TOPIC: Pmma article

hi guys

I thought this would be of interest for the forum.

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2858836...oved-gel-thighs.html

The most scary sentence in the article for us \"Now I\'ve discovered that the PMMA is sticking to my muscles and causing the tissue to rot.\"

While concerning, there are glaring issues that the more (PMMA) acquainted reader would spot: was it really in-fact PMMA, and if so, what brand (was it medical grade)? Why didn\'t her body absorb the carrier (assuming I got that correctly)? Who was her performing physician and is it possible his/her technique (e.g. sharp needles as opposed to cannula) contributed to the complication?

Furthermore, I wonder if the word \"rot\" was lost in translation (this originally occurred in Brazil). It just makes no sense unless damage was done to tissue during the injection process (e.g. injecting into a vein or artery). That or she\'s suffering from an intense immune reaction, but rotting muscles just seems so out of left field for complications stemming from this type of procedure that I have to wonder how clear or accurate the article info is. I\'m not suggesting that she\'s not indeed suffering from what the article suggests, I just have my doubts that her complication is literally rotting flesh.

What this article does show is that any elective procedure isn\'t without risk, but I\'d stop short of freaking out over this article unless clearer information can come forward. If anyone has such information, please share!

There could be some Necrosis if the immune system is attacking the filler and tissues where the filler has adhered. I think this is what they mean by \"rot\" here. You can get Necrosis from a lot of things - even pressure.

The main question I have is what material is actually there and how was it injected. They mention hydrogel too.

Tissue Necrosis by foreign body fillers was my initial assessment, but i\'m not totally sure what her post care hygiene was like. Or if the practicing physician used sterile techniques while administering her the cosmetic filler. A flesh eating bacteria, MRSA would be a diagnosis I would like to rule out. The article did state she was septic, septic shock can be caused by viral, bacterial, or fungal invaders. I really think it was a hygiene issue or poor sterile technique on the physician or technicians part. Many details are missing from the article. But on the septic shock information alone, I believe she acquired staph hence the antibiotic treatment she\'s also receiving. I don\'t think it\'s just prophylactic treatment, many third world physicians are aware of MRSA and are trying to not over prescribe meds without appropriate blood work. In her case, she probably started to panic went to an after hours clinic or ER, the attending ordered blood work. + for bacterial infection, tx: w/ a broad spectrum antibiotic my guess via IV, morphine q 4hrs prn, monitor over night, fever reduces, call in a specialists or send her home.

i\'m not familar w/ hydrogel either, is it a surfactant like fluid, chem name?

Hydrogel, is not PMMA, this article is all over the place. Basically before PMMA was popular, there was hydrogel, even DR C used it, this was before he was running his own clinic, he got bad reviews during this time and stopped using it. Hydrogel was known for serious infections, migration e.t.c. Hydrogel was popular because it is MUCH cheaper is larger amounts.

Polyacrylamide AKA hydrogel, is a no - no. As is I have said before a lot of girl getting injections in hotels, some south american countries, as being inject with hydrogel, silicone and being tols they have been injected with PMMA (which we know is not cheap in large quantities)

To me this sound like an infection cause by hydrogel, and mixed with pmma, which we know causes inflammation, lord known what went wrong there. there so many major veins, arteries e.t.c in the butt and thighs, this is a recipe for disaster.

