FrankTalk.org

The part I find bothersome is the chart showing the short lifespan of these implants before they were replaced.

http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script= ... 7000500911

That is some interesting data. I will have to digest it tomorrow. Thanks for posting.

alibaba,
I think you have to look at that report differently. They seemed men with implant failure at two years and less to see how it affects the stretching of penile tissues. Therefore there statistics include a high percentage of implants with short lifespans. That doesn’t mean 50% of implants have short lifespans. The study also tells you 2 years or more for the other half, but doesn’t say how many implants were say 12 years old. If you put it into perspective, the average lifespan looks far better.

Greg

alibaba wrote:The part I find bothersome is the chart showing the short lifespan of these implants before they were replaced.

http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script= ... 7000500911

Ali, I may be one that is causing you to have issues. My first implant was such a poor job (Ali, can you relate to poor installation) that it was replaced at the 13 month mark. Original was a CX 18 + 3 and replaced with a LGX 21 +3 1/2, much more satisfied. Mine was operating as designed but almost 2" too short.
Dave

My last P.O.S. was installed on the 13th. Threw it in the dumpster to ruin another environment other than me 15 months later. By the chart, I've almost used 1/2 this Titan already. d

Ali,

There isn't enough information in this study to draw a conclusion on the probable lifespan of an implant.

We know there were 2749 patients in the study, all of whom had their implant fail within 10 years of original surgery.
What isn't stated is the size of the selection pool. Were there 3000 candidates, 30000, or 3 million men? We don't know.
Say there were 30000 candidates then 2749 failures is a pretty small percentage of failures (<1%).

So I have to agree with Greg here, this study wasn't about IPP lifespan and you cannot make a conclusion about lifespan from the data presented.
So stop worrying. Remember too that statistics don't apply to a sample of one.

yes, the selection criteria was:

We queried American Medical Systems and Coloplast Patient Information Form databases to identify patients who underwent IPP placement and replacement between 2004-2013.

The key phrase here is placement AND replacement. So , in other words, they only looked at people who had a revision. Agree with others that the key statistic is:
" of x thousand implants, how many needed revision and when during a ten year period "

That question has been addressed, I do not have the papers in hand, but here are a couple graphs:


Figure 1 (above) Comparing coloplast titan and AMS, 90 % of devices (both manufacturers) were still working at 5 years.


Figure 2 (above) For AMS, 60% of devices were still working at 16 years (200 months)