IPP burst pressure

[Doggedly_positive]

Thought the boys would be interested in this query I made to ChatGPT.

https://chatgpt.com/c/68b5070b-4774-832 ... 14b6dade0c

So, my -30 kPa VED pressure while the Rigicon Infla10X is pumped fully to nominally +200 kPa (Chat GPT's guess), still gives a total of only 230 kPa differential pressure.

That outward pressure is borne fully by the tunica albuginea because my corpora are not 23 mm in diameter- the maximum claimed diameter of the Rigicon cylinders, so the actual IPP cylinders are not at all stressed.

I am just not seeing any obvious stretching of the tunica.

[ElbowRoom]

There is no vacuum generated inside the cylinders, as it’s a closed system. Your tissues will expand and engorge with a VED, but I don’t think you’re putting any stress on the implant itself.

[GoodWood]

The vast majority of IPP failures are due to tubing fracture.
I was told the cylinders are extremely tough. The info you found seems to verify that.

Depending on how the tubing exits the cylinders and is tunneled through the tissue would be the consideration regarding using a VED. If the base of the VED is pushing against the tubing I personally wouldn’t risk it. But if it didn’t seem to press the tubing it’s likely fine.

[Doggedly_positive]

There is no vacuum generated inside the cylinders, as it’s a closed system. Your tissues will expand and engorge with a VED, but I don’t think you’re putting any stress on the implant itself.

That's right, there's no vacuum inside the cylinders - quite the opposite. When fully inflated, they're at approximately 200 kPa above atmospheric pressure, whereas, on the other side of the tunica, the VED pressure is 30 kPa below atmospheric.
The differential pressure across the tunica and corpora is therefore 230 kPa in this example.

My point was that if the diameter of your fully inflated corpora is less than that of the fully inflated cylinders, the cylinders will not experience any extra stress regardless of the VED vacuum pressure. It's the corpora/tunica tissues that experience the extra stretching produced by the VED over and above that of the IPP.

Of course, if you're one of the lucky guys whose stretched girth is greater than the cylinders, none of this applies.
Stretching in this case would be entirely due to the VED. The IPP would not contribute to the stretching.

[Doggedly_positive]

The vast majority of IPP failures are due to tubing fracture.
I was told the cylinders are extremely tough. The info you found seems to verify that.

Depending on how the tubing exits the cylinders and is tunneled through the tissue would be the consideration regarding using a VED. If the base of the VED is pushing against the tubing I personally wouldn’t risk it. But if it didn’t seem to press the tubing it’s likely fine.

Yes, that's the main concern.

Another factor is the axial force exerted by the VED, which tends to pull the dick and implant outwards (distally), so the proximal end of the implant will tend to be pulled from the crus, and, as you say, the point of connection of the tubing and the cylinders will be pulled outwards against the tissues too.

The VED that I use is very wide (63 mm in diameter), with a wide seal, so the tissues in that area of tubing also gets pulled outwards, maybe making the potential for breakage less likely.