AMS CX for a longer Phallus?

[Frosty]

My question is: Why would you want a bigger penis than that? Unless you're a porn actor, that is just too much for most women.

[ThatTallGuy]

My question is: Why would you want a bigger penis than that? Unless you're a porn actor, that is just too much for most women.

First off, thanks to everyone for their input.

Frosty: I'm not sure if this question was directed to me, but no...I'm not looking for more length, I was just asking what the difference would be between the flaccid length and the erect length with the CX since the CX doesn't expand or contract like the LGX does. From what I've read and from what others have said in their replies, it sounds like the flaccid length will be significantly more than before being implanted.

Ha! My wife would kill me if I presented to her more length or girth with an implant than I already have! If anything, she wants less.

[whatevery]

Again, it doesn’t give me much satisfaction to point out how wrong you are. But it has to be said.

You are selectively quoting from the studies. They both acknowledge that patients have shorter lengths post-op, that lengthen back to their pre-op length over time. That is the lengthening they are describing.

But they are both also clear that there are no gains compared to pre-op lengths:

“more importantly, no statistical difference was seen between the baseline ICI-induced penile length and measurements at the end of follow-up.” From the Antonini study I provided.

“Overall our study shows that the AMS 700 LGX provides a reliable solution to short penis syndrome post-IPP implantation, providing a penile length comparable to the natural erection.” From the study you provided.

And there are a bunch of other studies that confirm the same thing: when correctly sized and with a cycling protocol, inflatable implants of all types largely get guys back to their pre-implant size from their post-implant shrinkage.

But there is zero evidence that it makes them bigger than that.

That's the thing. You're quoting studies selectively and you're absolutely unequivocally 100% wrong. There are mountains of evidence that LGX enhances one length beyond his pre-op size. I'm not going to be looking for anything anymore but encourage everybody to do their own research and to always keep in mind that doctors would almost always try to lower your expectations, especially as it pertains to ever sought for penile length.

Besides that Leto, you don't have LGX yourself, but dare to brand most of LGX recipient on this forum liars. Because there are very LGX recipients here on FT whose erect penile length didn't exceed their pre-op length, mostly after less than a year of cycling.

But let's forget about the two of us. I encourage every new person on this forum to conduct his own research. Don't listen to non-LGX implantees talking about LGX. LGX is the only length expanding implant with proven track record of likely length expansion. Many of those that choose other implants wish their implants did the same.

Do what I did. Find LGX recipients on the forum. There are plenty of them here. PM them and get the true scoop away from the ego and envy related noise. Just remember that LGX is generally not recommended for people with Peyronie's, and generally works better on smaller dicks. Having larger penis would increase your chances of having rigidity issues with LGX.

Also, don't trust either Leto or me. Google LGX vs CX vs Titan yourself. See what pops up.

I'm going to paste these suggestions every time I see Leto express opinion on LGX.

PS. There is also Rigicon Infla10AX that claims to do the same length wise as does LGX but I'm yet to come across a single AX recipient that exceeded his pre-op length with AX and I came across few already. Carefully watching progress of three members that just got implanted with AX: 2 in the States and 1 in UK. Let's pray their dicks would reach for the stars!

[sambalamba]

Different studies on the same exact experiment can have different outcomes. It doesn't mean one is incorrect over the other. That's just the nature of scientific outcomes sometimes. Means more studies are needed. Study design and interpretation play a major role as well.

Chung et al. (2017) did the largest comparative analysis and the summary is as follows.

Analyzed 2,749 patients who had device replacement. At ≥2 years after initial implantation:
AMS 700 LGX: +1.2 cm mean cylinder length increase
AMS 700 CX: +1.1 cm mean cylinder length increase
Coloplast Titan: +0.9 cm mean cylinder length increase.

Differences were not statistically significant between the three devices. LGX showed a slight numerical advantage, but it was small. 60% of patients gained >0.5 cm, and 40% gained ≥1 cm overall.

On the other hand, Kim et al. (2019) did a study of AMS 700 LGX and stretched flaccid length increased from 11.1 cm to 12.2 cm at 12 months, and inflated length increased from 11.8 cm to 12.7 cm. This shows some length gain with LGX.

As you dive into the details you can see in both studies the length gain of LGX was similar. But one study just compared the LGX which would lead to the conclusion LGX creates length expansion. But the first comparative study would indicate almost insignificant advantage of the LGX towards length expansion.

[edjohn]

Leto is hard wrong about the LGX not growing but the difference is mainly in flaccid to erect. That is the entire point of the design which is why they are specifically sized “down” unlike the others. However every implant has the potential to increase length a little if your surgeon is aggressive enough (safely).

[whatevery]

The other thing is that I'm yet to come across LGX recipient who at least didn't get back to his pre-op length. I came across quite a few Titan and CX recipients that lost their lengths permanently.

Granted for some people it might not be so important. If you were 8" or 9" pre-op but with ED, and became 7" or 8" post-op but hard at will I'd say it was still very much worth it. In fact some Titan and CX recipients on this forum even claim that they exceeded their pre-op lengths a bit. I hope it's true and I'd say more power to them.

It's just that with LGX majority that I came across gained length, but with CX and Titan some actually lost. It sort of make sense because both CX and Titan are girth expanding only but it's just that's how it is.

