Titan Failures on FrankTalk: User-Reported Time to Failure (through Nov 10, 2025)

[principles]

Hey everybody,

I got curious and pulled together FrankTalk self-reports of Coloplast Titan device failures across the forum’s history up to Nov 10, 2025. This is a community snapshot, not a paper.

What I did:
1. Searched thread titles for any of the following: revision, failure, failed, broke, broken.
2. Opened each thread and used the user's posts/signatures/timestamps to infer dates.
3. Filtered to Titan implants only.
4. Included device malfunctions; excluded revisions for non-device reasons (infection, malposition/positioning, extrusion/erosion, or any cause not about the device working or breaking)
5. Calculated TTF (Time to Failure) into decimal years from implant to failure or revision. Example: 1 year 6 months = 1.5 years.

Disclosures and caveats:
1. For a small minority of posts where dates weren’t obvious, I used ChatGPT Deep research to triangulate/infer timeline clues from surrounding posts. Entries are best-effort and may include errors.
2. This is unscientific and likely over-represents people with problems (people post when things go wrong). The other argument is that every implant will eventually fail.
3. Dates are inferred and some entries are approximate.
4. Entries are failure events. Some users appear more than once because they had multiple failures.
5. If you’re listed and something is off, please reply with the correction.

Results (self-reports; forum bias absolutely applies):
Dataset size: N = 57 failure events
Mean TTF: 3.21 years
Median TTF: 2.50 years
Min TTF: 0.10 years
Max TTF: 18.00 years

Full list (sorted by TTF, in years):
dcmusc — 0.10
Dprimal — 0.25
Ronn1708 — 0.25
1Roofer — 0.30
505AbqNM — 0.40
ViaSwiss — 0.40
gymguytupelo — 0.50
Maverick2dog — 0.60
RoboCock69 — 0.70
Curved-guy — 0.75
LMCatman — 1.00
MikeAN — 1.00
DonkeyDong10 — 1.00
thedriver — 1.00
Craigohbig — 1.00
1Roofer — 1.00
SW0110 — 1.00
Raptorpilot — 1.00
MikeAN — 1.00
Biker60 — 1.10
GayPornStud — 1.20
edinga — 1.20
Principles — 2.00
Charlie999 — 2.00
Principles — 2.20
MK1965 — 2.20
Curved-guy — 2.25
Ronn1708 — 2.50
wanttokno — 2.50
Stewy78 — 2.70
Jack1104 — 2.80
LMCatman — 3.00
jwdetails — 3.00
thedriver — 3.00
Raptorpilot — 3.00
BillinAL — 3.00
peyroniesjr — 3.20
wolfpacker — 3.20
Raptorpilot — 3.20
mikestap — 3.30
Curved-guy — 3.75
Ronn1708 — 3.80
gymguytupelo — 3.80
LMCatman — 4.00
sinestra — 4.00
NYCGay — 4.50
winsonmill — 5.00
LMCatman — 5.00
MikeAN — 5.00
stmfttr — 5.40
jackhammerdreamz — 5.50
bearnextdoor — 6.00
woodturner — 7.70
Daytripper — 10.00
maxxxxx — 10.00
parmenides — 16.00
Titan2 — 18.00

[ElbowRoom]

I don't believe DPrimal has a device failure, I have spoken to him quite a bit. Maybe recheck the rest as well.

And why only do analysis for Titans?

[principles]

As per his signature:

45yo.
(1) Implanted 3/25/25. Dr. Hakky.
22cm Titan, No RTE. Classic Pump.
Penoscrotal. Pre: 6” L, 6” G
10 wks Post Surg: 6” L, 6.5” G
**Device failed June 2025.
(2) Implanted 9/2/25. Dr. Hakky.
21cm AMS CX, No RTE, Tenacio Pump.
5” L , 5” G

[ElbowRoom]

As per his signature:

45yo.
(1) Implanted 3/25/25. Dr. Hakky.
22cm Titan, No RTE. Classic Pump.
Penoscrotal. Pre: 6” L, 6” G
10 wks Post Surg: 6” L, 6.5” G
**Device failed June 2025.
(2) Implanted 9/2/25. Dr. Hakky.
21cm AMS CX, No RTE, Tenacio Pump.
5” L , 5” G

Wow, okay...I stand corrected!

[principles]

I don't believe DPrimal has a device failure, I have spoken to him quite a bit. Maybe recheck the rest as well.

And why only do analysis for Titans?

That's just my bias since that's what I currently have and was most interested in. Would be interesting to see the AMS numbers as well though.

[ElbowRoom]

That's just my bias since that's what I currently have and was most interested in. Would be interesting to see the AMS numbers as well though.

Fair enough. I think the distribution is showing a lot of "infant" mortality, implants that fail early in their life, followed by another set at 3-5 years.

That sad part is we have no way to know if that's representative of the overall population, or we just see more failures here because those having problems are more likely top seek help from resources like this forum.

[NYCGay]

Hi principles!

This is a great and worthwhile project, even with the unavoidable forum bias. Thank you for undertaking it!

You got me right: failure at 4.5 years.

It would be very interesting to have a breakdown into the OTR and the Classic model. (The Titan only comes in those two version, right?) Perhaps if everyone who sees their name on the list can report here which model they have. I have the OTR.

Best,
NYCGay

[ElbowRoom]

Hi principles!

This is a great and worthwhile project, even with the unavoidable forum bias. Thank you for undertaking it!

You got me right: failure at 4.5 years.

It would be very interesting to have a breakdown into the OTR and the Classic model. (The Titan only comes in those two version, right?) Perhaps if everyone who sees their name on the list can report here which model they have. I have the OTR.

Best,
NYCGay

Hey, what was the nature of your device failure? Tubing fracture?

[principles]

Even though we have a pletora of reports, our sample still ends up being quite small overall and biased toward problems. It's important to say that these numbers are not incidence rates or survival probabilities. We don’t know the denominator (how many total implants exist or how many members never post). The units here are events, not people.

One metric that I believe would also be very interesting is TTR Time to Revision, as that would encompass all posted IPP related events independent of maker/model/event, whether the event was a cosmetic or functional revision, an infection or a failure. It would show the mean time to a revision reported on the Franktalk regardless of the reason.

[principles]

One idea: if we accept the (biased) pattern often mentioned here, that once guys are implanted and doing well they drift away from FrankTalk and usually only return if problems arise (that was my case too), then we can treat users who reported an implant but never reported a revision/failure/infection/etc as still having a functioning device. This is a strong and biased assumption since some users with problems may not come back to report them, but it'd give us a workable denominator to estimate (biased) survival. It would take some time to datamine those reports in a reasonable way, but it would be a first pass at a survival curve with wide, bias-aware uncertainty for device failure and surgical outcomes. I’m probably missing a lot of things.