Thank you, David, and good afternoon, everyone. As David mentioned, I'd like to share with you an update on the Evolysse/Estyme filler product line. Estyme is the name we use in Europe, and to make it simple, I'll refer to the line as Evolysse on the call. Going to Slide 2. The Evolysse HA filler manufacturing process uses a unique coal technology, which helps preserve the natural HA molecule structure, the building block of HA gels. Then each one of the HA products undergoes a specific manufacturing process, creating an optimized gel product for the target indication. Last month, the largest aesthetic meeting in the world IMCAS took place in Paris, and we'd like to share with you some of the clinical data shown there. Slide three. The data for Lift from the European Nasolabial full trial was presented and as a reminder, in the U.S., the two lead products are smooth and lift with an expected PMA filing with the FDA this summer. The study was double-blind, randomized, multi-center, enrolled 45 patients, a split-based design and used Restylane-L as the active control compared to Lift. The average volume injected and the baseline severity of the nasolabial fold scores were similar in both groups. The primary endpoint was non-inferiority comparing the improvement in the NLF severity scores at 4 weeks between the two products. The difference was minus 0.16 in favor of Evolysse Lift and the upper bound of the 95% confidence interval was 0.03, successfully passing the primary endpoint. Of note, the confidence intervals cross 0, demonstrating equivalence between the two products. The graph on the right illustrates the change in the NLF severity grade from baseline out to nine months. Note that despite similar volumes injected at the initial treatment, Evolysse Lift seems to have more pronounced effect at all time points, numerically and reach a statistical superiority at three and six months. Slide four, the graph on the left illustrates the percent of responders with at least a 1-point improvement over time using the NLF scale as assessed by the investigator. At nine months, the patient responder rate was 31% for Restylane-L and 46.7% for Evolysse Lift. The global aesthetic improvement scale on the right assesses the actual aesthetic outcome after treatment. The investigator scores are high throughout the study, but more importantly, the patient's own assessment of their respective aesthetic outcome was also high right to the end of the study with Restylane-L at 77.8% and Evolysse Lift at 82.2%. Slide five. SMOOTH is a softer product than Lift and can also be used in nasolabial folds, providing a second option in the area. In Europe, SMOOTH was also studied for the treatment of fine lines around the mouth or Perioral lines. This was an open-label, 61-patient study using a validated scale and measured the severity grade improvement of the fine lines over time. Fine lines are difficult to treat since the product needs to be placed superficially and only small volumes can be used. Here, we can see the results all the way out to one year with only half a milliliter of SMOOTH injected. Slide six. The scope product is halfway through its clinical trials in the U.S. In Europe, a 60-patient no control study followed the 3D volumetric correction of patients for 1.5 years. A little over 1 ml was injected into each sheet then using a special system, the 3D volume of the treat was measured. We see here an initial correction than a stable correction from 6 to 18 months at the end of the study. Slide seven. Lift of our particular interest to Evolysse as this is a popular lead indication for millennials. In Europe, 72 patients were enrolled in a single-arm study and their lip fullness was assessed using a validated score, a scale over the course of one year. Although not a head-to-head study, to provide some context, we've included the study results from the Emervel lip study, a product known as Restylane Kysse here in the U.S. It's interesting to note that the volume of product used in the two studies is different. One ml of Evolysse Lift was used at initial treatment and no touch-ups were allowed. In the Restylane study, 1 ml was also used at the time of the initial treatment, but a touch-up was allowed increasing the average amount of product received by each patient by 30% for 1.3 ml. Looking at the results over time, despite requiring less product, Evolysse Lift seems to provide more of a correction and lasts twice as long. Slide eight. The global aesthetic improvement scores were high throughout the duration of the trial for both the investigator and the patients. At the 1-year mark, 88% of the patients rate themselves are still having an effect. Slide nine. In summary, we now have the rights to the Evolysse/Estyme filler line throughout Europe and the U.K. We expect to receive European approval for Smooth, Lift, Sculpt and lips in the second half of this year under the new MDR approval process. Of note, Lift is already approved in Europe under the past MDD process. In the U.S., we remain on track. The first two products, Smooth and lift, the last patient just completed the trial this week. We plan to present the top line results for this U.S. pivotal study this summer and submit the PMA to the FDA with an anticipated approval in 2025. Sculpt is halfway through its pivotal trial, and we expect approval in 2026 followed Lips and Eyes in 2027. Moving from Evolysse, as Evolus continues to lead our portfolio with its precision profile, and we recently completed our Phase 2 Jeuveau duration “extra-strength” study, demonstrating extended duration of 26 weeks and expect the results to be published in a peer-reviewed journal this year. With that, I'll turn it back to you, David.