wolfcreek wrote:I never trust any self serving. industry-supported studies. The only study I have total confidence in is my own experience - in my case I am 100% sure that the LGX, for which I paid over $20,000 suffered a catastrophic failure at just 4.5 years (left cylinder developed a hole and the entire implant had to be replaced at a cost of $10,000).
So how do people make decisions who have never had an implant. They see people like yourself, who have had failures, and others who have had success. But, they don't have a way to really measure the % of successes vs failures. Hence studies. Yes some are industry funded and may be biased, but I am fairly certain there are independent studies that have been posted recently that support a higher degree of success.
I hope you are not implying that because you are '!00% sure that the LGX... suffered a catastrohpic failure at just 4.5 years" implies that all LGX's will do the same.
Even if the study that states 88% survival rate by 5 years is accurate, 11% is still a substantial number. There is a very real risk of failure with 11%... and obviously 11% does not mean you are free of risk because it is a relatively low percentage.
Heres a Korean study that demonstrates similar implant survival rates:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4462637/Heres another thing to think about too. In this study 'Mechanical survival rates of the inflatable penile prosthesis at 5, 10, and 15 years were 93.3%, 76.5%, and 64.8%" (this is for AMS only)
76.5% survival rate at 10 year mark (this includes implants from 1997-2014, so older models may be skewing results in an unfavorable way).
This also means a 23.5% failure rate... 23.5%, thats a pretty real fucking risk to not make it to 10 years. Statistically you will make it there, but you must be mentally prepared not to.
Furthermore, if you are a young person, as I am (27 years old), and you WILL need to have revisions in the future, then your likelihood of experiencing a premature failure is magnified. Lets assume at my age I will need at least 2 revisions before I throw in the towel for my sex life. So if I have a 23.5% chance of my implant failing before I hit the 10 year point with each of them, then from a mathematical point of view looks like:
(1-((76.5/100)x(76.5/100)x(76.5/100%)))x100 = 55.23%
Based on the numbers used in this study and the criteria I created to define 'premature failure', I have a 55.23% chance of experiencing a premature failure if I get a minimum of 2 revisions in my lifetime.
Therefore, I need to go into this knowing that statistically I will have to deal with this. I need to save money for this event, and be mentally prepared for the stress of it.
And I think the same is true if you only expect 1 revision. You need to be ready for the failure. If you go into this assuming or hoping that something wont go wrong, then I think you should not do this. There is a very real chance of it happening.
I also think that someone can further minimize their chance of failure with a device. I am going with Eid for many reasons, but during the phone consultation he expressed that he believes he knows things that will make a Titan last longer. Since the tubing is the weak link of the Titan, he suggests pumping in a certain way that doesn't stress the tubing as much. Now he may be wrong, but I think it may have some merit in giving me a better chance of avoiding premature failure. I also believe, but am not certain, that a surgeons implanting technique, such as how he places all of the components, will also result in a lower or higher lifespan for the device.
I think people need to think of this like poker. You can be dealt pocket aces, and still get beat out by some low non pair. Its all statistics.
Titan OTR. Dr. Hakky - successful surgery and very happy with outcome.
My advice: choose a world-class surgeon and make yourself the healthiest you can.
