PhalloBoards - An Online Community to Discuss Penile Girth Enhancement

Skeptical_One wrote:

hotdirt9114 wrote: Is Silikon oil a bad thing? This is what Medical Man Cave said to me:

Our procedure produces permanent results. No need to come back in for top ups. We do not use a permanent filler. The oil based silicon that we use is replaced with naturally produced Collagen. After 30 day the oil based silicon will be flushed out of your body, leaving you with only the naturally produced collagen. This is what produces the permanent gain in girth. The procedure will not affect your ability to get an erection or change any level of sensation in the penis. Everything will look even , there will not be a spongy or lumpy feel or look to your penis. After the collagen fully forms, you will see an increase of about ¾” in girth and you may see a small increase in length at the head of the penis. The shaft and head of the penis will look even, due to the even distribution of the injected product and collagen growth.

This is unfortunate. I was hoping we could have a Colorado-based Sponsor here but upon learning this I'm afraid I won't be reaching out.

Silicone oil is deceptive in that it can certainly provide instantaneous and aesthetically-pleasing girth, but can come with serious issues if & when complications arise. Also, given all the other relatively safer filler options available (PMMA, Ellanse, HA, Radiesse, Renuva, and Fat), why even play with fire??

And as far as Mancave's assertion that the silicone would be "replaced" with you collagen, that's simply untrue. Collagen may develop, sure, but the silicone isn't going anywhere and will remain in your penis. I'm troubled they are being so inaccurate here.

That thing about the silicone being "flushed" out of the body is intriguing, but totally unbelievable. At the same time, it makes me wonder if anyone came across such claims before?

Here we have someone claiming that the silicone will be "replaced" by collagen, and the silicone will be flushed out of the body. As far as I know, silicone is one of the substances that are likely to be able to transition elsewhere in the body, but it cannot leave the body.

Silicone breast implants vs saline implants are a perfect example. If the saline implant is ruptured, it will indeed leave the body, but this is absolutely not the case with silicone implants. Because of how common silicone implants are, and having been around so long, it is well-known how silicone reacts in the body.

hotdirt9114 wrote: Is Silikon oil a bad thing? This is what Medical Man Cave said to me:

Our procedure produces permanent results. No need to come back in for top ups. We do not use a permanent filler. The oil based silicon that we use is replaced with naturally produced Collagen. After 30 day the oil based silicon will be flushed out of your body, leaving you with only the naturally produced collagen. This is what produces the permanent gain in girth. The procedure will not affect your ability to get an erection or change any level of sensation in the penis. Everything will look even , there will not be a spongy or lumpy feel or look to your penis. After the collagen fully forms, you will see an increase of about ¾” in girth and you may see a small increase in length at the head of the penis. The shaft and head of the penis will look even, due to the even distribution of the injected product and collagen growth.

This is unfortunate. I was hoping we could have a Colorado-based Sponsor here but upon learning this I'm afraid I won't be reaching out.

Silicone oil is deceptive in that it can certainly provide instantaneous and aesthetically-pleasing girth, but can come with serious issues if & when complications arise. Also, given all the other relatively safer filler options available (PMMA, Ellanse, HA, Radiesse, Renuva, and Fat), why even play with fire??

And as far as Mancave's assertion that the silicone would be "replaced" with you collagen, that's simply untrue. Collagen may develop, sure, but the silicone isn't going anywhere and will remain in your penis. I'm troubled they are being so inaccurate here.

Screen2584 wrote:

Skeptical_One wrote: Honestly if you are looking for a filler without the surgical factor (and the harvesting of your own tissue), then virtually any dermal filler would suffice, including PMMA, Ellanse, Renuva, Radiesse, and Hyaluronic Acid (HA).

The advantages to dermal grafts like Alloderm is that they alleviate known irregularities posed by fillers, like nodules and lumps, so having them used as a filler takes away from that strength. I mean don't get me wrong, I suppose it could work in a filler form, but how well I don't know.

The brand Surgimend is the dermal graft matrix adopted by the resident American Plastic Surgeon Sponsors of this site, and is pretty much is like an Alloderm.

So if I understand you correctly, then dermal grafts are less likely to cause irregularities, compared to fillers? That is encouraging for me to hear who got dermal fat graft 11 weeks ago.

