This post is dedicated for those who want to critically appraise ipps reliability without involving emotions.
Politically correct fellas ,cheerleaders ,idealists and utopians aren't welcomed here.
I invite Elbowroom to continuing this discussion.
Following up on questioning IPPs reliability
-
- Posts: 177
- Joined: Sat Feb 01, 2025 12:46 pm
Following up on questioning IPPs reliability
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
27 y/o
-
- Posts: 552
- Joined: Fri Aug 25, 2023 7:47 pm
Re: Following up on questioning IPPs reliability
they fail to often for me to consider having one implanted , especially with the involved surgery . i can see their advantage, and if one failing was rare ,i could possibly go that route . but as it is ,it seems if you get past 3 years you're lucky .
i dont want to have do that whole thing more than once , and its just about guaranteed it will be at least twice or more, depending on a persons age .
i dont want to have do that whole thing more than once , and its just about guaranteed it will be at least twice or more, depending on a persons age .
American , retired in the philippines .
tactra malleable 13 mm ,in new delhi India . on april 2024
tactra malleable 13 mm ,in new delhi India . on april 2024
-
- Posts: 381
- Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2025 1:58 pm
Re: Following up on questioning IPPs reliability
I'm sorry, no...my calculation is correct. The cited stat is that 30% of surgeries performed per year are revisions. NOT revisions of original surgeries PERFORMED that year. Those revision surgeries could have been for implants implanted the same year or 20 years previously. So you have to look at the total number of working implants in place across all years, and then divide by the number of revision surgeries performed to get the failure rate.
Since only Coloplast surgeries were cited, we can assume probably as many revisions were performed using AMS...so double the rate I quoted and you end up with 3-4% failures per year. Do you really think IPPs have a 20% failure rate in the same year they are implanted? That's ludicrous and there would be recalls on them immediately, no medical device could be FDA approved with that failure rate.
I'm not being biased I'm making reasonable assertions about the stats. If anything my numbers are conservative as I only cited 200,000 implants in use and only went back 20 years. There are probably more than that in place and some in operation longer than 20 years.
I'm not cheerleading anything, I'm looking objectively at the failure rates and I'm neither cheerleading nor "doon and gloom" about IPPs. I'm pre-op on my implant and believe me I would not serve my own purposes by barreling headlong into a surgery that would likely end up as a personal disaster. If I thought that was the case or the data supported that, I'd say so and cancel my scheduled surgery.
Since only Coloplast surgeries were cited, we can assume probably as many revisions were performed using AMS...so double the rate I quoted and you end up with 3-4% failures per year. Do you really think IPPs have a 20% failure rate in the same year they are implanted? That's ludicrous and there would be recalls on them immediately, no medical device could be FDA approved with that failure rate.
I'm not being biased I'm making reasonable assertions about the stats. If anything my numbers are conservative as I only cited 200,000 implants in use and only went back 20 years. There are probably more than that in place and some in operation longer than 20 years.
I'm not cheerleading anything, I'm looking objectively at the failure rates and I'm neither cheerleading nor "doon and gloom" about IPPs. I'm pre-op on my implant and believe me I would not serve my own purposes by barreling headlong into a surgery that would likely end up as a personal disaster. If I thought that was the case or the data supported that, I'd say so and cancel my scheduled surgery.
58yo Coloplast Titan implant scheduled for 10/23/2025 with Dr. Hakky. Pre-op erect measurements:
8.5"L and 6.5"C
8.5"L and 6.5"C
-
- Posts: 38
- Joined: Sun Oct 20, 2024 5:51 pm
Re: Following up on questioning IPPs reliability
ElbowRoom wrote:I'm sorry, no...my calculation is correct. The cited stat is that 30% of surgeries performed per year are revisions. NOT revisions of original surgeries PERFORMED that year. Those revision surgeries could have been for implants implanted the same year or 20 years previously. So you have to look at the total number of working implants in place across all years, and then divide by the number of revision surgeries performed to get the failure rate.
Since only Coloplast surgeries were cited, we can assume probably as many revisions were performed using AMS...so double the rate I quoted and you end up with 3-4% failures per year. Do you really think IPPs have a 20% failure rate in the same year they are implanted? That's ludicrous and there would be recalls on them immediately, no medical device could be FDA approved with that failure rate.
I'm not being biased I'm making reasonable assertions about the stats. If anything my numbers are conservative as I only cited 200,000 implants in use and only went back 20 years. There are probably more than that in place and some in operation longer than 20 years.
