PURPOSE: We originally reported inflatable penile implants used to treat impotence in patients with Peyronie's disease in 1993. We now present a historical prospective study of 104 patients in whom the modeling procedure was used to correct Peyronie's curvature after implantation with the Mentor Alpha 1dagger and AMS 700CXdouble dagger penile prostheses. We compared revision-free survival experience of these implants with 905 similar implants in men with nonPeyronie's disease. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The reasons for revision were classified as mechanical failure, patient dissatisfaction, infection and medical causes, including reoperation for straightening. Overall and cause specific revision-free survival in the 2 study cohorts was compared. Maximum followup was more than 12 years and average followup was more than 5. RESULTS: No significant difference in device survival was observed in the 2 study cohorts in 5 years. Similarly each prosthesis provided the same permanent straightening without the need for revision. In Peyronie's disease cases mechanical survival of the Mentor Alpha 1 was superior to that of the AMS 700CX (p = 0.0270). There was no significant difference in mechanical reliability of the devices in nonPeyronie's disease cases. CONCLUSIONS: Implantation and modeling appear to provide permanent straightening without an increase in revisions. In the nonmodeled group there was no significant difference in mechanical reliability of the AMS 700CX or Mentor Alpha 1. In modeled cases the Mentor Alpha 1 appeared less likely to fail mechanically than the AMS 700CX when followed more than 5 years. Based on this single series modeling may predispose the AMS 700CX to earlier mechanical failure.
PURPOSE: We originally reported inflatable penile implants used to treat impotence in patients with Peyronie's disease in 1993. We now present a historical prospective study of 104 patients in whom the modeling procedure was used to correct Peyronie's curvature after implantation with the Mentor Alpha 1dagger and AMS 700CXdouble dagger penile prostheses. We compared revision-free survival experience of these implants with 905 similar implants in men with nonPeyronie's disease. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The reasons for revision were classified as mechanical failure, patient dissatisfaction, infection and medical causes, including reoperation for straightening. Overall and cause specific revision-free survival in the 2 study cohorts was compared. Maximum followup was more than 12 years and average followup was more than 5. RESULTS: No significant difference in device survival was observed in the 2 study cohorts in 5 years. Similarly each prosthesis provided the same permanent straightening without the need for revision. In Peyronie's disease cases mechanical survival of the Mentor Alpha 1 was superior to that of the AMS 700CX (p = 0.0270). There was no significant difference in mechanical reliability of the devices in nonPeyronie's disease cases. CONCLUSIONS: Implantation and modeling appear to provide permanent straightening without an increase in revisions. In the nonmodeled group there was no significant difference in mechanical reliability of the AMS 700CX or Mentor Alpha 1. In modeled cases the Mentor Alpha 1 appeared less likely to fail mechanically than the AMS 700CX when followed more than 5 years. Based on this single series modeling may predispose the AMS 700CX to earlier mechanical failure.