TOPIC: Choice of Filler/Enhancement Procedure

There are obviously many reasons why we choose the procedure we do (in conjunction with our physicians recommendation).
Body weight, pre existing conditions, medications, finances, not to mention what we are looking to gain individually.
I"m curious though, as to fillers -

HA doesn't last too long
Rejuval and some other fillers can give you up to 3 years or so
And PMMA is permanent

Why would someone opt to have a filler put in that won't last long? A few reasons that come to mind are - obviously, if there are any potential interactions or side effects the fillers can be reversed or are short acting...

I"m looking for something permanent. I don't want to have shots every 3 years. So I think PMMA is a good choice for me.
I would have thought more people are opting for PMMA but it seems like the opposite. More people are using Rejuvall and other fillers.

Tbh I opted for HA because I wanted to try out having a bigger Dick and see if it really made a difference both sexually and mentally for confidence. Also the fact that I could reverse it if I wanted too was very appealing. If you are from the USA, the options are very limited. The Americans here are traveling to Mexico to get their work done, and I’m a little bit sketched out about that idea. Albeit, that all the reviews for Avanti Derma have been good.

I’d like to eventually move to something permanent. But I’d prefer to stay in the USA if possible.

Sketch2000 wrote: There are obviously many reasons why we choose the procedure we do (in conjunction with our physicians recommendation).
Body weight, pre existing conditions, medications, finances, not to mention what we are looking to gain individually.
I"m curious though, as to fillers -

HA doesn't last too long
Rejuval and some other fillers can give you up to 3 years or so
And PMMA is permanent

Why would someone opt to have a filler put in that won't last long? A few reasons that come to mind are - obviously, if there are any potential interactions or side effects the fillers can be reversed or are short acting...

I"m looking for something permanent. I don't want to have shots every 3 years. So I think PMMA is a good choice for me.
I would have thought more people are opting for PMMA but it seems like the opposite. More people are using Rejuvall and other fillers.

You got the right line of thinking: as for filler choices we have HA, Ellanse (and Radiesse to a lesser degree), PMMA, and Fat. They all have their pros & cons, and many times it's the person's goals, circumstances, and risk thresholds that help determine what route is taken.

PSA: Avoid silicone injections!!! Or any iteration of silicone in the penis.

Skeptical_One wrote:

Sketch2000 wrote: There are obviously many reasons why we choose the procedure we do (in conjunction with our physicians recommendation).
Body weight, pre existing conditions, medications, finances, not to mention what we are looking to gain individually.
I"m curious though, as to fillers -

HA doesn't last too long
Rejuval and some other fillers can give you up to 3 years or so
And PMMA is permanent

Why would someone opt to have a filler put in that won't last long? A few reasons that come to mind are - obviously, if there are any potential interactions or side effects the fillers can be reversed or are short acting...

I"m looking for something permanent. I don't want to have shots every 3 years. So I think PMMA is a good choice for me.
I would have thought more people are opting for PMMA but it seems like the opposite. More people are using Rejuvall and other fillers.

You got the right line of thinking: as for filler choices we have HA, Ellanse (and Radiesse to a lesser degree), PMMA, and Fat. They all have their pros & cons, and many times it's the person's goals, circumstances, and risk thresholds that help determine what route is taken.

PSA: Avoid silicone injections!!! Or any iteration of silicone in the penis.

Thanks. Yeah, everything and anything I've read has told me to stay away from anything silicone.

snakecharm3r wrote: Tbh I opted for HA because I wanted to try out having a bigger Dick and see if it really made a difference both sexually and mentally for confidence. Also the fact that I could reverse it if I wanted too was very appealing. If you are from the USA, the options are very limited. The Americans here are traveling to Mexico to get their work done, and I’m a little bit sketched out about that idea. Albeit, that all the reviews for Avanti Derma have been good.

I’d like to eventually move to something permanent. But I’d prefer to stay in the USA if possible.

