PhalloBoards - An Online Community to Discuss Penile Girth Enhancement

behappy wrote: Hi there! I have been enlarging my penis for a year now with metacrill of 3/4 cm and I am very satisfied with everything.
Since I have only been with one girl this year, I have had some doubts about the aesthetics of an enlarged penis because I read a topic of someone who said that you could see immediately if it was an "artificial" penis.
From my point of view it looks perfect, ok the glans is small compared to the body but you can see many penises naturally like that, especially the wide ones. Maybe flaccid, since those of us who have pmma/other fillers has the skin thick, there is little difference between the girth size in erect and flaccid and this makes it much much wider than a normal one when flaccid.
What is your experience regarding this? also for example when some friends see you naked, like at the gym, has anyone ever suspected anything? or some partners? Thank you!

A well done procedure often results in a natural looking penis. Just like how a really good boob, butt, or nose job can also go undetected. However, unlike those, penis enlargement isn't remotely mainstream and therefore even less likely to be suspected. Couple this with the fact that penises come in different shapes and sizes, there are plenty of reasons you can evade unwanted scrutiny.

I don't know what ONE topic you read, but members here seldom (if ever) report detection by partners. I've had double digit partners ranging a rather diverse palette, and I've had zero instances of suspicion, and multiple compliments. Mind you, if anyone here has an arguably detectable unit, it could be me --> I have smaller than average glans and decided I was willing to sacrifice some natural-ness for more "punch," which lead to some minor aesthetic issues. In light of this, still no concerns, complaints, or suspicions.

More times than not we can be our own harshest critics, not our partners. What I mean by that is, since we know what our penis was like before a procedure, it's not unusual for us to "detect artificiality," no matter how insignificant. I've always said to own your newly enhanced penis because any reluctance to do so will only invite the unwanted scrutiny you're so worried about -- in other words, people don't notice things unless you give a reason to question things.

I've read virtually every account of PMMA and other fillers on this forum for over a decade and one thing I don't see are complaints about partners "asking questions," or "suspecting enlargement." If anything, the only time this really becomes relevant is when you happen to hook up with a partner that has had you before your enhancement -- and that's on you, assuming you aren't planning to reveal why you're noticeably thicker or longer.

Also, in the rare event that there is suspicion, simple excuses like "penile injury," or "born that way," is more than sufficient to brush aside any question marks.

When performed by an experienced practitioner using medical grade product, dermal filler enhancements can pass for natural just fine. If "natural" results are what you are looking for, you'll want a conservative approach, not over-filling and building girth incrementally over multiple appointments.

I've heard from both Avanti Derma (MX) and the Androfill Clinic (UK) that Ellansé L and Ellansé E have been discontinued - however, Ellansé M and Ellansé S are still available and are not going to be discontinued anytime soon.

As you'll see, the news is surprisingly good because it pertains to the reported longevity of this filler; this makes it more economical which means less top-offs (thus less visits and less costs). However, if you are the type who prefers things that aren't long-term or permanent, Hyaluronic Acid (HA) remains the best filler in this regard (even so, HA too has exhibited a longer-than expected lifetime in the penis).

I will use this topic to continue posting updates as they arrive. Here are some current information that has been more-or-less confirmed:

The text exchange with Francis from Androfill, and I'm transcribing his message with his permission:
S and M are lasting longer than their 1 and 2 year ratings, at least in the penis.

We have an S patient from 2019 who has had no reduction in size. He originally chose S because he wanted to be safe (knowing it would be gone in 1 year), but not.

I understand from the Sinclair Rep that one of the main reasons for pulling L and E was that they were lasting far longer than anticipated. This can cause headaches to doctors using the substance in long term shifting / sagging areas such as the face (where the product is intended for).