I'm not cheerleading anything, I'm looking objectively at the failure rates and I'm neither cheerleading nor "doon and gloom" about IPPs. I'm pre-op on my implant and believe me I would not serve my own purposes by barreling headlong into a surgery that would likely end up as a personal disaster. If I thought that was the case or the data supported that, I'd say so and cancel my scheduled surgery.
This^^
Where is the implant rep when you need him? I’m not an implant cheerleader but for there to be a revision rate that high for implants inserted in that same year doesn’t make sense tooyoung..
28 years old.
Currently trying injections - may be a neurogenic cause of ED.
Currently trying injections - may be a neurogenic cause of ED.
-
- Posts: 177
- Joined: Sat Feb 01, 2025 12:46 pm
Re: Following up on questioning IPPs reliability
ElbowRoom wrote:I'm sorry, no...my calculation is correct. The cited stat is that 30% of surgeries performed per year are revisions. NOT revisions of original surgeries PERFORMED that year. Those revision surgeries could have been for implants implanted the same year or 20 years previously. So you have to look at the total number of working implants in place across all years, and then divide by the number of revision surgeries performed to get the failure rate.
Since only Coloplast surgeries were cited, we can assume probably as many revisions were performed using AMS...so double the rate I quoted and you end up with 3-4% failures per year. Do you really think IPPs have a 20% failure rate in the same year they are implanted? That's ludicrous and there would be recalls on them immediately, no medical device could be FDA approved with that failure rate.
I'm not being biased I'm making reasonable assertions about the stats. If anything my numbers are conservative as I only cited 200,000 implants in use and only went back 20 years. There are probably more than that in place and some in operation longer than 20 years.
I'm not cheerleading anything, I'm looking objectively at the failure rates and I'm neither cheerleading nor "doon and gloom" about IPPs. I'm pre-op on my implant and believe me I would not serve my own purposes by barreling headlong into a surgery that would likely end up as a personal disaster. If I thought that was the case or the data supported that, I'd say so and cancel my scheduled surgery.
Dismiss coloplast's 30% statistic for a second...please refute my calculation of 20% yearly failure rate first...you divided annual failure rate (per you it's 3k...per MAUDE it's 4.2k) by total implants of 20 years...then you came up with 1%...first atleast admit your miscalculation..you can't divide annual number by 20 year span...mathematically WRONG
Now back to the coloplast 30% statistic..
You said the revision rate is 30% for all implants placed years ago. That's true—but you’re overlooking the concept of parallelism again. Each year carries its own 30% revision rate(assuming it wasn't any higher previously). It seems you're assuming that previous years had no revisions at all. But the reality is that while implants were being placed in earlier years, revisions were simultaneously occurring.....I don't know how your fog transformed yearly 30% (reported by the company itself!!!!) into lovely perito's 1%.
27 y/o
-
- Posts: 377
- Joined: Tue May 28, 2024 2:58 pm
Re: Following up on questioning IPPs reliability
ElbowRoom wrote:I'm sorry, no...my calculation is correct. The cited stat is that 30% of surgeries performed per year are revisions. NOT revisions of original surgeries PERFORMED that year. Those revision surgeries could have been for implants implanted the same year or 20 years previously. So you have to look at the total number of working implants in place across all years, and then divide by the number of revision surgeries performed to get the failure rate.
Since only Coloplast surgeries were cited, we can assume probably as many revisions were performed using AMS...so double the rate I quoted and you end up with 3-4% failures per year. Do you really think IPPs have a 20% failure rate in the same year they are implanted? That's ludicrous and there would be recalls on them immediately, no medical device could be FDA approved with that failure rate.
I'm not being biased I'm making reasonable assertions about the stats. If anything my numbers are conservative as I only cited 200,000 implants in use and only went back 20 years. There are probably more than that in place and some in operation longer than 20 years.
I'm not cheerleading anything, I'm looking objectively at the failure rates and I'm neither cheerleading nor "doon and gloom" about IPPs. I'm pre-op on my implant and believe me I would not serve my own purposes by barreling headlong into a surgery that would likely end up as a personal disaster. If I thought that was the case or the data supported that, I'd say so and cancel my scheduled surgery.
This is correct.
Born 1990. ED since age 20 after a bicycle accident. Coloplast Genesis malleable implanted December 2024.
· December 2024 implant journal
· June 2025 update
· December 2024 implant journal
· June 2025 update
-
- Posts: 156
- Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2023 8:51 pm
Re: Following up on questioning IPPs reliability
Short of a long range tracking study of a meaningful number of young implantees who use the device to failure, you're not going to get at anything useful about reliability.