Gotcha. see if it works and if not (or if you have any reactions or are unhappy) you can easily reverse it. So I understand the logic there. I just don't know if I'd pay out the money to have something temporary.

I would choose PMMA. Other filllers are not permanent, even wear out by doing sport, sex... !

With other fillers I also would not wear a cockring anymore because of this. Do someone know a condom with integrated cockring? Would be great to wear it secretly hehee

@PmmaFan All of those things do not wear out Ellanse. Not sure where you heard that.

@Sketch2000 You’re paying more money as insurance to protect you against the unknown. Do you know how PMMA microspheres in you dick will cause your body to react in 20-30 years? No, you don’t. We’re at about 11 years? with reports. Could be smooth sailing, or not. That’s mostly what you’re paying for. Permanency is higher risk. Ellanse isn’t that much more expensive for equal gains to where price should be the ultimate deciding factor. the L version could possibly preserve your gain for 4-5 years before it STARTS to decline. There is also the chance of new fillers coming out, new techniques. In addition, there are plenty of guys who wish they hadn’t gone so big and would trade for less girth. Nothing easy you can do there with PMMA. With Ellanse, you are building collagen that will eventually break down. But it will take a long time. You could still have half the collagen after 10-15 years. Therefore, you’re likely not re-filling you’re original amount every 4-5 years. You can choose your girth, go real big knowing time will dial it back and if you feel sex was better and more women liked you at a more comfortable size then you can leave it.

With all that said, if you don’t have a decent paying job and can’t afford higher cost, go with PMMA. I would have if I couldn’t afford Ellanse. But I’m going into debt, charging it all on a credit card. Luckily it’s no interest for 18 months but hopefully these rounds will be the last time I have to do that. I do plan on advancing my career in the next year or so. But if you think you’re stuck with the same income for the next decade and it’s not a lot then, again, go with PMMA. My point is, IF permanency worries you then go with Ellanse, the difference in cost isn’t that much to where it should be a factor outweighing the unknown concerns, again if you have them and depending on severity of your concern.

Ah okay thank you for your comment : )

I thought hyaluron, Ellanse and all temporary filler gets absorbed more or less fast, depends on your life style. Sport..... Also there is big discussion by women in regard to lips enhancement

Interesting discussion. The extra cost of Ellanse isn’t so much a major con in my decision of PMMA vs Ellanse. It’s more that we don’t really know what polycaprolactone/Ellanse does in the body over time, either. At least with PMMA we know it’s been used in various biomedical applications (knee/hip arthroplasties, etc) for decades. PCL is a newer polyester. It may be fine and biodegrade away completely with time, or it may not.

Hyperbol wrote: @PmmaFan All of those things do not wear out Ellanse. Not sure where you heard that.

@Sketch2000 You’re paying more money as insurance to protect you against the unknown. Do you know how PMMA microspheres in you dick will cause your body to react in 20-30 years? No, you don’t. We’re at about 11 years? with reports. Could be smooth sailing, or not. That’s mostly what you’re paying for. Permanency is higher risk. Ellanse isn’t that much more expensive for equal gains to where price should be the ultimate deciding factor. the L version could possibly preserve your gain for 4-5 years before it STARTS to decline. There is also the chance of new fillers coming out, new techniques. In addition, there are plenty of guys who wish they hadn’t gone so big and would trade for less girth. Nothing easy you can do there with PMMA. With Ellanse, you are building collagen that will eventually break down. But it will take a long time. You could still have half the collagen after 10-15 years. Therefore, you’re likely not re-filling you’re original amount every 4-5 years. You can choose your girth, go real big knowing time will dial it back and if you feel sex was better and more women liked you at a more comfortable size then you can leave it.

