Re: usersr of PAPnet

<< Previous Message | Next Message >>
From:Beth Sheppard <>
To:"Gary W. Gill" <>
Date:Mon, 29 Mar 1999 09:44:10 -0500
Content-Type:text/plain; charset=us-ascii

Gary's note brings up another point. How many labs are currently using Cytec-
thin prep for all GYN preparations? How was it introduced to your lab? By the
clinician? Considered standard of care?  or Just the lab thought it would be a
good to offer this in your institution? Has it been cost effective???

I realize the thin prep technology does provide a very nice clean slide and is
easier to interpret. But, I do detest the feeling of having an instrument
demanded by physicians due to active marketing by a company to physicians and
It is about time that this instrument has some competition.
We  can only wonder why the cost of healthcare is escalating for us not only as
consumers but providers.

"Gary W. Gill" wrote:

> FYI, Neuromedical Systems voluntarily filed on 03/26 for bankruptcy
> protection in a Wilmington, Delaware court and "therewith let go the
> majority of its US workforce."  NeoPath, maker of AutoCyte, will acquire
> NSI's "patent estate" and 1.4 million shares of common stock for $4 million,
> pending approval.  The recently published "Duke evidence report" and JAMA
> article (too little bang for the buck) probably accelerated the inevitable
> demise.
> Perhaps some large lab will acquire numerous deeply discounted PapNet
> devices and offer a regional Pap smear screening service.  However, the
> latter is what got NSI into trouble in the first place.  Or perhaps, a few
> university researchers will use PapNet to conduct cytological studies.  But
> where will they get the spare parts?  It's not a happy situation.
> I am not a PapNet user, though I took their week long training course in
> 1997.  The technology is impressive, but NSI's early marketing strategy and
> tactics were not well received by potential end users.  NSI persisted in
> this strategy for too long to recover.  Like all automated systems, PapNet
> is not perfect; it still misses abnormal cells.  It is also very expensive.
> PapNet driven screening microscopy systems are very sophisticated
> electronically and require daily QC/QA measures -- which is to be expected.
> I wish all NSI employees well.  The few I met were competent, conscientious,
> personable individuals.  Having experienced sudden and unexpected
> outplacement twice in the past 10 years, I appreciate firsthand the turmoil
> created in one's personal and professional life.  Becoming re-employed is
> especially difficult when one's job skills are very specialized and matching
> job opportunities are few and far between.
> Gary Gill
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: John van Marsdijk []
> > Sent: March 27, 1999 3:11 AM
> > To: Histonet listserver
> > Subject: usersr of PAPnet
> >
> >
> > Are there any users of the PAPnet, and what are they going to do now NSI
> > doesn't do to well ?
> >
> > --
> > met vriendelijke groet,
> >
> >  John

<< Previous Message | Next Message >>