AMS 700 expansion

[Matthew]

Danny,
Since getting peyroines about a year and half ago, I was at 6" and 6 1/2" with VED. 7" was pre-peyroines. There is record of people on here with shorter penis gaining over 1 1/2" on LGX. I feel I have a very good chance, expecially if blood flood is good to head to get to 6 1/2" in a year or so. That would be over a 100% return on pre-op size. 5.9 as you say would be at least 95% of pre op approx. Do not be discouraged. I have a feeling I am going to be happy long term. I will keep you posted over coming months. Remember also 5.3- 5.9 is the average size of male penises. Anything 6 and above is above average.

[danny1553]

I feel I have a very good chance, expecially if blood flood is good to head to get to 6 1/2" in a year or so.

Thanks Matthew
Though I am not sure how that would be possible to get 6.5" if now you are at 5". From what I understood, the 18% of the length expansion is the absolute maximum that LGX cylinders are capable of.
If you are hoping to get 6.5" that would require 30% of the cylinder expansion which is not what the manufacturer is claiming is possible.

[Matthew]

Danny, I am only partially inflated. 2 or 3 pumps at best. At 6 weeks I will be fully pumped. I am thinking at least 5 1/2". From there I will grow 18% approx of the next year. Jackp started with 4 1/4" inflated and is now 5 1/2".

[danny1553]

Jackp started with 4 1/4" inflated and is now 5 1/2".

4.25" to 5.5" makes 30% of improvement.
This live example proves that either AMS statement of 18% max is incorrect; or that there are some other factors that can affect the expansion capacity; or my math skill sucks

[Matthew]

I believe he gained 1/2" of that through head erections that started a some months in the head. I think another issue is scar tissue. The LGX can help stretch that out with alot of use and if you free up/break up that, the lgx really shines in expansion for that situation in some cases. If you had 4" and gained and inch, that would be a 20% increase. If you gained blood flood to head and head erections came that would add another 1/2". I have read more then a few who have gained and inch just from the LGX. I know there are exceptions, usually due to the dr being too conservative in measurement.

[danny1553]

I know there are exceptions, usually due to the dr being too conservative in measurement.

Too conservative doctors are my greatest fear in this area .
Though my uro states that having a shorter-than-needed implant in the end result causes way much more problems than a risk of erosion in case of an aggressive measurement.

[radiodec]

Remeber, when calculating the expansion, you have to use the length of the implant cylinders to do the math. Since some of the cylinder size does not show as penis size, the increase in length can be deceptive. 18% on a 15 cm implant would be just over an inch of expansion without taking any other factors into account. Longer cylinders would give more expansion.

The math can become complicated. All the expansion can be assumed to be visible, but only a certain percentage of the implant cylinder will be "visible". Therefore the percent expansion as measure on a erection might be higher. Since the tailpieces of the implant effect the location of the cylinders relative to what is visible, their length also effects the visible percentage.

Anyway, a one inch gain without any extra factors is within reason.

Radiodec

[rlm1818]

I went through the operating room manual on the AMS 700 LGx and on the CX. AMS does not recommend sizing the implant 2.0 cm smaller than the corpus. They have two ways of sizing the implant body (the part without the extenders). One method uses 2.0 cm of extender to place the "fill" tub closer to the incision line and one uses the full size of the corpus.
Radiodec

The OR Manual I referenced when I said AMS recommends sizing the LGX 2cm smaller than the comparable CX is this one (see page 10):

http://www.amselabeling.com/assets/file ... NGLISH.pdf

When measuring the CX they recommend measuring distally and proximally from stay sutures. It then states:

"However, when using LGX devices, some physicians choose to measure distally from the distal edge of a 2 cm corporotomy and proximally from the proximal end of a 2 cm corporotomy for a more optimal sizing of the device."

If you do what they recommend, the size of the LGX you get will be smaller than the comparable size of the CX, by the amount of the size of the corporotomy, which they suggest be 2cm.

I concede that this suggestion is less than a full blown recommendation. But, the fact the cite it (in italics no less) in the OR manual and suggest that it gives "more optimal sizing" I would take as a strong suggestion.

Also, Mathew cites jackp's experience. jackp has posted extensively about his LGX experience. If you go back and read his descriptions, you will see that he states that the tips of his LGX when first inflated didn't go into the glans. It needed to be worked to penetrate 1-2cm further into the glans, which took a bit of time. In contrast, in my case and in every other case of a properly installed Titan or CX, the tips are fully into the glans right away. In my case, and I think just about everyone else, this is the case even in the flaccid state. I could feel that in the first day after surgery. This is strong anecdotal evidence that in jackp's case, the LGX was sized, in its uninflated state, somewhat smaller than the size of the cavernsa, and that only when inflated and when the LGX did its length expansion did it fill out into the glans.

[rlm1818]

Forgive me for my ignorance but this is even more confusing for me now. Are you saying that the Titan and CX are fully expanded length and never need pumping up? I would think all units would expand to a certain length. I thought the whole purpose for a reservoir on ANY unit was for expansion. So if a guy had a titan unit and was 7 1/2" long, he would walk around with a non erect penis hanging 7 1/2" down? In light of "inflated" vs "deflated" 18% does not seem impressive to me. Again forgive my slowness. Maybe I will come around with more education.

The Titan, and I believe the CX too, are the same length uninflated and inflated... assuming that in the uninflated state it is straight and at its full length. That is, there is no natural lengthwise expansion in the device as it inflates. However, when inside my body, and I believe I'm quite typical, the uninflated state is not straight. It collapses a bit into itself, and I can sometimes feel a bit of buckling. When it is inflated, it straightens out (as well as expanding in girth). I measure my flaccid length at 5 3/4, and my fully erect at 6 1/2 inches (with a 22 cm Titan, no RTE's). I know of a couple of others with the same size Titans, and their experience is similar, though in at least on case the flaccid is 5 1/2 and the fully erect is 6 1/2. The difference between flaccid and erect is due to straightening out, and not lengthwise stretch of the device. Clear, I hope?

I would assume that the LGX might actually be similar, in that in the uninflated state it also collapses a bit from being straight. In that case, the difference between flaccid and erect would reflect both the straightening effect I see with the Titan, PLUS whatever length expansion/stretch the LGX will give in your particular case.

[buckster]

The Titan, and I believe the CX too, are the same length uninflated and inflated... assuming that in the uninflated state it is straight and at its full length. That is, there is no natural lengthwise expansion in the device as it inflates. However, when inside my body, and I believe I'm quite typical, the uninflated state is not straight. It collapses a bit into itself, and I can sometimes feel a bit of buckling. When it is inflated, it straightens out (as well as expanding in girth). I measure my flaccid length at 5 3/4, and my fully erect at 6 1/2 inches (with a 22 cm Titan, no RTE's). I know of a couple of others with the same size Titans, and their experience is similar, though in at least on case the flaccid is 5 1/2 and the fully erect is 6 1/2. The difference between flaccid and erect is due to straightening out, and not lengthwise stretch of the device. Clear, I hope?

I would assume that the LGX might actually be similar, in that in the uninflated state it also collapses a bit from being straight. In that case, the difference between flaccid and erect would reflect both the straightening effect I see with the Titan, PLUS whatever length expansion/stretch the LGX will give in your particular case.

Confusing for sure. So if you were sized for a 22mm Titan then the recommended size LGX would be 20mm. If the LGX can expand 18% in length the a 20mm LGX could theoretically be inflated to 23.6cm when fully expanded, assuming the penis could stretch that far. To me the LGX make more sense even being sized 2mm shorter because it would be more natural flaccid and longer when fully inflated. All this math makes me dizzy.