SW0110 wrote:I have been reading a bunch of studies on safely doing implants and recommended procedures and found one that specifically laid out the measurement. A non lengthening implant should be measured and placed .5 cm less than the total measurement. In the case of the AMS expandable implant, it was recommended that the implant total length be 2 cm less than the total measurement to give the implant a safe length to expand into. First time I saw that.
Please, PLEASE, post the link to the study (or post the publication name and issue number/date, or at least the title).
I read a study by Monague et al specifying a shorter implant than the inside measurement of the tunica. Article written in 2002.
Here is a link to the article
"Cylinder sizing: less is more"
DK Montague and KW Angermeier
http://www.nature.com/ijir/journal/v15/ ... ion_detail
Here is a citation for a different article that does seem to address your point about the difference capabilities of the LGX vs the other models from either maker:
Montague DK, Angermeier KW. Increasing size with penile implants. Curr Urol Rep. 2008;9:483–486. [PubMed]
Thank you for bringing this up. It is important to a good installation.