Not exactly. The dermal grafts matrices I was referring to were the synthetic kinds (e.g. Surgimend, Alloderm, Belladerm). These are "synthetic" in that they are derived from human or animal dermis. A dermal fat graft taken directly from the host (like from under the buttocks) may not be as precision-cut when compared to something made in a lab, and won't necessarily be free from irregularities.

Screen2584 wrote: I assume it would be allowed to link to them because they are a sponsor of the board? www.calibreclinic.com.au/product-options

Of course. Not only that, but virtually any link, article, or study that is relevant to the topic can be posted, Sponsor or not. This forum is meant to expand the knowledge database of this field and any credible information ought to be shared.

Skeptical_One wrote: Honestly if you are looking for a filler without the surgical factor (and the harvesting of your own tissue), then virtually any dermal filler would suffice, including PMMA, Ellanse, Renuva, Radiesse, and Hyaluronic Acid (HA).

The advantages to dermal grafts like Alloderm is that they alleviate known irregularities posed by fillers, like nodules and lumps, so having them used as a filler takes away from that strength. I mean don't get me wrong, I suppose it could work in a filler form, but how well I don't know.

The brand Surgimend is the dermal graft matrix adopted by the resident American Plastic Surgeon Sponsors of this site, and is pretty much is like an Alloderm.

So if I understand you correctly, then dermal grafts are less likely to cause irregularities, compared to fillers? That is encouraging for me to hear who got dermal fat graft 11 weeks ago.

I saw that CALIBRE Clinic in Australia has a very interesting page where they compare different procedures they offer, including different kinds of fillers and dermal fat graft, and I assume it would be allowed to link to them because they are a sponsor of the board? www.calibreclinic.com.au/product-options

When it comes to PPMA, FFT and dermal fat graft they list irregularities as being common, but it seems they are of different kinds.

For PPMA they list: nodules, granulomas, product hardening and lumpiness.

For FFT they list: skin fibrosis, scarring, and possible skin necrosis.

For dermal fat graft they write: "Fat graft has tendency to result in some lumpiness. Scar tissue is material (both at harvest site and where penis is re-stitched), which can result in deformity."

Interestingly, it says that the lumpiness with dermal fat graft can be corrected. I had my dermal fat graft almost 11 weeks ago, and there is a lump at the base of the penis, as I have previously shown. I am very curious if anyone has any idea how CALIBRE Clinic would correct it?

I saw that Dr. Jayson Oates wrote on the forum 04/12/16: "Surgery with lengthening and dermal fat grafts can be successful, with the right surgeon. But is major surgery, very expensive (>$30K in Australia) and has protracted down time."

Interestingly, it seems they do not offer the lengthening procedure anymore, based on their website. That would be interesting to know why?

As for what procedure they seem to prefer, it is obviously hyaluronic acid. Both several years ago and now it is clear it is their preferred procedure. They give it a risk rating of 1/3, compared to 3/3 for PPMA, FFT and dermal fat graft.

They also state that irregularities are "possible" rather than "common". I guess the low-risk rating might partially be because it is reversible?

What they write about complications is: "Nodules may form early or possible scar granulomas at a later date, but can generally be resolved quickly with Hyalase/steroid injections."

Honestly if you are looking for a filler without the surgical factor (and the harvesting of your own tissue), then virtually any dermal filler would suffice, including PMMA, Ellanse, Renuva, Radiesse, and Hyaluronic Acid (HA).

The advantages to dermal grafts like Alloderm is that they alleviate known irregularities posed by fillers, like nodules and lumps, so having them used as a filler takes away from that strength. I mean don't get me wrong, I suppose it could work in a filler form, but how well I don't know.

The brand Surgimend is the dermal graft matrix adopted by the resident American Plastic Surgeon Sponsors of this site, and is pretty much is like an Alloderm.

samsmithms wrote: I am scheduled for a fat transfer for girth in November. I am not circumcised. The doctor will remove fat and then transfer it to the penis. He also adds Renuva to the fat that he transfers. Does you penis feel soft (squishy) to touch? Do the veins show up more in the shaft post transfer? Did you do penile massage several times each day after the transfer? How much of the fat do you feel you have lost post transfer? Do you you have prior and post measurements of penis girth? Sorry for all the questions but I am trying to absorb any and all the information I can gather. Thanks! Sam

First off, you should know that dermal fat graft is very different from a fat transfer, but I believe that with the knowledge I have obtained I can still give you some advice. Generally, circumcision is NOT necessary, but if you had past problems with phimosis some doctors performing phalloplasty will recommend it. I even saw some clinics that seem to insist on performing circumcision as a preventive measure. Anyway, you should not be concerned at all about not being circumcised, I believe.

