title: Comparison between AMS 700™ CX and Coloplast™ Titan inflatable penile prosthesis for Peyronie's disease treatment and remodeling: clinical outcomes and patient satisfaction.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  The implantation of inflatable penile prosthesis (IPP) with simultaneous manual penile remodeling allows for men to undergo a single procedure aimed at correcting both the penile deformity/curvature and erectile dysfunction (ED).
  
  
  OBJECTIVE
  To evaluate the clinical outcomes and patient satisfaction in men with Peyronie's disease (PD) and ED who underwent AMS 700™ CX and the newer Coloplast™ Titan inflatable penile prosthesis (IPP) implant.
  
  
  METHODS
  Patient demographics, type of IPP, clinical outcomes, post-implant sexual characteristics, and overall patient satisfaction.
  
  
  METHODS
  A single-center retrospective review of clinical database and prospective telephone survey were conducted in all men with PD who underwent IPP between January 2006 and November 2010.
  
  
  RESULTS
  A total of 138 patients with an average age of 57.7 (32 to 80) underwent AMS 700 CX (88 patients) and Coloplast Titans (50 patients) IPP implantation during the 5-year period. The majority of patients (91%) had only one IPP implantation. The IPP clinical outcomes include eight (6%) revision surgery for device malfunction and three (2%) device explantation for prosthesis infection. While there was no statistically significance in device survival between the two devices, the trend favored AMS 700 CX over Titan (5-year Kaplan-Meier estimates of mechanical survival were 91% vs. 87%, P>0.05) and both IPPs provided similar penile straightening without the need for revision surgery. Most men (79%) reported great satisfaction following CX or Titan implants with greater than two thirds of men reported greater self-confidence and 82% of patients would undergo the same operation again.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  AMS 700™ CX and Coloplast™ Titan IPP implantation and penile remodeling appeared to provide permanent penile straightening and high patient satisfaction without an increase risk of revision surgery.
authors.affiliation: Division of Urology, St Joseph's Health Care, London, ON, Canada Department of Urology, Princess Alexandra Hospital, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.
authors.forename: Eric
authors.initials: E
authors.lastname: Chung
authors.forename: Matthew
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Solomon
authors.forename: Ling
authors.initials: L
authors.lastname: DeYoung
authors.forename: Gerald B
authors.initials: GB
authors.lastname: Brock
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D000369:Aged, 80 and over; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D017060:Patient Satisfaction; D019935:Penile Implantation / Q000379:methods; D010411:Penile Induration / Q000601:surgery*; D015917:Penile Prosthesis; D010413:Penis / Q000601:surgery; D011446:Prospective Studies; D012189:Retrospective Studies; D012725:Sexual Behavior