Dr. Casavantes of Avanti Derma also discusses the 2022 Ellansé update in his Doctor's Forum thread (the following is a copy & paste from www.phalloboards.info/forum/dr-casavante...co-avanti-derma.html ):
At the end of 2021, our supplies announced that Ellansé-L would be discontinued and reassured that the shorter-lasting versions (S, one year and M, two years) would remain in the market.
The obvious response/request was to know the reason why.
Their decision came from the fact that we have known since we followed our first patient's evolution: Ellansé (any of the variants) is way longer lasting than the initial research showed.
Additionally, those observations came from patients who received the product for facial rejuvenation. The expected longevity of Ellansé is even longer for penile implants since the penis has a less active metabolism and dynamics; also, its exposure to the elements is minimal compared with the face.
The face has significant structural changes over the years, and most injectors do not support the idea of having very long-lasting or permanent fillers there. The penile structures remain pretty much stable.
The most enduring versions of Ellansé (L, and especially E) became less and less popular, to the point that they didn't make financial sense to both the manufacturer and t he end-user.
The longevity of Ellansé depends on the length and cross-linking of the polycaprolactone chain in its different versions, which determines the speed of biodegradation and biosorption. Safety is identical in any of them; the byproducts of degradation are water and CO2.
At Avanti Derma™, after many years of using Ellansé L, the only reported problems have been strictly cosmetic (imperfections); we have no reports of local or systemic complications or damage, which coincides with the findings of some investigators (doi.org/10.1111/jocd.13518 , journals.lww.com/dermatologicsurgery/Abs..y_of_Forehead.4.aspx )
Ellansé-E was never available in Mexico, but as the largest consumer of Ellansé-L in our country, the company gave us notice of the withdrawal of version L by the end of last year, so that we had the opportunity to stock-up.
We will continue to offer the versions of Ellansé-S and M.
Ellansé-L will be provided while supplies last.
DrC / DrM

At the end of 2021, our suppliers announced that Ellansé-L would be discontinued and reassured that the shorter-lasting versions (S, one year and M, two years) would remain in the market.
The obvious response/request was to know the reason why.
Their decision came from the fact that we have known since we followed our first patient's evolution: Ellanse (any of the variants) is way longer lasting than the initial research showed.
Additionally, those observations came from patients who received the product for facial rejuvenation. The expected longevity of Ellanse is even longer for penile implants since the penis has a less active metabolism and dynamics; also, its exposure to the elements is minimal compared with the face.
The face has significant structural changes over the years, and most injectors do not support the idea of having very long-lasting or permanent fillers there. The penile structures remain pretty much stable.
The most enduring versions of Ellanse (L, and especially E) became less and less popular, to the point that they didn't make financial sense to both the manufacturer and the end-user.
The longevity of Ellanse depends on the length and cross-linking of the polycaprolactone chain in its different versions, which determines the speed of biodegradation and biosorption. Safety is identical in any of them; the byproducts of degradation are water and CO2.
At Avanti Derma™, after many years of using Ellanse L, the only reported problems have been strictly cosmetic (imperfections); we have no reports of local or systemic complications or damage, which coincides with the findings of some investigators ( doi.org/10.1111/jocd.13518 ,
journals.lww.com/dermatologicsurgery/Abs...y_of_Forehead.4.aspx )
Ellanse-E was never available in Mexico, but as the largest consumer of Ellansé-L in our country, the company gave us notice of the withdrawal of version L by the end of last year, so that we had the opportunity to stock-up.
We will continue to offer the versions of Ellansé-S and M.
Ellanse-L will be provided while supplies last.
DrC / DrM

Thanks for sharing your posts - real life experiences bring much needed clarity to both the pros & cons of a procedure, etc.

I'll be honest, I think this is a case of the "uncut problem" rearing its head, and for some, leaves to poor aesthetics. To be quite frank, if not for the foreskin, the shaft isn't terrible visually (as in, it appears it can be corrected).

Out of curiosity, did you ever get the Macrolane dissolved or did it dissipate by the time you tried again in 2018? I ask because that iteration of HA was known for its "squishiness" and not ideal for penile application. In other words, I wonder how much HA persisted, and if multiple rounds could have contributed to said-squishiness. Also, would you describe the softer areas all along the shaft or mostly the foreskin?

Again I want to thank you for the photos & details, it reveals the risks associated with any elective procedure (breast implants have a variety of complications for example), and the importance to weigh the pros & cons and if you feel you're a candidate for these kinds of procedures. This post highlights the realities of foreskin issues (they can be successful but do elevate risks of poorer aesthetic outcomes). I'd say though, if you do have foreskin, I'd opt for HA given that it's temporary and more readily reversible than other dermal fillers.

