TOPIC: Uncircumcised HA flaccid appearance question.

The main question is: With HA filler, is it possible to achieve decent aesthetic in penis look even when the Foreskin forced completely back?

I'm searching for modest gain up to 0,5". Now I have 6,5" x 4,7" and want at least 5" Girth (ideally would be 5,3" at the base). I'd really like to avoid a situation when girl will be able to notice filler presence. So is there a chance to get this enhancement without significant accordion effect?

Have already spent a lot of time searching through new and old forums but still haven't found strong evidences of Flaccid good-looking uncut penises. So request is to share your opinions about the topic and also I'll post found data by my own (if I will).

In my time reviewing posts and opinions of Doctors, the belief is that uncircumcised units can have decent, aesthetic outcomes, but that they also pose higher frequency of irregularity if & when they do happen. Other factors are at play too which are going to vary patient-to-patient, including (but not limited to): filler used, injection technique and/or practitioner experience, patient's unique anatomy & skin, etc.

My advice for those who are aiming at "gains while retaining as much naturalness as possible" ought to go the medically conservative route, with low volume, building gradually over multiple rounds like layering bricks one on top of another. This is a more costly route, but also comes with better results. That isn't to say larger volumes in fewer rounds can't work, but if you're both uncircumcised AND naturalness is of high priority, the cost will come with the territory.

Besides, doing it in lower volumes makes it easier to reverse HA should you not like it, which is a plus for some as well.

I’m more worried of the firmness Erect with HA held a few people say they had it removed to squishy

beardy07 wrote: I’m more worried of the firmness Erect with HA held a few people say they had it removed to squishy

I'd argue this is more reason why HA is an attractive option --> firmness, ridges/nodules, aesthetic irregularity, etc., are all potential side effects of any Girth filler injection, but at least with HA (assuming you stick to low-to-modest volumes initially), it's reversible to some extent and temporary.

Just with like Fat Transfer (relatively safe) and Silicone oil (not recommended), volume-fillers tend to have issues with firmness when over-filled/over-injected.

Besides, with more recent HA reporting I'm seeing that the squishy thing may be overblown. I think it also depends on the brand of HA (they aren't all the same), like how Macrolane was notorious for the squishy issue, but Juvaderm and other modern brands, not so much.

Skeptical_One wrote: Other factors are at play too which are going to vary patient-to-patient, including (but not limited to): filler used, injection technique and/or practitioner experience, patient's unique anatomy & skin, etc.

I have a question to moderators: I've done the experiment on myself injecting cannula in penis and injecting saline as filler simulator. I'm not sure if I can post more details.

The goal was to make sure that in future physician will inject filler in the right layer and not subcutaneously. As it turned out, it is really not-trivial and crucial at the same time technical point that needed a lot of attention.

Here the example of that bad injection technique can be seen: https://youtu.be/X45cCiWmifA?list=PLUShOe_mw3SzDuscGdeP-wm3UQGDvHFO4&t=70

I have one more idea about getting better result in uncircumcised penises.

I think the filler needed to distributed not only on the top part of the penis shaft, but also underneath the shaft. So you can achieve thinner filler layer with the same filler volume / Girth gain.

I heard only one argument against this which sounded like filler may obstruct urethra patency, but I consider this premise is wrong. Don't think this problem can really occur.

Firstly, rules are rules. Conversations of self-injection are strictly forbidden. This is because it normalizes the idea that any "joe" can buy a cannula and vial and bypass thousands of dollars and years of medical training to get a big penis, only to end up in regret. It would be more regretful if that person gathered that kind of information from my site. I've seen it before end up in disaster and I'm not having it. As always, seek out a qualified & experienced practitioner when pursuing elective penis enlargement.

Secondly, I say this respectfully, but short of you being a seasoned filler injector and/or physician (with experience in aesthetic medicine), there is no way to grant merit or credibility to your claims, no matter how many photos of self-injection you allege to possess. You could be right, but giving credence to someone with a 4-post history and zero credentials would be irresponsible on my part. However, if you can furnish credentials, that could change the scope of this conversation.

What I would recommend is to find a practitioner/Clinic who is willing to do your technique-idea, perform it on you, or some other willing candidate, and then evaluate the results. This way you have information that can be presented to the forum within forum rules. I think I'm being pretty fair in this regard.

Lastly, the realities of uncircumcised units. I don't want to be a "downer" but every Sponsor I have, including some non-Sponsors in the field of Phalloplasty, all have iterated the challenges of a satisfactory uncircumcised result. Dr. Casavantes, who is about as experienced as they come (and is a Dermatologist well versed in proper layer & technique), has patients sign a waiver if they are uncut. Dr. Carney, a Urologist with extensive background in penile trauma and Peyronie's has admitted that the uncircumcised will always have a higher frequency of aesthetic irregularity. It appears as if being uncut poses an anatomic challenge that hasn't been overcome by any phallo-doc worth their weight in salt, and I'm rather reluctant, if not downright skeptical, a stranger's new technique has solved the problem.

I do appreciate your determination to find a solution to the uncut-problem, I really do. I just have to maintain decorum with certain topics and this is not an affront to you or your suggestions. I implore ideas to be shared if & when they can advance this relatively experimental field in cosmetic medicine, and I hope I can get Sponsors to chime in more often in 2022 as one of my NY Resolutions.