Different clinics use different fillers, but I never saw any clinic that advertised combining different fillers. It would be interesting to read what more experienced members think about this? From what I read; I believe that is when complications usually occurred when people got many different kinds of fillers over a long period.

Because different fillers apparently have very different qualities, resulting in different outcomes, and possibly different complications that can arise. With some fillers, it seems that massaging the penis each day is mandatory even. Then with some other fillers, the need for massage is not even mentioned, but it says there is still a risk of fat moving and forming lumps. Again however, I believe this is least likely to happen with fat transfer, because the fat will be absorbed gradually.

Fat transfer seems to be the safest, but at the same time the results seem temporary, with much of the fat being absorbed. I read that 70% fat absorption is expected, and 30% fat can remain, but here is where the information I found is contradictory: some clinics claim it is permanent, but I read on way too many places that this is NOT the case, so personally I cannot believe the claim that the result would be permanent. I believe eventually all the injected fat will be absorbed.

It sounds like an interesting approach then to combine fat transfer with some filler. As for what filler is best, it is very hard to say. In the USA, Europe and Korea they all seem to use different fillers. I cannot even say what is the safest, and I doubt anyone can say for sure, because different doctors in different regions use different fillers and they will surely all say that their choice is either the safest and/or has the best results.

samsmithms wrote: Dr Hakky is planning to use fat from stomach area and transfer to penis shaft. He uses Renuva in the fat bag before injecting the fat into the shaft. I am not sure what other procedures he offers. From all my searching so far, Fillers are not permanent, Some fat (about 30%) will leave the shaft but the rest is expected to remain.I am hoping this is correct. I am currently 5 EG and wanting 6.6-7 EG. I am really not sure what average is but I think is must be larger than mine at 5 inches. Guys at the gym look much thicker. My length is not good either. Some have written that larger girth can make a short penis look shorter
I hope that is not correct. I have also read that some guys hang just a bit longer after transfer of fat and that the penis feels heavier.

5 inches EG is pretty normal, and I doubt the majority of gym-goers are naturally packing in excess of 5.5" EG. Anything north of that is pretty uncommon. Besides you are seeing flaccid compared to your own, you're likely getting a skewed sample. To be frank, you'd be certifiably thick after even one session of filler (with a follow-up addressing any revision if necessary).

samsmithms wrote: I did a phone call with Allen. I was eliminated because I am not circumcised. Dr Carney requires patient to be circumcised.

That's a new development - last I checked, I knew they preferred circumcised men, but it appears they've chosen a complete departure from uncut penises. This isn't a surprise to me, I've been told by a number of Doctors (and from patient reports on the forum) that uncircumcised units tend to be more prone to aesthetic irregularity, and no one wants "unhappy customers."

I'd strongly recommend men who are uncut and wish to remain that way to consider more temporary filler options like Hyaluronic Acid (HA). That isn't to say uncut men who have undergone alternative fillers can't have successful outcomes, but trying to manage aesthetic irregularities with bio-stimulatory fillers (i.e. Ellanse and PMMA) proves more challenging in the long-run. Even fat-based treatments could prove just as challenging, like FFT (fat) or Renuva (synthetic fat). The other alternative would be to go for lower volumes. And of course, the final alternative would be to seek out a practitioner who provides these procedures to uncut men, but be mindful that these potential aesthetic irregularities come at a higher chance.

According to one of our resident Sponsors, Avanti Derma, they describe the aesthetic irregularity more common with uncircumcised / uncut men as the "accordion effect." Per Avanti Derma, they describe this as: "The accordion effect is a common thing among uncircumcised patients that have tried girth enhancement with fillers, and it is the clumping of the skin at the base of the penis when it is retracted. Making sexual intercourse difficult."