With all that said, if you don’t have a decent paying job and can’t afford higher cost, go with PMMA. I would have if I couldn’t afford Ellanse. But I’m going into debt, charging it all on a credit card. Luckily it’s no interest for 18 months but hopefully these rounds will be the last time I have to do that. I do plan on advancing my career in the next year or so. But if you think you’re stuck with the same income for the next decade and it’s not a lot then, again, go with PMMA. My point is, IF permanency worries you then go with Ellanse, the difference in cost isn’t that much to where it should be a factor outweighing the unknown concerns, again if you have them and depending on severity of your concern.

Personally I respectfully disagree with your reasoning in some ways. For one, PMMA in various forms and to various degrees of success over time has been used in the human body for much longer than that (really research, read the long term studies, etc).

Secondly, the same logic applies to Ellanse. It's newer, we really don't know the long term effects there (although personally, I wouldn't be any more or less concerned than with PMMA). Ellanse however will dissolve over time. If you can live with minor issues and wait it out, that is actually the cheaper option over the long haul. Have issues with PMMA? Want it out? You'll be paying out of pocket for fairly invasive surgery.

I can't speak for anyone else, but I went for PMMA personally because of it's track record in this application and with it's overall risk level in general, if properly used. The clinic I went to (Avanti) also has the most experience with it and for years used it primarily, so that was an added layer or comfort.

I'd also throw out there that just because there's more recent posts here with Ellanse, it does not really mean PMMA use at clinics outside the US has gone down. Maybe Dr C can chime in with a rough ratio of Ellanse vs PMMA use at his clinic or if the total average number of PMMA procedures has dropped since Ellanse or if the total number over all has just gone up. They alone perform a lot of procedures, the bulk of which you never hear about on here. Once you've physically been there you kind of realize just how busy they are.

cushen79 wrote: Interesting discussion. The extra cost of Ellanse isn’t so much a major con in my decision of PMMA vs Ellanse. It’s more that we don’t really know what polycaprolactone/Ellanse does in the body over time, either. At least with PMMA we know it’s been used in various biomedical applications (knee/hip arthroplasties, etc) for decades. PCL is a newer polyester. It may be fine and biodegrade away completely with time, or it may not.

That's my point too and was my thinking when I made my choice essentially

@justn8 I’m not sure what reasoning you’re disagreeing with. I’m aware of the successful use of pmma in other parts of the body. My point was specifically regarding the penis, we are only 11 years in.

Sort of the same logic in the sense we don’t know the long term effects of Ellanse In the penis, that’s right. But It’s been proven to dissolve as you said. So logic would imply that with zero product in the body, that product is no longer providing risk.

When I met with Dr. C in September he said about 60% of his patients are doing pmma and 40% Ellanse.

Honestly I think all the current filler choices discussed at length on the forums are viable, and each represent their strengths & weaknesses. If there was a holy grail filler, we'd know it by now.

HA (Volume Filler) presents the best safety profile but is temporary and probably not ideal in large volumes. Guys looking for modest gains while preserving a natural look, and aren't fond of permanence, HA becomes a strong candidate.

Ellanse & Radiesse (Dermal Fillers) presents good long-term temporary solutions with a bit more range for gains than HA; however, they aren't free of whatever complications permanent dermal options (like PMMA) present while the product is in you.

PMMA (Dermal Filler) presents the best permanent solution, and is considerably safer than the alternative permanent filler solution of silicone (which is a banned topic for good reason). Advantages obviously include "one & done" since top-offs to retain size aren't necessary, but has the reality of a life-time commitment (Removal is surgical and invasive).

Oh and shout out to Fat transfers (FFT), the only surgical filler solution that I think can be viable in low-to-modest gains as well, but has the inevitability of top-offs due to some reports of uneven dissipation over-time. It also has the advantage of being your own tissue.

As you can see, each have their strengths, and picking one can do a lot with your goals, outlook in life, relationships, budgets, locale, and risk thresholds. Choose wisely, then be sure to have a sed practitioner inject said-choice! That's why I'm proud to have the Sponsors we have here.