions. Kevin, I just wanted to start with one on the prior authorization. I understand that the dip in March was due to some of the automation that you mentioned. Can you touch on how some of the practices you have put into place to address this have trended thus far? And at a higher level, what is included in 2026 guidance for any potential ongoing headwinds in that case?

Kevin Hykes: Sure. Thanks. I appreciate the question, Max. I will let Jared address the guidance piece, but up front, as I mentioned, this was an unexpected and inadvertent effect of some new federal regulations that went into place on January 1. We first saw this in late February. What we saw was an increase in immediate denials, often for experimental reasons, but in fact because of administrative gaps in the prior authorizations—effectively missing signatures—or they are using AI, as we can best tell, to find any missing data they possibly can to serve as grounds for immediately denying a prior authorization request, which then buys them the additional time they now need under the new rules to properly evaluate.

We have responded, working closely with our in-house team that does this day in and day out. We have lots of physicians who do it themselves and have begun using our own AI tools to ensure that every possible “t” is crossed and “i” is dotted in these very lengthy prior authorization requests so that we can defeat this attempt to buy time, which is what we believe it effectively is. Importantly, what we are seeing—and this has been corroborated with partners across the industry through back channels—is a very healthy overturn rate.

So if there is a surprise, it is that these are taking a little longer than we thought they would, but the ultimate approval rates, we think, will be as good or better as the prior chapter under Category III. We think it is a temporary situation. We are all working our way through it, and we do not think it will ultimately affect approval rates for the therapy. Jared, do you want to cover the second part of the question?

Jared Oasheim: Happy to. Max, just to clarify as well, one of the things that we are watching really closely is that 30-day approval rate. We received the 30-day approval rate for March in April, noting a slight decline from what we had seen in January and February. As for the guidance, we did not really know what was going to happen with Category I. We assumed it would lead to higher approval rates for our prior authorizations that we are supporting in 2026, but we did not want to bank on that as we were setting up the guidance.

To hit the numbers in the initial guide, we assumed very consistent 30-day and 60-day approval rates for cases that required prior authorization support. Last year, we saw 30-day approval rates of roughly 44%. So far in Q1, we are at 46%, so slightly better year to date. If that continues, then we should not see any issues hitting the guide we initially set. Longer term, we still expect this to be a timing issue.

We do expect the appeals approval rate to be greater for these Category I cases as the documentation is refined, so we still expect a greater final or terminal approval rate, but we are not going to bake that into guidance until we actually see it play out.

Max Smock: That is helpful. And then just for a follow-up, congrats on enrolling the first patient in BENEFIT-HF. How should we think about that progressing as the year moves on? And you mentioned in your prepared remarks that it was helping you get your foot in the door with some new centers that may not have been familiar with Barostim. Can you talk about that dynamic specifically and then more broadly how we should think about the ramp of the trial throughout the rest of the year?

Kevin Hykes: Sure. I will cover the second part first and let Jared cover your initial question on ramp. As we have mentioned, this is a landmark trial in heart failure and for our company—the largest, we believe, therapeutic device trial ever done. If you think about the barriers to adoption—awareness, evidence, and patient access—this trial touches all three. It has driven significant awareness for us, it will be a foundational element of our long-term evidence portfolio, and the Category B designation effectively creates a national coverage decision for patients enrolled in this trial, and that is a population three times bigger than our current population. So it helps us further reduce barriers.

For ultra-conservative centers that have not yet been ready to adopt Barostim, it is an excellent engagement tool, and many of them are willing to implant Barostim under the auspices of a trial like this. For those that have already adopted Barostim, it is equally interesting because it allows them to treat many more patients, often patients they are turning away for Barostim today. We have already seen evidence that this is viewed as a leadership- and confidence-boosting signal and a project many of our physicians want to be part of.

Jared Oasheim: Max, to address the ramp question, we are really happy to see a couple of sites activated and that first patient enrolled so early in the year. We are still being a little cautious as far as what we will bake into expectations for 2026. We are going to need a bit more experience with our site activation process before we start setting expectations on how many new sites could be activated each month and, therefore, by the end of this year. We are thinking in terms of multiple quarters, maybe multiple years, to get all of these sites up and running.

It could take 12 to 24 months to get to that target of 150 sites activated and fully starting to enroll this trial.

Max Smock: That is helpful. Thanks, guys.

Operator: The next question is from John Young from Canaccord Genuity. Please go ahead.

