HazelEyes wrote:Lost Sheep wrote:Welcome to the forum, HazelEyes.
Think of it this way:
The example of a man with a bum leg who can hobble through a mile run in 45 minutes, but amputate and replace the leg with a prosthesis and he can do that mile in 10 minutes (not world-class running but a lot better than he could do before). But the leg, if it breaks and he will be in a wheelchair. Parallel this with a penile implant. No sex, or extremely bad sex, but remove the corpus cavernosum to insert an implant and he can have sex almost as good as when he was intact and fully capable. But if the implant breaks, he is in a wheelchair....until he gets a replacement implant.
So, my choices were to continue with crippled sex (fellatio still worked and cunnilingus sufficed) or go for the implant for assisted sex more like natural. A choice unaffected by expected service life of the prosthetic.
I think I was trying to ask a more semantic question, like statistically how many men are capable of getting a revision after receiving an implant? How many studies are there on dudes who have had multiple revisions over multiple decades?
In most cases I've read on here it seems the implant leaves people with less sensation in their penis and less ability to orgasm. If an implant failed and you were only 30 something years old and weren't fit for a revision, seems like you're a lot worse off than before and you still have many decades of enduring the regret of that decision. At least before you would of still been able to feel your penis and orgasm as awkward as that would of been.
I don't have ED but I've thinking about what I would do if I did get it one day and the revisions required for penile implants seem to instill a lot of uncertainty in my decision to consider that option since I don't know how many revisions a person is capable of withstanding before their penis basically breaks.
OK, I get it. My reasoning still applies, I think. My point was that anticipating potential revisions is a good thing to do so you are aware of all potential outcomes. But if an implant is necessary, the revision question is largely irrelevant in that it does not matter. Future revisions do not bear on an impotent man's contemporaneous condition. That is, even if a (future) revision would not ever be possible, the implant would treat an otherwise untreatable condition. So, the question of whether or not to implant is clearly answered, "yes". If the man is not irreversibly impotent, an implant is not indicated, no matter of revisions were easy or not.
Sensation: Some men do lose sensation. Any time a surgery is performed, nerve damage is possible, but not inevitable. In my case, the order of preference of sexual activities has changed. Masturbation is not very satisfactory and takes longer than it used to. Fellatio (previously preferable to coitus, probably because it was more successful than coitus at achieving my orgasms because coitus was a guaranteed dead end). But coitus has taken a superlatively starring role in my love-making repertoire. So, you might infer that I lost feeling in some ways and gained feeling in other ways. On a scale of 1 to 10, my pre-implant score was maybe 2 or 3 because fellatio and cunnilingus still sufficed, albeit only as a compromise. Post-implant, I think 8 to 10. 8 because my erections are not spontaneous. 10 because my ability to enter m lover and stay erect, no matter what (refractory period after ejaculation does not cause erectile collapse, nor does venous leakage). So, my sex life is absolutely improved and well worth going through the operation, no matter what the future holds.
I suppose one could have so many revisions that the penis is no longer operable, but I have never heard of any man who met that fate. Some men are limited in which implants they can have, but Coloplast and AMS have a lot of options in their inventories.
