We are no longer accepting cases regarding these products.  Due to a terrible Supreme Court ruling, consumers injured by this product are no longer permitted to sue the manufacturers of this device.  We wish we could help, but the Supreme Court has taken the rights of citizens away to protect the profits of medical device manufacturers.  For more information, please read the following New York Times article entitled “Medical Device Ruling Redraws Lines on Lawsuits.

Penile prostheses have been invented to treat a number of ailments of the penis, and surgical implantation of penile prosthetics is typically only used when natural remedies and medications are unable to resolve the patient’s condition.  Among the conditions in which prosthetics may be used are erectile dysfunction (ED) and stress urinary incontinence.  Like many procedures, penile prosthetic implantation has at times resulted in complications and required follow up treatment, and may include additional corrective surgery.

One of the studies reporting the outcome of several penile prosthetic implantations is titled “Outcomes of simultaneous placement of an inflatable penile prosthesis and a male urethral sling through a single perineal incision.”  The study was conducted by V Gorbatiy, within the Division of Urology of the University of Texas Health Science Center in Houston, and published in the Journal of Sexual Medicine in 2010.

The study reports the outcomes of synchronous implantation of an inflatable penile prosthesis (IPP) and a bulbourethral sling.  The authors of the study state “this article describes our surgical approach and reviews the operative time, length of hospital stay (LOS), estimated blood loss (EBL), and cost of synchronous dual prosthetic implantation compared with the implants performed individually.” The report also includes a review of the short-term outcomes in the patients receiving the implants.

After following up with the patients after the procedure, three cases of complications were reported.  One patient experienced complications due to sling erosion, another suffered from sling infection. Another patient had acute urinary retention.  The patient suffering from urinary retention did not require significant corrective intervention.

Ultimately, the authors concluded that penile prosthesis is a safe and effective technique, despite the instances of complications requiring corrective procedures.  The problem is that many men enter into penile implant surgery unaware of the rates at which these complications occur.  Since the manufacturers of these devices, commonly American Medical Systems, have failed to make these warnings clear to users, a number of penile prosthesis lawsuits are currently being filed.


We have the experience, resources, and skills required to win the justice you deserve.  Call today and see how we can help!  Our Penile Prosthesis Lawsuit Information page is a great place to start if you have any questions about penile prostheses.