Hi All,

I’m in my early 30s and based in Southern California. Stumbled across this site a few years back and only recently (past few months) have I decided to commit to getting a procedure done. Have been doing my research and was hoping some of you more experienced and knowledgeable members might be able to assist in my decision-making process. Please and thank you

Since I’m extremely risk averse and safety is my top priority, I’ve elected to go with an HA filler for shaft enhancement. I’ve so far had consultations/brief discussions with the following physicians. Here are some comments, questions, and feedback on all of them. [The TL;DR questions are at the bottom]

Dr. TJ Tsay, Orange County, CA (Phalloboards Sponsor):
Overall impression is that he’s an experienced practitioner (couple hundred patients is what he told me, and he said he’s never had any material complications) and obviously the fact that he’s a site sponsor helps. He does both fat and HA filler injections, saying that the former is more permanent and firmer, but a bit more invasive (the fat harvesting part; not the injections part, which is not very different from HA fillers).

The fact that he also does glans enlargement is somewhat of a red flag, since my understanding is that it’s much riskier than shaft enlargement, and the fact that a doctor would do that concerns me as he’s potentially putting patient safety second to other factors. But that’s just me – I have a very high standard when it comes to doctors (sadly, a lot of doctors view themselves more as businessmen than as true fiduciaries, but I digress…).

Pricing:
$100 initial consultation
$890/syringe, 1 syringe = 1 cc = 1 mL, so $890/mL; Juvaderm
$750/syringe bulk, so $750/mL

Dr. Josh Gonzalez, Los Angeles, CA (an affiliate of the PhalloFill clinic, who referred me to him and who I understand are coincidentally as of very recently also Phalloboards Sponsors)

Dr. Gonzalez is a young doctor and much less experienced than some of the other doctors (as of December 2021, he had only done about 20 procedures, including those he did as part of his training at the PhalloFill Clinic). However, I was pleasantly surprised with his knowledge, candor, and “patient first” vibes. Additionally, it bodes well that he’s actually a urologist, not a plastic surgeon, so he has a far better understanding of penile anatomy than most others in this practice. Additionally, he worked under Dr. Irwin Goldstein, one of the top urologists in the country and who was coincidentally my doctor for some unrelated ED issues I had (I reached out to Goldstein and he gave a glowing recommendation of Gonzalez). But maybe this is an unnecessary qualification and wouldn’t be indicative of skills with HA filler injections?

Again, though, the lack of experience is something concerning me. He also touted the PhalloFill “technique” which uses a “special” method of “hydrodissection” to create more space in the penis to put the filler, an allegedly superior method. Not sure if there’s any merit to this technique or if it’s just a marketing ploy.

Pricing:
$5k for 10 units; 1 unit = 1.2mL, so $417/mL; Versa brand
$9k for 20 units, so $375/mL

Dr. Mark P Solomon, Los Angeles, CA (Phalloboards Sponsor)
I had a brief phone call with Dr. Solomon, as I understand he only does dermal grafts, not fillers, for which I understand the safety profile is not as great (please correct me if I’m wrong; he did tout a low complication rate). He doesn't believe in fillers “I don't put in fillers, I take them out”, as they don’t last and because he believes they just come out lumpy; says he has had maybe half a dozen complications in the 25 years he’s been practicing. He said that some of his patients have had ED but he also believes it didn't have anything to do with the procedure itself (i.e. when you take any random sample of men, over time, some of them will get ED).

Dr. Walter Kane, Los Angeles, CA
Also had just a brief phone call with Dr. Kane. The phone number on his site connects directly to his cell phone, an odd quirk for a doctor who wants to come off as professional (but I’m sure others would appreciate the approachability). While he does do HA fillers, he said he prefers silicone oil suspension using Silikon 1000, and that he’s done “thousands” of procedures using each. I was turned off by his use of silicone, as Phalloboards has taught me to steer clear of the material; but maybe there are different kinds of silicone?

Dr. Jason Emer, Los Angeles, CA
Dr. Emer is the only doctor I didn’t speak to directly, as his consultation is fee is very high (I don’t remember the exact figure but it was probably between $300 and $500). The only reason I’m adding him to this list for discussion is because his name is pretty well known. I have this trick of asking doctors the following question: “if you had to recommend any one doctor to do this procedure other than yourself, who would it be?” It’s a great way to 1. Test the doctor’s level of honesty and 2. Get a 100% unbiased and reliable referral (what could be better than a referral from your competitor?). Of the two doctors I asked this, interestingly, both said Emer. But it was hard to determine whether it was because they truly believed in his skills or if he’s just an excellent marketer. He also does every type of cosmetic enhancement under the sun, so I find it hard to believe he could be an expert in this field.

