FrankTalk.org

My urologist offered to do a Doppler ultrasound on my penis, but the cost will be around $700. I am hesitant as I don't really see the value in it, and many seem to be inconclusive. I'm not interested in attempting vascular surgery given the poor outcomes so is there really any value in identifying exactly what the problem is with a poorly functioning penis?

Either it works or it doesn't, either you get an implant or you don't, is the reasoning really that useful?

Interested on others thoughts.

You pretty much nailed it. Only bother with a doppler if you wanted to confirm that you have a venous leak as the cause, but if the outcome is still going to be an implant, there is no point in wasting the money or giving the urologist a nice bonus check.

I thought it is necessary to get a diagnosis or confirmation, otherwise, depending on your age, a surgeon wouldn't operate on you.

I guess if I decide to go ahead with the implant and it is conditional on a VL diagnosis then I have little choice, otherwise it seems kind of pointless.

Rise again wrote:I guess if I decide to go ahead with the implant and it is conditional on a VL diagnosis then I have little choice, otherwise it seems kind of pointless.

Pretty much my opinion also. Unless your insurance requires it in order to get a warm fuzzy feeling to cover the implant. What does it matter. My surgeon hasn't even mentioned having it done. Coverage might depend on your other conditions like cancer or diabetes that are easy to document.
I'm sure that there is men that just want to know but it dosn't seem importat to me.

My urologist said there is no reason to do one as if pills don't work then try injections and if they don't work get an implant. This is fine but why waste 2 years of trying all this to find out that the implant is your only option.

Had one done a year before my implant. Why I don't know but never did see any insurance bill for it.
The doppler was done when I was first considering the implant, but my deductible was so high that year had to cancel the surgery. The next year we were almost at our max out of pocket expense, so scheduled the surgery. They did not repeat the doppler.

In the runup to my implant surgery there was never any mention of a Doppler. It seems to me that the results of a Doppler are news you can't use - your course of action if you have documented venous leak is exactly the same as without the test, so why incur the expense?

vajim1 wrote:My urologist said there is no reason to do one as if pills don't work then try injections and if they don't work get an implant. This is fine but why waste 2 years of trying all this to find out that the implant is your only option.

Yeah I think the weird thing is, I absolutely flunked my doppler test, I got no erection at all, and I knew I wouldn't before I did it, then a few days later I am almost having an unassisted erection, but of course that was fleeting.

frwmw1 wrote:

vajim1 wrote:My urologist said there is no reason to do one as if pills don't work then try injections and if they don't work get an implant. This is fine but why waste 2 years of trying all this to find out that the implant is your only option.

Yeah I think the weird thing is, I absolutely flunked my doppler test, I got no erection at all, and I knew I wouldn't before I did it, then a few days later I am almost having an unassisted erection, but of course that was fleeting.

Perhaps it was positional. Sometimes the position of the penis might allow venous occlusion enough to cause a partial (or full) erection just because of how it is or isn't hanging. I find that although I have a low hang due to loose suspensory ligament and non-existant crus, I get more glans (and corporal) engorgement if I hold my penis in the 1:30-2 o'clock position. I theorize that this is due to positional venous occlusion, the opposite of venous leakage.