Dr Hakky is planning to use fat from stomach area and transfer to penis shaft. He uses Renuva in the fat bag before injecting the fat into the shaft. I am not sure what other procedures he offers. From all my searching so far, Fillers are not permanent, Some fat (about 30%) will leave the shaft but the rest is expected to remain.I am hoping this is correct. I am currently 5 EG and wanting 6.6-7 EG. I am really not sure what average is but I think is must be larger than mine at 5 inches. Guys at the gym look much thicker. My length is not good either. Some have written that larger girth can make a short penis look shorter
I hope that is not correct. I have also read that some guys hang just a bit longer after transfer of fat and that the penis feels heavier.

I am scheduled for a fat transfer for girth in November. I am not circumcised. The doctor will remove fat and then transfer it to the penis. He also adds Renuva to the fat that he transfers. Does you penis feel soft (squishy) to touch? Do the veins show up more in the shaft post transfer? Did you do penile massage several times each day after the transfer? How much of the fat do you feel you have lost post transfer? Do you you have prior and post measurements of penis girth? Sorry for all the questions but I am trying to absorb any and all the information I can gather. Thanks! Sam

(9.) Do you have a preference for Renuva or Hyaluronic Acid (HA) for penile girth enhancement? If not, could you describe the pros & cons of each?
This question is not that simple to answer. If it were for myself personally, I would want to use Renuva. The main reason would be longevity. HA's are safe and have been around for decades. The results are very consistent and predictable (in the right hands). Renuva is still a fairly new product to the market and not that many people are familiar with what it is and what it can do. Ive been using it already for more than 5 years for aesthetic purposes in the face and body. Initially, I would use Renuva in male enhancement to "top off" a fat transfer procedure that I had already performed because Renuva causes your body to grow its own fat. Gradually I am using Renuva more and more for girth augmentation even as an alternative to fat transfer. It is extremely easy to use right out of the box. There is no liposuction needed to harvest ones fat which reduces the downtime and recovery from a mini liposuction procedure. During Covid supply chain issues caused a pause in the sale of Renuva, but in 2022 the inventory has been robust and without any limitations on accessing product. So Renuva game on!


(10.) Do you use a blunt-tip cannula or needle for injections?
95% of time I am doing this procedure I am using a blunt tip cannula. Either a 22 G 50 mm or 22 G 70 mm depending on how long the organ is. When I reassess and have to finalize and even things out, I connect a 27 gauge 1/2 inch needle that comes with the HA product and inject the remaining with a needle for fine tuning. For glans augmentation I use a small needle and only inject a maximum of 5 ml in 1 session for safety reasons.


(11.) What, if any, are the risks of filler migration?
The penis not a static organ like a chin or or ear. It lengthens, retracts, curves and reaches different directions when being used. With that being said, filler migration is to be expected. For the first month following a girth enhancement procedure, the product can be manipulated/massaged to even out any irregular distribution. After 2 months the product has almost fully integrated into the tissue so there is less change of moving things around. As long as the product is placed in the proper plane, this should not cause any issues such as migration of filler somewhere else and staying there long term.


(12.) How many sessions can a patient expect to achieve an ideal result?
This all depends on the budget of the patient and how quickly they want to achieve their goals. If they want full correction as quickly as possible, this can happen with a 1-2 fat transfer sessions. With HA fillers or Renuva, this can take several sessions and the goal can be obtained incrementally, which is not a bad thing.


(13.) What makes an ideal candidate?
An ideal candidate is someone who is circumcised, does not have any preexisting scar tissue, someone who desires mainly girth enhancement, and has reasonable expectations of reaching their goal. In many instances ones goals may change over time. For example, a patient may initially want to go from 3.5 inches in flaccid girth to 4.2 inches. This is 20% and visibly very noticeable. Its not KING KONG size by most standards, but they may enjoy that for a while and later want to go further and try to attain 4.8-5 inches in girth and be the king of the locker room. As long as one is doing this in a safe manner using safe products, this is the most important factor to consider.

Wanna8x6 wrote: Hi all -

Curious to hear about any new research or trials for these types of procedures. Have to believe there are new fillers in development or some other kind of improvement getting examined. For example, I believe Volux (not offered in US for penis enhancement - I was told) is getting a look.

Most fillers today are quite satisfactory in what they do, chances are most development is being put into improving them, in terms of quality and cost-effectiveness.

Volux is simply another iteration/brand of Hyaluronic Acid.