Moreover, I personally trust personal feedbacks that I get on this forum more than the studies, particularly on LGX. Studies are limited in time. FT feedbacks are not. All of those that claim significant length gain with LGX had their implants for over 5 years. Studies would often not last that long.

[LetoMan]

Another purveyor of misinformation heard from, lol. Some guys think only LGX makes dicks bigger. Some guys like Edjohn think all implants make dicks bigger. I’m still waiting for him to provide me with a link to anyone of any significance claiming that all implants expand in all directions! Best he could do was say I should call Clavell and he would say so (Clavell is on the record in his videos stating that implants do not increase size). viewtopic.php?t=27713&start=10

Just want to point out that there is no evidence of widespread practice of undersizing LGX implants. The instructions for installing the LGX and the CX are identical: the surgeon performs internal measurements of the corpora and implants a device plus RTEs equal to that measurement. There is no variation between the two. Based on what I have read in the literature, there may have been a practice done some time ago to undersize the LGX because of its supposed lengthening ability. But that is no longer the case, per the instructions. Also should point out that the idea that the point of the LGX is to expand from flaccid to erect is seemingly nonsense.

It’s important to understand how the LGX came about. The tech was originally developed in the 90’s to combat penile shortening due to implantation. It’s my understanding that the original tech, the AMS Ultrex, perhaps actually did expand lengthwise a bit. But it did so at the cost of girth expansion, and of course it had to be undersized to accommodate corporas that could not expand beyond their size without danger of erosion. The Ultrex was discontinued for that reason. Later the LGX was introduced, and provided for greater girth expansion, but with virtually no evidence that it actually expands lengthwise when implanted.

The important thing to note is the goal was always to *preserve* size, not to *gain* size. There are two limits on the expansion of penis size in an implanted penis: the corpora, and the implant. Both would have to grow longer in order to make a penis bigger. If you put an implant in that actually grows over time, it’s going to erode the tunica because tunicas only lengthen a very little bit and over a long time.

All of the studies are concerned with getting guys back to their size before implant, NOT growing it beyond that. It’s so far fetched it’s not even contemplated. The idea of the Ultrex and perhaps later the LGX was that guys would get back to their original size because it expanded. But what was eventually observed is that regardless of implant type, almost all implanteees recover their size IF they are sized correctly (an implant length equal to the size of their corpora) and they regularly cycle the implant over the course of two years.

Sambalamba, thanks for relatively intelligent discussion on this. The problem isn’t contradictory studies; there are no studies that show penises getting longer because of implants.

The Chung 2017 study doesn’t measure penile lengths. Rather, it measures the increase in the size of cylinders that can be placed in the corpora upon revision. It’s well documented that many guys when they get a revision, they can accommodate an implant that is a cm or two longer than the one they accommodated before. That’s because the tunica can slightly expand over time when the penis has regular erections… something that happens with an implant that is regularly cycled. Does that mean their dick got longer? Not necessarily. First, with the old implant they are limited by the size of that implant, and as of yet there is no evidence that LGX’s actually get longer inside penises. And that cm or two that is gained… where is it? It could all just be digging deeper into the crus. We would have to see evidence that it was actually making their BPL longer, evidence that doesn’t exist now.

The Kim 2019 study measures stretched flaccid pre-op vs. inflated erect post-op. The big problem with that is that stretched flaccid is a very bad indicator of actual erect penis length. Consider the Antonini 2019 study I linked above. In that study they measured participants in the week pre-op both by flaccid stretched and by inducing an erection with an intercavenous injection. The difference was stark: mean and median stretched lengths were both essentially 14 cm and ICI induced erection was essentially 17 cm. Those 3 cm more than make up for the supposed growth in the Kim 2019 study. Flaccid stretched is apparently a bad way to measure actual erect length, perhaps explainable by the differences in who is doing the pulling, conditions, why it is being stretched, etc. It should be noted that the Kim study was retrospective (it looked back at data that had been gathered before the study design was established) rather than prospective like the Antonini study… that’s probably why they didn’t gather the actual erect preop size and just used the flaccid stretched data that they happened to gather as a proxy. This difference is evident in the Kim study as well, as it shows the flaccid stretched measurements are lower than the inflated erect measurements at each interval (including at baseline, which doesn’t make sense… baseline presumably is pre-op, but the chart also shows an inflated erect measurement at baseline???)

The Kim authors understood this. There is no claim in the paper that the LGX was making dicks bigger. Rather, the authors claim is that shows the LGX “preserves” length.

Anyway. I just want to point out I have no axe to grind here. If the data said implants turned penises into elephant trunks, that is what I would report. It’s just that it doesn’t! Guys who lose fights with the data are always telling people to do their own research or to google this or google that or to “call Dr. Clavell”. Those of us who are interested in what the data says don’t have to do that; we can actually just cite the data. And the data is fundamentally clear on this point: no one’s dick is getting any bigger because of an implant.

[LetoMan]

The other thing is that I'm yet to come across LGX recipient who at least didn't get back to his pre-op length. I came across quite a few Titan and CX recipients that lost their lengths permanently.

The data is abundantly clear that virtually all guys recover their length regardless of implant type, provided they are correctly sized (New Length Measurement Technique) and they follow a cycling protocol for up to two years.

I personally trust personal feedbacks that I get on this forum more than the studies

lol, thanks for letting us know.