John Young: Hey, Kevin and Jared. Thanks for taking the question and congratulations on the quarter. I just wanted to start off on the reiteration of the revenue guidance. You have kind of a solid Q1 beat. I am wondering, is the reiteration just Q1 conservatism, or are you seeing anything beyond the reimbursement dynamics that you already highlighted as we sit here in May?

Jared Oasheim: Happy to take that one, John. One quarter in at this point, this is a year where we are reaccelerating our growth rate after doing a lot of team building and rebuilding the ground floor of the company over the last couple of years. We simply did not want to get ahead of ourselves from a guide perspective by updating the full-year number after just the first quarter. We are really happy with the results and seeing that reacceleration back to 20% growth, but we do not want to get ahead of ourselves by updating guide too early in the year.

John Young: Great, thanks, Jared. I will also just touch on the Medicare Advantage prior authorization. When they get close to 50%, can you remind us again of willingness of MA payers to create policies? And do you need prior authorization for patients enrolled in BENEFIT-HF?

Kevin Hykes: Sure. Thanks, John. I will take the second one first. The short answer is no, we do not, which is a benefit. Patients that are eligible and enrolled in the trial will be treated almost as traditional Medicare patients—no prior authorization required. As it relates to the first question, roughly 10% of all denials are ever appealed. Across the spectrum, 80% plus of appeals are ultimately approved. It is about not giving up and being tenacious in appealing each and every denial.

If you push it all the way to the end of the process—the administrative law judge (ALJ) review—the industry data suggest once payers begin losing not even 50%, but high-40-percent of those, they will begin to approve without having to go to ALJ because the ALJ process is expensive and they bear that cost. That threshold is about 48%, from what we understand.

John Young: And just to follow up on that, any expectations on your end of when we could approach that number?

Kevin Hykes: We are starting to see we are in that neighborhood with a number of payers already. Once you cross that threshold, you often move into a situation of silent coverage—so they do not yet have a written policy, but they are, in fact, approving. Eventually, you move on to a written coverage policy through a number of different mechanisms. That is still some years away, but we are pleased with what we are seeing as we move through this and with the number of ALJ appeals that we ultimately win.

Operator: The next question is from Samantha Munoz on for Matt O’Brien from Piper Sandler. Please go ahead.

Samantha Munoz: Hi. Thank you so much for taking our question. First, we wanted to touch on ASP in the quarter, which looks really nice. It is a little bit different than historical seasonality where we see a dip in Q1. Can you talk about your expectations for ASP the rest of the year? Is this related to the Category I code, and any other details there would be great. And then, going back to BENEFIT-HF, how long do you anticipate this trial to enroll and any expectations on ultimately when you think potentially the TAM could triple?

Jared Oasheim: Happy to take the ASP question, Sam. We are seeing close to $32 thousand ASPs on the U.S. business for the first quarter, a nice step up again from the average we saw in 2025, closer to $31.5 thousand. I am still a little reluctant to bake that into expectations throughout 2026. We are kind of expecting that number to be around $31 thousand or maybe $31.5 thousand throughout the year. We are incentivizing the sales team to go out and capture as high of an ASP as possible, so the team will continue to push on that to see that number potentially grow over time, just not baking that into expectations for 2026.

On the BENEFIT-HF timeline, when we laid out this trial we talked about a timeline of five to seven years, knowing that once we fully enroll the trial there is going to be a two-year follow-up period for the final patient. If we hit the middle of that target, it would take about four years to enroll the 2.5 thousand patients, and then two years afterwards to follow them up. So you are talking six years from the beginning of the trial this year out into the early 2030s before we could potentially see FDA approval.

Samantha Munoz: Got it. Thank you.

Operator: The next question is from Frank James Takkinen from Lake Street Capital Markets. Please go ahead.

Frank James Takkinen: Great. Thank you for taking the questions. I was hoping to start with conversation around some higher-utilization sites. I think previously you spoke to the top 20% of sites averaging in the neighborhood of 1.5 procedures per month. Can you speak to that top 20% cohort—what their utilization rates are looking like today? And any commentary toward the opposite of that question of more sites graduating into that 1.5-per-month rate?

Jared Oasheim: Appreciate the question, Frank. We were trying to draw a line in the sand for investors and the outside community to understand what is possible with these centers. We pulled that as an ad hoc analysis in the fourth quarter for our top 20% of centers to note that they were doing more than one patient per center per month, to show what is possible as we continue to build out our programs. I do not think it is going to be a metric that we will share on a quarterly basis because there is some seasonality that plays in as we look at results from Q4 going into Q1.