In addition to my last post, I want to point out that uncut procedures aren't "out-of-the-question" and there are some who are happy with their results. I don't want to give uncircumcised men here the impression that they are not candidates for surgical (or non-surgical) penis enlargement.

I wanted to stress and emphasize the reality that uncut guys are simply going to have higher degrees and frequencies of aesthetic irregularities versus Circumcised guys. At least with what's presently known in modern Phalloplasty. Can these issues be corrected? Sometimes. What's good to know is that an aesthetic irregularity is NOT a major complication and is often a cosmetic nuisance, not a threat to the form or function of your penis.

Skeptical_One wrote: I'm rather reluctant, if not downright skeptical, a stranger's new technique has solved the problem.

I don't suggest any new unique technique. It's frequently mentioned subject (by Anrdofill, as example) that injecting method may be wrong when cannula is placed too superficially. And I just want to be sure that practitioner will inject cannula in the right layer.

If you check video I attached you can see that kind of mistake.

That's perfectly reasonable - find a practitioner who observes proper technique and you'll reduce the likelihood of aesthetic irregularity (e.g. nodules, ridges, etc.). I don't know that it will entirely eliminate the "uncut problem," but certainly couldn't hurt having someone who specializes in the right technique perform this for you.

My mistake if I was under the impression you were suggesting some new technique. I got this idea because it seemed your self-experimentation was trying to introduce something previously not understood. Again, if that was a misunderstanding, my apologies.

Hi please find some picture of uncircumized penis injected with 10 ml of macrolane.

for the background this was my first injection with the (considered) inferior product macrolane and i was pretty satisfied by it and result was smooth and firm although AS firm as old Erection but good enough.

i repeated the injection later with the same practitioner but with voluma and macrolane (did a mix) and result was very far from bein as satisfying. it was very squishy and Foreskin looked much worse (like the skin became very very thick ..).

i thought this was due to poor injection technique but got a new injection with ultradeep (considered the firmest HA) and result are as bad if not worst in term of Foreskin aesthetics and squishiness (ridiculy squishy, almost like a very thick skin with water in it almost) so kind of useless and not even a boost in non Erect esthetic or size. i am going to dissolve at least the part of the Foreskin and want to discuss with the practice regarding the best route forward.

so 2 possible conclusions (or more ..) :
- Either my metabolism is smoothing out HA too much and anything less firm than macro lane will give bad results in term of firmness
- The previous injections and subsequent very high swelling (plus some time PE stretching) have stretched my skin too much making it very hard to for the product to stay firm and not move/migrate in all this available skin space

So bottom line uncircumized penis is riskier for sure but there seems to be more to it than just circumised/uncircumsised and the tightness of the skin is probably largely at play in the results, anyway it think it would be valuable for poeple in my case to understand a bit more to that regards

There is Androfill informs that injection may be done wrong in some clinics even when cannula is used.

mat744 wrote: Hi please find some picture of uncircumized penis injected with 10 ml of macrolane.

for the background this was my first injection with the (considered) inferior product macrolane and i was pretty satisfied by it and result was smooth and firm although AS firm as old Erection but good enough.

i repeated the injection later with the same practitioner but with voluma and macrolane (did a mix) and result was very far from bein as satisfying. it was very squishy and Foreskin looked much worse (like the skin became very very thick ..).

i thought this was due to poor injection technique but got a new injection with ultradeep (considered the firmest HA) and result are as bad if not worst in term of Foreskin aesthetics and squishiness (ridiculy squishy, almost like a very thick skin with water in it almost) so kind of useless and not even a boost in non Erect esthetic or size. i am going to dissolve at least the part of the Foreskin and want to discuss with the practice regarding the best route forward.

so 2 possible conclusions (or more ..) :
- Either my metabolism is smoothing out HA too much and anything less firm than macro lane will give bad results in term of firmness
- The previous injections and subsequent very high swelling (plus some time PE stretching) have stretched my skin too much making it very hard to for the product to stay firm and not move/migrate in all this available skin space

So bottom line uncircumized penis is riskier for sure but there seems to be more to it than just circumised/uncircumsised and the tightness of the skin is probably largely at play in the results, anyway it think it would be valuable for poeple in my case to understand a bit more to that regards

Thank you for sharing your story, very valuable info.

Can you please recall your penis appearance after the fist procedure? Check the attachment, did your penile skin act like on the left image? And after subsequent injections, is it resemble the right one now?

Did the filler move with the skin or it was rather be attached to the shaft? And were the veins clearly visible through skin after injection or less than in intact penis?

Not all Hyaluronic Acid (HA) formulations are not all created equal. Macrolane has had reports of being a less-than-desirable brand of HA for penis enhancement dating back many years. Granted, the reports are far & few, but each mention was notable. I make this point so you can have a discussion with your practitioner about HA varieties better suited for the penis, like Juvaderm or Voluma or Teoysal.

It's a bit tricky to monitor which HA proves most effective in Girth enhancement because results are subjective (and us readers aren't there pinching the skin to know for sure), but I can comfortably say that if your practitioner offers Macrolane, ask if there are alternatives.

How longs it been since it was done are you sure you don’t need to wait abit for it to come good