TOPIC: Just had a visit with Artefill PS & Artefill trainer

This went a lot better than the last American plastic surgeon I approached with my questions about PMMA. He also has done some penile surgery. He was nice enough to take down the name \"metacril\" and look it up (he hadn\'t heard of it before) and we talked about it at my follow-up. He got some info I haven\'t come across yet... which maybe you have - but I\'ll share anyway...

Basically, he said Artefill went through about 3 generations - and complaints from the first 2 (mostly, lumps and some adverse reactions) were what caused the revisions in the product. He said the main issue with it in the early generations was particle size. The particles were not all uniform. The original inventors thought it was better this way, but then they decided to revise the product to have a uniform particle size. He said he thought metacrill was similar to the \"1st generation of artefill\" since it had different particle sizes. (So, I am wondering if Linea safe is any better in this regard too). He said the bovine collagen gives immediate size, which you won\'t really get with artefill, though I said the cellulose gives size, he said that would probably diminish faster than the bovine collagen. He seemed okay about the idea of metacril in the penis (though he thought they should fix the particle size issue), but he couldn\'t do it in the USA since it is not FDA approved. In a way, I wonder if it\'s safer than artefill because it is not bovine derived. He would consider artefill in the penis via blunt cannula - but it would be extremely expensive (no exact price - but without discounts, 20cc would be like 18k - so maybe 12-15k after discounts). He confirmed it\'s a firm feeling that you get - like what has been described here.

Lots of people are happy on this board w/ metacril so maybe this particle size thing doesn\'t mean anything but I just wanted to pass it along. He said PMMA is fine & he is a proponent of it in the face (he has a big poster of before & afters with PMMA) - and my other surgeon (the ass hole I posted about a month ago) was just going by a few bad reactions he saw with 1st generation Artefill which tainted the brand.

The original inventor is a member here. He\'s looked at the latest generation of Metacril and Linea Safe under the microscope and was complimentary about both products.

I don\'t think Artefill can be used as the filler takes too long to absorb. Though personally I\'ve wondered if that could be an advantage in terms of aesthetics.

Oh - that\'s interesting. I had no idea. I am guessing this doc I saw got his info from a similar journal article source as the one mentioned in another post too by \"interested1\" - but I don\'t know if this quote (from the medical journal) has to do with Metacrill or another filler (it\'s in the abstract in a vague way and I don\'t have access to the online library to see the details). It says: \"Of note, some products demonstrated potentially concerning significant variability in particle size and irregular morphology.\" Also, why it is \"concerning\" to have varied sized particles vs. consistent?

phalloboards.websitetoolbox.com/post/Qua...-vs-artefill-6298914

That quote is 5 years old. Linea Safe was only released within the last year.

But it has to be remembered that there are more immune cells in the skin and Dr C is injecting under the skin into the dartos layer, so one would expect a lower rate of problems no matter the size of the particles. Also lumps are far more problematic when injected into the skin on the face, as they are disfiguring. We frequently read of our members reporting small lumps and they don\'t seem like a big deal. But imagine the same sort of lumps appearing in a wrinkle line!