Middle-aged SGM with lifelong ED. AMS 700 CX 21cm + 3.5cm RTEs implanted January 2025 and explanted due to infection February 2025, with salvage. Revision to Coloplast Titan 24cm + 1cm RTE July 2025.
-
- Posts: 11
- Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2025 3:14 pm
Re: Following up on questioning IPPs reliability
There are much better statistical analyses available like this one:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/a ... 9522002680
It answers my question of how likely is it that my IPP will still be working in 5 years? 7 years? I have no idea what the 30% figure means or how I’d use it to predict the likely useful life of my device.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/a ... 9522002680
It answers my question of how likely is it that my IPP will still be working in 5 years? 7 years? I have no idea what the 30% figure means or how I’d use it to predict the likely useful life of my device.
RP 2012, fought ED with viagra and cialis for years then switched to trimix for 3 years. Then scar tissue settled in. Now fighting atrophy with a VED and getting ready for an AMS700 in Sept.
-
- Posts: 177
- Joined: Sat Feb 01, 2025 12:46 pm
Re: Following up on questioning IPPs reliability
LiverpoolLad wrote:ElbowRoom wrote:I'm sorry, no...my calculation is correct. The cited stat is that 30% of surgeries performed per year are revisions. NOT revisions of original surgeries PERFORMED that year. Those revision surgeries could have been for implants implanted the same year or 20 years previously. So you have to look at the total number of working implants in place across all years, and then divide by the number of revision surgeries performed to get the failure rate.
Since only Coloplast surgeries were cited, we can assume probably as many revisions were performed using AMS...so double the rate I quoted and you end up with 3-4% failures per year. Do you really think IPPs have a 20% failure rate in the same year they are implanted? That's ludicrous and there would be recalls on them immediately, no medical device could be FDA approved with that failure rate.
I'm not being biased I'm making reasonable assertions about the stats. If anything my numbers are conservative as I only cited 200,000 implants in use and only went back 20 years. There are probably more than that in place and some in operation longer than 20 years.
I'm not cheerleading anything, I'm looking objectively at the failure rates and I'm neither cheerleading nor "doon and gloom" about IPPs. I'm pre-op on my implant and believe me I would not serve my own purposes by barreling headlong into a surgery that would likely end up as a personal disaster. If I thought that was the case or the data supported that, I'd say so and cancel my scheduled surgery.
This^^
Where is the implant rep when you need him? I’m not an implant cheerleader but for there to be a revision rate that high for implants inserted in that same year doesn’t make sense tooyoung..
You have MAUDE numbers lasthope publish monthly...it's about ~350 failures per month...given that 20-25k implants are installed anually in the U.S (keep in mind this is inclusive of mpps and that this number is published by companies and affiliated surgeons)...the ratio of failure (old or new implants) vs new implantation (revision + virgin cases) is 4.2k:22.5k is approx 0.2 which is 20% yearly failure.
It's just that the desperate like ourselves find it better to burry our heads in the sand for our mental wellbeing but that doesn't change the reality.
27 y/o
-
- Posts: 177
- Joined: Sat Feb 01, 2025 12:46 pm
Re: Following up on questioning IPPs reliability
duke_cicero wrote:ElbowRoom wrote:I'm sorry, no...my calculation is correct. The cited stat is that 30% of surgeries performed per year are revisions. NOT revisions of original surgeries PERFORMED that year. Those revision surgeries could have been for implants implanted the same year or 20 years previously. So you have to look at the total number of working implants in place across all years, and then divide by the number of revision surgeries performed to get the failure rate.
Since only Coloplast surgeries were cited, we can assume probably as many revisions were performed using AMS...so double the rate I quoted and you end up with 3-4% failures per year. Do you really think IPPs have a 20% failure rate in the same year they are implanted? That's ludicrous and there would be recalls on them immediately, no medical device could be FDA approved with that failure rate.
I'm not being biased I'm making reasonable assertions about the stats. If anything my numbers are conservative as I only cited 200,000 implants in use and only went back 20 years. There are probably more than that in place and some in operation longer than 20 years.
I'm not cheerleading anything, I'm looking objectively at the failure rates and I'm neither cheerleading nor "doon and gloom" about IPPs. I'm pre-op on my implant and believe me I would not serve my own purposes by barreling headlong into a surgery that would likely end up as a personal disaster. If I thought that was the case or the data supported that, I'd say so and cancel my scheduled surgery.
This is correct.
That's it ?....Is that the positive attitude your psychiatrist told you to adopt ?
Do you have any valuable appraisal to add other than "positive attitude"?
27 y/o
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: amazonbot, Baidu [Spider], ClaudeBot, Google [Bot], UpNorth, YandexBot and 82 guests