Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A comparison of the two types of penile prostheses used in the surgical treatment of male impotence

  • Articles
  • Published:
Sexuality and Disability Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

A comparison of the Small-Carrion and Scott-Bradley penile prostheses, based on our experience with their use over the last three years, is presented. Nearly all patients given either device were satisfied with the results. Selection of the type of prostheses to be used must be made on an individual basis, taking into consideration which choice will best suit the requirements of each patient. In the majority of cases, however, the patient may make the final choice himself.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Small MT, Carrion HM, Gordon JA: Small-Carrion penile prosthesis.Urology 5:475–486, 1975.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Gottesman JE, Kosters S, Das S, et al: The Small-Carrion prosthesis for male impotence.J Urol 116:49–50, 1976.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Scott FB, Bradley WE, Timm GW: Management of erectile impotence. Use of implantable inflatable prosthesis.Urology 2:80, 1978.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Furlow WL: Surgical management of impotence using inflatable penile prosthesis. Experience with 36 patients.Mayo Clin Proc 51:325–328, 1976.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Smith, AD, Lange, PH: The comparison of Small-Carrion and Scott-Bradley penile prostheses. Submitted for publication.

  6. Malloy, TR, Voneschenbach AC: Surgical treatment of erectile impotence with inflatable prosthesis.J Urol 118 (Part 1):49–51, 1977.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Merrill DC, Swanson DA: Experience with Small-Carrion penile prosthesis.J Urol 115:277–279, 1976.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Product Information, American Medical Systems.

  9. Butler LE, Scott FB, Karacan I: Psychological screening for impotent men.J Urol 116:193–197, 1976.

    Google Scholar 

  10. M. T. Small, personal communication.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. the Department of Urologic Surgery, University of Minnesota and the Veterans Administration Hospital, Minneapolis, Minnesota

    Paul H. Lange &  Arthur D. Smith

Authors
  1. Paul H. Lange
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Arthur D. Smith
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lange, P.H., Smith, A.D. A comparison of the two types of penile prostheses used in the surgical treatment of male impotence. Sex Disabil 1, 307–311 (1978). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01101021

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01101021

Keywords

Search

Navigation