TOPIC: Anyone heard of Dr Mark Solomon or Repriza

I looked at the before and after pics, have to say this made laugh:
\"Note the fact that the tip of his penis is located at the bottom of the scrotum in the after photo, demonstrating the increase in length that was achieved. \"
Conveniently forgetting that the scrotum rises and falls due to a wide variety of factors such as temperature.

Repriza looks like an interesting option as compared to Alloderm. Anyone know how thick, \'extra thick\' is as described on Dr. Solomon\'s site? I couldn\'t find the dimensions on the manufacturer\'s site, but it does seem like they do a lot of custom sizing. www.ssp-inc.com/Products/Repriza_ReadyToUse_ADM

looks like 4.5mm is available

www.ssp-inc.com/Products/Repriza_ReadyToUse_ADM/RePieces

Alloderm x-thick is 2.3mm to 3.3mm
www.lifecell.com/alloderm-regenerative-t.../8/?pstAction=search

Eq-Yes, but the length and width are 2x9cm. That\'s pretty small. Does he sew several sheets together? Maybe I can email him the question.

I am sure they will sew several sheets together without any problem, but the most important question would the thickness stay the same after 1-2 years or more, because my experience with Alloderm (2007 by Dr.Rosenthal) not so good I lost most of the thickness before my PMMA. I am not saying that PMMA is better than Repriza, I would if there is a guarantee that the Repriza will not resorbed after 1-2 yrs or more like other grafts and there will be no chance later on of scar tissue formation which can cause penile retraction---> it will be a very good product .

@southie - Sorry don\'t know anthing about Dr. Solomon. His name was given to me by a local plastic surgeon as a PE doctor that the local doctor respected. Please keep us posted on any info you get.

@smartman - the only guarantee in any PE procedure seems to be that the customer satisfaction rates are low and the problems and complications are high.

I have not seen any data on high allograft reabsorbtion rates. I do know that rarely the grafts do not take and have to be redone.

There is a study showing a high rate resorption of using e.g.a dense cancellous Allograft (I know it is completely different than Repriza but it is an Allograft) www.mendeley.com/research/high-graft-res...scectomy-and-fusion/ .

if it is the same Dr. Solomon from NY or Philly then I\'d say stay far away as possible I called him and spoke with a lady who worked there, and all she did was feed me a bunch of bullshit. It was all lies about my results and compared with the ones he had posted on his website, it wasnt even close.

usmcwolf19 wrote: ... It was all lies about my results and compared with the ones he had posted on his website, it wasnt even close.

Are you saying you had surgery with Dr Solomon and he posted your results with lies on his website??

@smartman - I don\'t see how experimental spinal bone grafts have anything to do with the dermal matrix grafts like Alloderm/Belladerm/Repriza that we are discussing.

Eqstudent

I have read highly mixed reports regarding the results of dermal matrix grafts for PE. Several members have had the procedure and have posted accounts here, most done by Dr. Rosenthal. Some of the negative results have seriously impacted the patients lives. Even the successful reports only note a .5-.6 Girth gain, but with a price tag around 8.5 thousand.

sparticus wrote: ...I have read highly mixed reports regarding the results of dermal matrix grafts for PE. Several members have had the procedure and have posted accounts here, most done by Dr. Rosenthal. Some of the negative results have seriously impacted the patients lives...

You are preaching to the choir! I have done 3 (paid) consultations with prominent local plastic surgeons about PE. We discussed Implants, FFT, Allografts, Injectable, Scaffolding and new/experimental. The consensus was that all the PE procedures at this time would be at best be considered investigational and carry very high risks and have very low patient satisfaction rates. I will add that there are almost no formal studies available on this subject. Two of the docs referenced a British survey which showed a > 50% dissatisfaction rate for lengthening procedures. Two of the docs had done 'several' Revision procedures to correct bad results done elsewhere

@EQ what did they say about injectables? Out of the 15-20 people here who have recived PMMA the satisfaction rate is is close to 100% with minor complications. Aside from granulomas there dosent seem to be horrible future complications AS OF NOW. Also the complications that do exsist , seem to react well with steroid/5-FU injections. So does the lack of long-term studies of PMMA in the PENIS lead you to belive that there are very high risks? Or did these plastic surgeons tell you otherwise? Curious to see what you opinion is, being it seems you do extensive reaserch on all facets of PE surgery.

@Dd71 ' 2 of the docs inject Artefill in their practice which is why I chose them; the other doc is very much against permanent and semi-permanent fillers due to 'risks'. Neither of the Artefill docs recommended that I have Artefill put in my penis at this point in time. Both suggested waiting at least 3 to 5 years to see to see how it plays out. One doc was extremely knowledgeable about PMMA and claimed to have been around since Arteplast, which in his words was a disaster, as was early Artecol. He was the doc that gave me the reference to the very damaging independent study on NewPlastic which I posted on the other site. All 3 recommended that 'if I absolutely had to have PE' then find the most experienced allograft surgeon and go that route. Their consensus was that with 20 years of detailed study on Alloderm they are comfortable in how it behaves and the only real risk is from the implantation procedure itself, which after all is surgery and carries a known set of risks. History is filled with new procedures that seemed fantastic at first blush but turned out to be disasters 5 years down the road. Hope this helps!Just noticed that you and I have the exact same stats!

hmm interesting how they said not at this time. Which means that theres not enough long-term data. (Which is the biggest draw back for most of us getting this procedure!) Thats why I am considering a Temp filler first, so if there is a drastic long term complication....its not something I would have to live with for the rest of my life. I still feel that even when compared to all of the other options in PE surgery(i.e. FFT,Belloderm, allograft,silicone injections,Elist implant) this has better initial results. That would normally lead one to belive that there would be better long-term results - no? I agree with your logic,and I dont want to make a horrible mistake that I will regret for the rest of my life. But PMMA is very intreging in its NON-evasive nature, and its complications not only being semi- easy to correct....but not major complications when occur in the PENIS. I mean, if a lump or \"Nodule\" were to arrise in the FACE....than this would be a major problem. But a lump in the PENIS....would that be the end of the world? Much to think about. Thank you for your feedback EQ. I hope that we can both be above our current levels in the near -term future