First I want to be sure I make clear that some of the back and forth with some Members needs to cool off. I get why each side has their feelings and I think it's only serving to derail the discussion, even if it wasn't unintended. I'm not taking sides on who is right or wrong, who has a point or doesn't -- however, comments that could be perceived as personal attacks are against Forum Rules, and further trivial disputes may result in Moderator review. So please, I politely ask we resume the topic at hand, many thanks.
Secondly, three members have already chimed in on this particularly uncommon aesthetic irregularity (relatively speaking), all three of which I believe said cleared up over time (which may or may not have required some follow-up revision work). Let me add my name to the hat, I had what I believed was an identical issue that you're describing
@Gh847
, and you said in an earlier post: "
My biggest concern now is the underside of the base. There is a palpable, firm, rubbery ridge where the injected product stops. I try hourly to smoosh it into a more gradual slope to transition more naturally from the enhanced/visible shaft section to the unenhanced/buried shaft section that lives deeper in."
Not only does that sound like what I experienced, but your pictures brought back
memories of an issue I had I nearly forgot about. It felt like a rubber ring at the base, especially the lower sides that almost created a ridge-like distinction between the shaft and scrotum. I got my first injections in May of 2011, and had subsequent appointments over the course of a few years that included both girth and touch-ups. I made mention of this and while unfortunately I don't recall exactly what they did to address it (if anything at all), it in fact dissipated over time,
and is 100% non-existent today. To be fair, I don’t recall exactly when it was gone, since it gradually became less noticeable both visually and to the touch, but I do think I spent many more of my years enhanced without this ring than with it.
The pictures and description match the exact same anomaly I experienced, so I'm willing to bet they are indeed the same.
More importantly, while I absolutely respect the opinion of all qualified & reputable Physicians -- surgical intervention could fix this in theory, sure,
but it is completely unnecessary if there are no compelling grounds to believe this poses an imminent risk or long-term risk to you or the health of your penis, point blank. In other words, this is categorically an aesthetic nuisance (by all accounts), in which case surgical intervention
should be a last resort. This is because the removal procedure is invasive, and may have the inadvertent risk of opening you to other complications... and even if you manage to evade those, members like
Toothman and others can attest to the cumbersome recovery involved.
In order to justify "last resort" measures, the risk of inaction has to outweigh the risk of complication associated with surgical intervention, which I do not see here. I suppose the only other exception would be that if the aesthetic irregularity was too unsightly to wait out an indeterminate amount of time for it to resolve -- which is too premature to judge roughly 2 weeks post-op, never mind that the current photos (in addition to how I remember my own experience, so very reminiscent of yours) doesn't come close to fitting that bill.
I'm the resident patient advocate, I'm not a healthcare provider nor a medical professional. That said, this particular case is one I'm especially qualified to chime in on, and in fact, three other men did as well... and the collective consensus was relatively the same:
this can and likely will be resolved with time and/or non-surgical intervention. Heck, you're not even a full 2 weeks post-op as far as I can tell, and I genuinely advise waiting until the 6 week marker at minimum before making any significant decisions. Unless your exhibiting complications or the worsening of complications, I see and read nothing (especially barely 2 weeks out post-op) that would warrant any radical deviations from the current course (truly).
Something I've advocated for as long as I can remember: if the issue is purely aesthetic in nature, always have your performing physician/injector be provided the opportunity to remedy the situation first. They have your medical file, they're acquainted with the nuances of your specific penis and its associated issues. They have the same products (i.e. fillers) and have every incentive to see a happy patient. If they remain unsatisfactory, find a separate provider -- but at least you will have had someone with additional incentive to see the work through as intended. This is especially true for Sponsors, who have a public-facing profile and by extension, will get greater scrutiny for their work -- overtime this has the net positive effect of improving the overall quality of results & standard of care. This is my sincere advice irrespective of whether or not it was Avanti Derma, whether or not you consulted with Rejuvall, and whether or not you involved a non-Sponsor like a Dr. Gelman or Dr. Alter. I mean that.
Patience is your best friend now. I do think you can get this corrected in a reasonable amount of time at minimal cost. We're here supporting you, and you have the full knowledge, experience, and wisdom of the collective commentary to reinforce that. I appreciate you taking the time to update the Forum with your situation.