Plast Reconstr Surg. 2010 Oct;126(4):1349-57. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0b013e3181ead122.Complications after polyacrylamide hydrogel injection for soft-tissue augmentation.Ono S1, Ogawa R, Hyakusoku H.Author information AbstractBACKGROUND:Polyacrylamide hydrogel has gained international attention as a new injectable permanent filler that appears to be ideal for soft-tissue augmentation. However, studies on the safety of polyacrylamide hydrogel injection are limited and inconsistent. In the authors\' experience, polyacrylamide hydrogel injections can induce complications.METHODS:The authors retrospectively reviewed all cases where patients injected with polyacrylamide hydrogel for cosmetic purposes between 2004 and 2007 at other clinics suffered complications that led them to come to the authors\' facility. The authors retrieved the patient histories, the duration between injection and presentation in their clinic, the materials and sites that were injected, whether injection was combined with other procedures, the clinical findings of the complications, the preoperative imaging analysis results, the operative methods used to correct the problem, and the chemical analysis of the extirpated injected material.RESULTS:Of the 15 cases, all were women, except for one man, who was injected in his penis. Four, two, four, and four of the women were injected in their cheeks, nose, eyelids, and breasts, respectively. The product names of the injected materials were Aquamid and Amazingel. Five patients underwent surgery to remove the injected material or a foreign body granuloma.CONCLUSIONS:There has recently been a steady increase in the number of cases in Asian countries where polyacrylamide hydrogel injection has led to complications necessitating treatment. This is the first report of this phenomenon in Japan. The authors found that once these complications occur, they are difficult to treat. Further studies are needed to elucidate the risks involved in this procedure.Comment inFinding a favorable treatment of polyacrylamide hydrogel injection complication. [Plast Reconstr Surg. 2011]PMID: 20885258 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

Med Sci Monit. 2012 Jun;18(6):CR399-408.Polyacrylamide hydrogel injection for breast augmentation: another injectable failure.Wang Z1, Li S, Wang L, Zhang S, Jiang Y, Chen J, Luo D.Author information AbstractBACKGROUND:Increasing complications of polyacrylamide hydrogel (PAAG) augmentation mammoplasty, such as chronic persistent infection, have recently caught the attention of both the medical field and the general public.MATERIAL/METHODS:A total of 96 patients with severe chronic infection following PAAG augmentation mammoplasty were treated in the present study including 63 cases with infection confined to the breast and 33 with systemic infection. Endoscopy and surgery were performed to completely remove the materials and clear the infected tissues followed by drug-irrigation and vacuum-assisted closure for several days.RESULTS:In patients with severe infection there were large amounts of PAAG, fibers and infiltration of numerous neutrophils and macrophages. The infection-inducing materials were extensively dispersed in the mammary and subcutaneous tissues, pectoral fascia and intermuscular space. In addition, there was scattered distribution of PAAG materials in the armpit, chest wall and abdominal wall, which were mixed with necrotic tissues and surrounded by lymphocytes, giant cells, macrophages and other inflammatory cells, forming chronic granulomatous and fibrous lesions. Infection was controlled following surgical intervention. No residual infectious foci or recurrent infections were noted among these patients. Although the severe infection did not result in mastectomy, patients had breast atrophy and various degrees of deformation.CONCLUSIONS:Chronic infection following PAAG augmentation mammaplasty usually causes systemic infection and other devastating adverse reactions. This study confirms PAAG augmentation mammaplasty is another failed attempt. More attention should be paid to the injection of large doses of liquid filler.

www.realself.com/question/butt-augmentation-hydrogel


www.herbeautyreviews.com/a-warning-about...-buttock-injections/

www.thebody.com/Forums/AIDS/FacialWasting/Q227819.html?ic=2003

Can I just point out, to the link above and in another recent thread someone says he doesn\'t have \"Aids\" thinking it will make him a more suitable patient for PMMA. Ironically, PMMA was first widely used in aids / hiv patients with wasting, and people with HIV, are less likely to have complications with PMMA because their immune systems are weaker, so them being injected with large amount of PMMA, will less likely get lumps e.t.c of course if done sterile environment.


So it true what that doctor is saying, about it being excellent for HIV patients, obviously done by a trained doctor using a large cannula method. But in people who don\'t have HIV, quite a few woman have ended up with hard lumps. I am guess this is more an immune system reaction, I read more of these reports from makemeheal. The thing is, I can\'t validate if it was real PMMA that was used, as a lot of doctors in South America / PMMA butt injection parties / hotel using cheaper substances.


We all know quite a few people have died from butt / thigh injection because of it being injected into arteries/veins, and I am guessing most of this is bad technique. I wonder if a cannula was being used in these cases?