Pricing:
Consultation: $300 to $500 (can be applied to procedure if done)
$750+/syringe, so $750/mL; Juvaderm
Buy 3 get 1 free, so $563/mL

So that’s my summary of my physician visits and discussions. The questions I have (to those who are kind enough to offer answers) are:

Questions:
Of these doctors, who would be your recommendation?
Are there any other doctors in SoCal I should be contacting?
For Dr. Gonzalez: does being a urologist help at all, or is it more important to have experience with the sculpting and injecting?
For Dr. Gonzalez: does only 20 procedures of experience give you pause?
For Dr. Gonzalez/PhalloFill: is there any merit to this “hydrodissection” technique?
For Dr. Tsay: does him doing glans enhancement give you any pause about his integrity?
Is there any difference between the Versa and Juvaderm brands? Am I truly comparing apples to apples by listing the pricing on a dollar-per-mL basis of the filler, or am I missing something?
Taking it a step back, I just want to be 100% sure I’ve done all my research: are there any material risks associated with HA fillers, assuming I’m in the hands of a good physician? I use the word “material” because we can all agree that there are risks with anything you do; but is the safety profile as high as it’s purported to be?
My other concern is that I might get the “pig in a blanket” effect, since one of the lingering complications from my previous ED is that my glans doesn’t engorge the way it used to. (Maybe I should be more open to glans enhancement than I previously thought?)

Thank you all so much!

Infections from elective procedures are an established risk. No procedure, not even modifying one's own nose isn't without risk. In the article itself it even states that facial dermal fillers have an established 1% chance of acute or delayed infection.

What needs to be understood are that the fillers in it of themselves aren't the problem, and thousands (maybe hundreds of thousands if you count Botox) of people around the world get injections daily, for a variety of reasons. What ends up happening is that you get a pathogen introduced into the body unintentionally or accidentally, and for some, it can wreak havoc.

Take a look at what I consider the most telling part of this report: "In this case, subcutaneous invasion of bacteria likely occurred during sexual intercourse through the abrasion (Fig. 1A) or a herpetic sore, which then invaded the hyaluronic acid fillers. It was considered less likely to be a delayed infection from the initial insertion of penile fillers, due to the onset of symptoms following unprotected intercourse."

The lesson here is to practice safe sex and good hygiene. This is why medical settings that perform these kinds of procedures emphasize a sterile work environment (and even then rare cases of slipups can happen). This is also why some Clinics will give you antibiotics after a procedure as a preventative measure.

The moral of the story here is that Hyaluronic Acid (HA), something naturally produced by your body, is relatively safe. Reports of complications this severe from the penile fillers we talk about here are not only rare, but almost never the fault of the filler itself. Just be mindful that if you choose to get medical work done, hell even dentistry, it isn't without risk.

bayareapenisenlargement.com
Contact Form (Website)

Board Certified Plastic Surgeon

Services of Interest to PhalloBoard Members:
Surgical Penile Enlargement via Alloderm (acellular dermal matrix graft); Non-Surgical Penis Enlargement via Fillers (temporary and permanent options), Ligamentolysis (Lengthening surgery), and Scrotal Enhancement.

1. 490 Post Street, (Union Square),
Suite 1230,
San Francisco, Ca. 94102

2. 120 S. Spalding Drive,
Suite 300,
Beverly Hills, Ca. 90212

Please call the Office at 650-697-8888 to set-up a Virtual Consultation with Dr. Liu by Zoom meeting or Facetime.

Honestly from what I've been gathering these past few years, temporary fillers are a lot more long-term than short-term than originally believed.

The manufacturers of these fillers give their product retention rates based on facial injections; however, the retention in the penis could be much longer because of the layers the filler is injected into, which to my understanding has less means to absorb and dissipate (i.e. lymphatics) as quickly, thus reports of longevity.

Our Ellanse reports on the site have been pretty strong despite it being a "temporary" filler, and some Clinics have reported to me that HA too has become more of a "long-term temporary" than thought before, at least as far as penile application is concerned. I'd be really interested in getting up-to-date opinions in early 2022 regarding this matter.

