From the Guidelines
When choosing between Coloplast and Boston Scientific inflatable penile prostheses, Coloplast devices are preferred due to their hydrophilic coating, which reduces infection risk, and a one-touch release valve that some patients find easier to operate, as seen in a recent study 1.
Key Differences
- Coloplast devices feature a hydrophilic coating that reduces infection risk and a one-touch release valve, whereas Boston Scientific devices offer a Parylene coating to enhance durability and a Momentary Squeeze pump mechanism.
- Coloplast's rear-tip extenders lock more securely, while Boston Scientific offers more cylinder size options, including their LGX model, which provides some girth and length expansion.
- Institutionally, pricing is comparable, though contract arrangements may vary, and infection rates are similar (1-3%) for both manufacturers, as noted in a study from 1.
Patient Perspective
- Patients may prefer Coloplast's one-touch release valve for ease of use, while others may benefit from Boston Scientific's LGX model for added girth and length expansion.
- Patient anatomy and specific needs should be considered when choosing between the two devices, as suggested by the American Urological Association guideline 1.
Surgeon Perspective
- Surgeons may prefer Coloplast's rear-tip extenders for secure locking, while others may appreciate Boston Scientific's variety of cylinder size options.
- Surgeon familiarity with the device and its features is crucial for successful implantation and patient satisfaction, as implied by the guideline 1.
Institutional Perspective
- Both companies provide excellent technical support and warranty programs, typically covering mechanical failure for the lifetime of the device.
- Institutional contracts and pricing should be carefully evaluated to ensure the best value for patients, considering the similar infection rates and device effectiveness, as seen in the study 1.
From the Research
Patient Perspective
- The Coloplast Titan and Boston Scientific AMS 700 inflatable penile prostheses have similar patient satisfaction rates, with no significant difference in overall satisfaction between the two devices 2, 3.
- Patient satisfaction is high for both devices, with most men reporting great satisfaction and improved self-confidence after implantation 4, 3.
- The Erectile Dysfunction Inventory of Treatment Satisfaction (EDITS) questionnaire showed no difference in patient satisfaction between the two devices 3.
- Key pinch strength may be a factor in patient preference for a particular inflatable penile prosthesis model, with men with below-average key pinch strength potentially benefiting from a model other than the Coloplast Titan Touch 5.
Surgeon Perspective
- The Coloplast Titan and Boston Scientific AMS 700 devices have similar clinical outcomes, with no significant difference in device survival or mechanical failure rates 2, 4.
- The Coloplast device demonstrated slightly greater resistance to the stimulated forces of penetration and gravity, but this did not translate to a significant difference in clinical outcomes 2.
- The infection rate was higher for Coloplast implants coated with vancomycin/gentamicin, followed by the AMS penile prosthesis, while the rifampin/gentamicin coating had the lowest infection rate 2.
- Surgeons may consider the ease of implantation and the potential for complications when choosing between the two devices 4.
Institutional Perspective
- The cost of the devices and the potential for complications may be factors in the institutional decision-making process when choosing between the Coloplast Titan and Boston Scientific AMS 700 inflatable penile prostheses.
- The similar clinical outcomes and patient satisfaction rates for the two devices may make it difficult for institutions to differentiate between them based on efficacy alone 2, 3.
- Institutions may consider the unique advantages of each device, such as the Coloplast Titan's resistance to penetration and gravity, or the Boston Scientific AMS 700's potentially lower infection rate, when making purchasing decisions 2, 4.