That said, the most "recent/new" filler I've seen around the corner is Renuva, which is essentially an "off-the-shelf" fat injection, coupled with a mixture of proteins, collagen, and growth factors. This eliminates having to harvest fat thus making it completely non-surgical. Dr. Tsay is the only Sponsor offering Renuva for girth enhancement that I'm aware of at this time.

Tim62411 wrote: I also see a lot of people talking about PMMA Avanti Derma. skeptical_one: if it were you, would you be going the surgical route or filler route if you had BPEL of 6” and erect girth of 5” mid shaft. I know surgery is about the only option for a length increase.

My role here prevents me from "trying to play favorites" or "what would you pick" scenarios, because it will create a conflict-of-interest. That said, I can propose to you pros & cons worth considering, and you make the best judgment given your circumstances.

The appeal of Surgimend in your case is two-fold:
(1) because the dermal graft is precisely cut to size, you won't have to deal with the aesthetic irreuglarities that comes with fillers (e.g. nodules, ridges, bumps). The shaft theoretically should be uniform in contour. It's also a material rich in collagen and will mimic gains achieved with fillers. The only downside here (really depending on who you ask) is that the girth is somewhat capped. In other words, once you have your procedure done, there is no "topping off" or "adding more girth." You'll want to ask the Doctors yourself but I believe gains of 0.5"-1.0" in girth are plausible, and that's quite significant (if you were 5.75" in erect girth, you're effectively Magnum XL).

(2) The two Doctors you are considering (Dr. Liu & Dr. Solomon) can both perform Ligamentolysis (lengthening) and Surgimend on the same day, making logistics and costs much more manageable. The only downside here is that recovery time is typically longer when getting multiple procedures done same day.

In contrast, if you get fillers performed, you'll still have to visit a Surgeon to get ligamentolysis. Fillers are also known to require multiple appointments to achieve desired aesthetics and size, bringing potential costs on par with the surgical route.

Fillers greatest advantage are that they are non-surgical, making them outpatient and recovery quicker. PMMA in particular makes your "skin thicker" as opposed to your "shaft thicker" (like Surgimend would).

Avanti Derma is certainly a great Clinic, and the reason you see a lot of them here is because PMMA dominated the discussion for most of this site's existence, before topics like Ellanse, Radiesse, HA, Renuva, and PRP-Treated FFT became regarded as effective alternatives in the filler discussion today. The good news is that now we have options, which also expands our ability to choose our physician, region, budget, etc.

As for Surgimend, it's the only surgical (*not non-surgical) option I recommend, and most other surgical alternatives are either obsolete or too risky for me to consider.

I hope that helps.

Conceivably a lot - however, I wouldn't advise going overboard with HA filler. Men here, especially those without any work done, have no idea how significant 0.5"-1.0" is in actual girth. The change in volume is quite significant.

If you want a natural end-result with HA, go with practical goals (like I said, try not to exceed 1 inch in circumference). This not only will improve how it feels and looks, but will be much easier to manage if you need future revision work.

To be honest, I think going overboard with any filler increases the risk for aesthetic irregularity. I think the "squishiness" effect is a bit overblown - your natural erect penis still has some "give," much like why dildos are not rock hard like vibrators. Furthermore, overfilling is equally problematic for more permanent fillers like Ellanse or PMMA, where the skin can become "too rubbery" to the touch.

In other words, HA, Fat, Ellanse, Radiesse, Renuva, and PMMA are all viable fillers when (1) medical grade; (2) performed by a qualified & experienced practitioner; and (3) not over-filled, especially not all at once.

I also agree with Hyperbol - regardless of the contour/palpability of your penis, the vast majority of partners are going to dwell on how much it fills them up... if they've seen enough penises they'll know how much variation there is in size, shape, veins, coloration, etc. What COULD raise suspicion is if you over do it. Just like lips, you ever see a woman with disproportionally large lips? The ones who add just enough to plump them up get away just fine, same applies.

On a side note, if you have a significant other who's comfortable with your decision and aesthetics aren't high on your priority list, then sure, you can probably exceed 1 inch, many have. Just be aware of your circumstances when making these decisions.

Honestly any filler will do, it's a matter of communicating your desire to your practitioner on what you're trying to achieve: for example, those with "baseball bat" style penises will likely want most of the filler at the base, tapering upward toward the glans. This can be achieved with Hyaluronic Acid (HA), Radiesse, Renuva, (your own) Fat, Ellanse, or PMMA; in other words, all viable penile fillers.