Maybe on an annual basis we can reflect on how many more of those centers are now reaching that threshold of one patient a month. We can refresh that number in Q4 this year.

Frank James Takkinen: Fair enough. And then can you speak to prior auth rates in April by chance? If we had 50% in the first two months and then ended at 46%, I think that implies March was maybe high-30s. Just curious if it was up or down from that prior auth rate.

Jared Oasheim: I do not think March was quite that bad, Frank. There is a little bit of mix in how many prior auths were processed in March compared to January and February. We did have a bit of a bolus coming through in January that helped drive that rate a little higher. As for April, we are seeing it bounce back. We do not have 30-day rates yet for April. All we have is about 11 days’ worth of data for the prior authorizations submitted in April. In those early rates, we are seeing a little bit of a bounce back closer to the January/February approval rates than what we saw in March.

We expect a little up and down as we implement new tools and other payers implement new tools to adapt to this new regulation issued at the beginning of the year, but we are seeing it bounce back a bit in the early April data.

Operator: The next question is from Chase Richard Knickerbocker from Craig-Hallum Capital Group. Please go ahead.

Chase Richard Knickerbocker: Great. Thank you for taking the questions. Maybe just to follow up on the dynamic with Medicare Advantage. Can you remind us of the mix between Part B and Medicare Advantage within your Medicare business? And then on guidance, does the recent trend give you comfort that March did not impact revenue trajectory?

Jared Oasheim: The traditional Medicare patients represent about a third of our overall patient population. Medicare Advantage patients represent another third. The remaining third are private payers, VA, and maybe some uncovered patients. So two-thirds are covered by Medicare, split roughly 50/50 between traditional Medicare and Medicare Advantage. On guidance, it is the latter—we are feeling good about the guidance we provided on the top line. We believe the MA approval rates at 30 days, or even terminal rates, are going to be as good or better than what we saw in 2025. We want to see this play out a little further before we would tighten the range on the guidance.

Chase Richard Knickerbocker: Got it. Just last one for me. As we think about July approaching and the OPPS proposed rule, have there been any notable conversations you can share around your APC placement or any additional thoughts there?

Kevin Hykes: Sure, thanks, Chase. It is time for Groundhog Day again. The good news is we have been working on this, as we have in past years, since January. We have had very constructive engagement with CMS. Our data is better than it has ever been, as is the combined data of this coalition of five companies. Importantly, all five companies this year are starting in 1580, which has not been the case in the past. We think that bodes well for this year’s cycle, and we are hopeful this will be the year we can finally put this issue to bed. No specifics or commitments from CMS, but lots of engagement.

Operator: The last question comes from JP Morgan. Please go ahead.

Analyst: Hi, this is Alan on for Robbie Marcus. Thanks for the question. I have a quick one on your expectations for center adds this year. I think you had previously talked to an average of high single-digit centers per quarter. I think first quarter was a little bit lower relative to our expectations. You also commented that the trial could bring in new centers that had not historically been CVRx, Inc. customers. Understanding the onboarding process is longer, how should we think about that expectation for high single digits? Could there be upside as some newer accounts are brought in through the trials rather than standard commercial efforts?

Jared Oasheim: Thanks, Alan. Our expectation is that the vast majority of the centers activated in BENEFIT-HF will have experience with Barostim already, so we do not believe this will be a significant near-term driver of new center adds. Over time, as we engage some of those new centers and they start to treat patients, they will be included in the active implanting center totals, but we do not think that will impact the next few quarters throughout 2026. As for expectations for new center adds, we are still setting the expectation for high single digits on a net basis quarter to quarter, with variability—like this quarter where we were plus five.

Some quarters could be low double digits; other quarters may be around five.

Analyst: Got it. And then a quick follow-up on the Medicare Advantage dynamic. With your market access team appealing more decisions, in light of you reiterating operating expense guidance, is there a chance you need to expand that team to address a higher rate of denials, or can you handle this with your current team?

Kevin Hykes: Thanks, Alan. The short answer is no. We are deploying AI to respond to AI, in effect. We do not believe our team will be any less efficient or that the burden will change dramatically. We are responding to a new tool being deployed against us, and we are confident we can respond appropriately and that the team can continue to support prior authorizations with roughly the same efficiency they have historically.

Operator: This concludes the question and answer session. I would like to turn the floor back over to Kevin Hykes for closing comments.

Kevin Hykes: Thank you, operator, and thanks to everyone for joining us today. We appreciate your continued support and look forward to updating you on our progress next quarter.

Operator: This concludes today’s teleconference. You may disconnect your lines at this time. Thank you for your participation.