PD25-11 A BIOMECHANICAL COMPARISON BETWEEN THE AMS LGX 700 AND THE COLOPLAST TITAN (2017)

You have accessJournal of UrologySexual Function/Dysfunction: Surgical Therapy III1 Apr 2017PD25-11 A BIOMECHANICAL COMPARISON BETWEEN THE AMS LGX 700 AND THE COLOPLAST TITAN Jonathan Beilan, Enrique Barrera, Ge Leihui, Paul Perito, Steven Wilson, Rafael Carrion, and Tariq Hakky Jonathan BeilanJonathan Beilan More articles by this author , Enrique BarreraEnrique Barrera More articles by this author , Ge LeihuiGe Leihui More articles by this author , Paul PeritoPaul Perito More articles by this author , Steven WilsonSteven Wilson More articles by this author , Rafael CarrionRafael Carrion More articles by this author , and Tariq HakkyTariq Hakky More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2017.02.1206AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookTwitterLinked InEmail INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES The development of the inflatable penile prosthesis (IPP) ushered in a new era in the management of erectile dysfunction. Despite multiple innovations to improve the function and reliability, there is no current data comparing the biomechanical properties of these devices. We aim to compare the resistance of the Coloplast Titan to the AMS LGX penile prosthesis cylinders to longitudinal (penetration) and horizontal (gravity) forces. METHODS We compared two cylinder sizes from each company: Coloplast Titan (18cm and 20cm) and the AMS LGX (18cm and 21cm). To evaluate axial rigidity, which simulates forces during penetration, we performed a longitudinal load compression test to determine the load required to cause the cylinder to kink. To test horizontal rigidity, which stimulates the horizontal forces exerted by gravity, we performed a modified cantilever test and measured the degrees of bend for each device. All devices were tested at 10, 15, and 20 PSI to simulate in-vivo pressures. RESULTS The main outcome measurement for the longitudinal load test (penetration) was the force required for the inflated cylinder to bend, thereby impacting its rigidity. The main outcome for the horizontal rigidity test (gravity) was the angle of displacement, in which a lower angle represents a more horizontally rigid device. Longitudinal column testing (penetration) demonstrated that less force was required for the AMS device to kink compared to the Coloplast implant across all three-fill pressures tested. The Coloplast Titan also had a lower angle of displacement on the modified cantilever test (gravity) when compared to the AMS implant across all fill pressures. CONCLUSIONS The Coloplast Titan demonstrated greater resistance to both longitudinal (penetration) and horizontal (gravity) forces in this study. The AMS device was more sensitive to fill pressures. In contrast, the Coloplast Titan′s ability to resist both types of forces was less dependent on the device fill pressure. © 2017FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 197Issue 4SApril 2017Page: e505 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2017MetricsAuthor Information Jonathan Beilan More articles by this author Enrique Barrera More articles by this author Ge Leihui More articles by this author Paul Perito More articles by this author Steven Wilson More articles by this author Rafael Carrion More articles by this author Tariq Hakky More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...