Two schools of thought - direct to implant or exhaust other options

[Kimball]

If we catch an infection, it’s 1%.

I’d focus on the 99% and become a success story.

The risk of infection is 1% to 3% for the first surgery.

For revision or repair surgery, it is is 13% or higher, due to scar tissue and longer operation times. This is from the Journal of Urology.

[Old Guy]

Not sure what others have contributed, but I'm definitely in the camp of skip the pills and injections.
Wish I had known about the implant before taking that first Viagra. Yes, they worked good at first, then the side effects kicked in on top of fading results. Went a couple years with no erections until I was introduced to Trimix. Same thing, it worked great at first until side effects and less result. When Trimix quit working it was a couple years until I found out about implants.
If only I knew then what I know now it would have been straight to surgery.

[ElbowRoom]

It’s a personal call. Frankly, I wish I hadn’t done injections as long as I did (over a decade). They are i convenient, cause scarring and Peyronie’s, and can reduce sensitivity. I had reduced sensitivity, and some fibrosis, but thankfully didn’t get PD or other bad scarring effects.

The implant, conversely, has been marvelous. Any time, any place, any duration, any number of times. It’s the kind of sexual function we all dreamed of as horny teenagers. Once the healing is done of course, that part is a drag.

My advice would be to consider trying the shots, but only as a stop-gap while you decide if you really want the expense and risks of the implant. If you already know that you like the idea of the implant, maybe skip right to it.