LGX vs CX Implants

[cbinspok]

Its very interesting to see your words from several years ago when you were new to an implant. After almost 4 years of use of my Lgx, Im still very glad I made the step to become bionic.
The question of which Ams is better comes up alot. My thoughts now are ( and understand I never had a Cx ) that the most noticeable function of the Lgx is its ability to shrink ie mimicing a normal penis.
The increase of size is regulated by your anatomy so little difference in over all erection size between cx and lgx over all. But on the deflated end I believe the Lgx has greater shrinkage. If I needed a new one today I would have a conversation with the dr. And probably opt. For the Cx, as Ive gotten quite fond of my flaccid cock and the cx would be a bit larger in definition mode. Plus the new pumps sound great too.
Hell in another few years I may think differently again.
Cheers

[Txagq8]

Had something of a discussion along these lines yesterday. I was at urologist for TRT check up. Same doc who did my implant.

Btw back 5 years ago my surgeon was just a little over 1000 implants. Now, per his PA, he has done 1800 or so. That’s 160/year which makes him high volume by anyone’s yardstick. He is strictly AMS, he sends Coloplast cases to an associate now.

Nothing is wrong with my LGX. All is well. But we got to talking about this website, revisions, increase in implant size upon revision, where would I go from here, and the meaning of life.

We didn’t mention the 21 cm LGX. I get the feeling that the doctor tries to avoid them but nobody is going to discuss it.

I’m at 23 cm of implant and it’s been cycling constantly for almost 5 years. In another 5-8 years, if it were to break, I could be looking at needing 26 cm.
That would likely be done with a special order 24 cm CX and 2 cm of RTEs. Then again, using the same approach as this time I might end up 21+5. Bottom line if I had to get a revision and wanted to stick with my surgeon I’m looking at a CX.

I’m okay with that.

In discussing this website I mentioned that the nationally renowned superstars were Eid, Clavell, Perito, & Hakky but that Dr. Kansas occupied a second tier of honorable mentions-his patients who post here were all largely very happy. The PA thought that the top performers list ought to include Levine, apparently my doc is in contact with him a lot discussing cases and techniques.

[nuance]

it's truly frustrating not having data on implant (type) failures. What other surgery has this kind of risk where the implant can break so quickly with no option but to get another and constantly worry about size.

[SWorks17]

I'm scheduled for an implant in August. Not sure if I should go with the LGX or CX model. My doctor says the LGX is good for length and girth, but isn't as rigid as the CX model. Does anybody have experience with either model? Thanks!

mskahn, my military docs implant that he used the majority of the time, was the AMS 700 CX at Brooke Army Medical Center in San Antonio, Texas and I thought for sure that is the implant I would get, but during the surgery, maybe when the doc did my internal penis measurements, the Boston Scientefic rep and the doc decided to go with the LGX. I’m thinking they went that route so I wouldn’t lose length and not have to have extra rear tip extenders.
My LGX works fine, my wife likes it super hard, so I keep pumping until I can’t get any more pumps in.

S-Works

[2435tjklAS]

I’m at 23 cm of implant and it’s been cycling constantly for almost 5 years. In another 5-8 years, if it were to break, I could be looking at needing 26 cm.
That would likely be done with a special order 24 cm CX and 2 cm of RTEs. Then again, using the same approach as this time I might end up 21+5. Bottom line if I had to get a revision and wanted to stick with my surgeon I’m looking at a CX.

I’m okay with that.

Are you saying the length of the implants can increase with every new revision? Because you often cycle?

which has more girth and higher chance of cylinders rupturing?

I did feel like adding I think we can now call the LGX proven to expand length 1-3cm on most everyone and also girth by about 1-2cm (there does seem to be a limit at 5.5", though, and bigger sizes could shrink to that). I would think that would be hard for a lot of men to turn down. What advantage does the CX have over that?

Really I don't know anything about the differences but I am curious.

[nuance]

Are the LGX cylinders more likely to rupture cause they’re stretchable? There has to be a downside else it would be the most popular.

[frank66665]

in my opinion the lengthening of the lgx is all marketing, I don't think that anyone can stretch more than their own anatomy, I think that the lgx gives the impression of lengthening because being very soft, its flaccid or cylinders in the penis become so small that when it swollen, it gives the impression of lengthening, but it lengthens the maximum of what you have available, and not beyond your anatomy, any serious implantologist will never tell you that an implant lengthens your penis

[SWorks17]

in my opinion the lengthening of the lgx is all marketing, I don't think that anyone can stretch more than their own anatomy, I think that the lgx gives the impression of lengthening because being very soft, its flaccid or cylinders in the penis become so small that when it swollen, it gives the impression of lengthening, but it lengthens the maximum of what you have available, and not beyond your anatomy, any serious implantologist will never tell you that an implant lengthens your penis

Frank, I believe the reason that my doc went with the LGX rather than the CX was the ability to fill my natural internal penis because it expands 25 percent more. If I would have gotten the 18cm CX, it would have been stiffer but I probably would have lost some length because it wouldn’t expand enough to fill my internal penis correctly. The AMS implants come in 3cm increments, so the doc and manufacturer rep try to size you the best that they can while using the rear tip extenders to allow the pump to be placed correctly in your scrotum. That’s my thought. I really won’t know, because I didn’t get the CX.

SWorks

[Mark1974]

I'm wondering if the LGX is the most comfortable implant in the flaccid state. However, there seems to be no issues with the CX in the flaccid state.

I also wonder if the CX has more durable cylinders than the LGX.

[2435tjklAS]

in my opinion the lengthening of the lgx is all marketing, I don't think that anyone can stretch more than their own anatomy, I think that the lgx gives the impression of lengthening because being very soft, its flaccid or cylinders in the penis become so small that when it swollen, it gives the impression of lengthening, but it lengthens the maximum of what you have available, and not beyond your anatomy, any serious implantologist will never tell you that an implant lengthens your penis

Are you arguing the numerous authoritative studies by real urologists, the anecdotal evidence from people like me who never once measured their dicks at 9" or above before implant, but do now every time and can easily prove it, all this is merely "marketing"?



How could the bottom of that ad (I know its an ad, but that doesn't mean its wrong) report where it got the proof if the proof is wrong?

When you say you can't grow past your anatomy, we can thank the penis enlargement (PE) idiots for at least proving if you stretch your dick tissue enough they can get longer, and it's not only the impression, even if it's obviously temporary and dangerous since they have nothing to support the new stretched tissues.

Implantees can do it and have it actually be permanent. Tissues in our bodies are obviously capable of enlarging. And sticking a valuable and expensive device invented by real scientists and implanted by real surgeons that was created to do exactly that is far too credible to say they're all lying.