I say this because permanency at your age in light of how robust the current temporary market is makes me want to reiterate what I said above. I don't want to be mistaken though, permanent isn't "bad" (heck, I have permanent in me), but if I knew what I do today, I think I would have reconsidered my approach (that is in NO WAY a knock on PMMA, or that I would have done something different, just an honest hindsight).

Again, good luck either way.

This is the reason I love this site, not promoting high risk procedure that are unsafe in the long run. If it wasn’t for this site I wouldn’t have known about Dr. shafer clinical trials which I was lucky to be one of the few volunteers. I felt lot more confidence getting the treatment than before, even thou people would say nothing to worry about after getting the fillers felt lot better.

Eventually I would do lengthing surgery and pmma filler knowing it’s worth getting it. Plus it’s too costly to do filler every single year or so .

Skeptical_One wrote: I was/am in talks with him for Sponsorship here, especially since he offers a variety of male enhancement services including lengthening. However, I told him that I could not extend a Sponsorship opportunity as long as he promoted or included this "peniflex" device. This material is essentially the Mexican version of the rigid silicone implant we call the "Penuma" in the U.S., or at least that's how Dr. Aguilar described it. Since patents are at play, I'm sure there are some nuanced differences, but they basically achieve girth the same way.

The PhalloBoards is a No-Silicone-Zone, and by that I mean myself, the Moderation team, most forum veterans, and all my Sponsors (Doctors & Clinics), and even some credible & reputable non-Sponsors have denounced the use of silicone for the purposes of penis enlargement. That isn't to say silicone can't be effective in other parts of the body, but in my decade of moderating a penis enlargement site, silicone has always been a poor choice for penile augmentation.

This is due to both the frequency of complications/issues/complaints, AND the severity of complications if & when they do occur. It doesn't help that (historically) the few Doctors that offer it also have poor ethical track records, although I'm not alleging Dr. Aguilar is necessarily unethical - I gave him reasons to discontinue the use of this device and until he does or doesn't, I will withhold any Sponsorship (which also means denying myself additional income, so I hope my readership truly understands I give a damn).

The No-Silicone-Zone I speak of includes:

• Rigid silicone implants for purposes of enlargement (and NOT erectile dysfunction, those are a totally different story)
• Large volume of silicone oil or gel injections

That said, Dr. Aguilar could very well be a good surgeon but until such time he discontinues the use of his silicone, I'm afraid I cannot recommend him in good faith, Sponsorship or not.

www.phallofill.com
Contact Form (Website)

William A. Moore - Founder

Services of Interest to PhalloBoard Members:
Hyaluronic Acid (HA) injections for girth enhancement and glans enhancement.

Studies have shown approximately 50% of men report dissatisfaction with the size of their penis, often suffering with conditions such as Penile Dysmorphia or Body Dysmorphic Disorder (BBD) relating to their penis or Small Penis Anxiety (SPA). This can negatively impact sexual performance, and this is no laughing matter for men in our society.

Our modern culture readily accepts women having breast augmentation but rarely wants to discuss the need for men to have procedures that address their sexual needs and self-image. We are here to discreetly help you overcome the fear and anxiety you have been silently suffering with.

The PhalloFILL enhancement really does add instant, realistic, natural girth to your penis. What makes the PhalloFILL enhancement even more attractive is there is no surgery, cutting, stitches, pills, or exercise required.

The treatment is performed in about 20-30 minutes using the dermal filler Revanesse® Versa+™ very similar to Juvederm® or Restylane® which are dermal fillers that have been used in the face since 2004. There is no social downtime or recovery. You can return to normal activities the same day except for sexual intercourse or self-pleasuring for a minimum of 72 hours. We recommend 7-10 days.

There will most likely be some bruising and swelling that could last 5 - 7 days, however, no follow-up treatment or medication is required for the post-treatment bruising.

Patients must wait 3 weeks between treatments, and most receive a 2nd or 3rd treatment. For ultimate girth enhancement results patients sometimes receive as many as 5 or 6 treatments spaced apart a minimum of 3 weeks.

The goal of most patients is an increase of 1 to 2 inches in circumferential girth. There is no girth we cannot achieve with subsequent treatments. And another fantastic attribute of the PhalloFILL enhancement is that it is reversible if you don't love it.

Dallas Location:
Advanced Skin Fitness
2928 Oak Lawn Ave,
Dallas, TX 75219

Text: 972-663-5588
Phone: 844-876-3455

Androfill wrote: I would be interested to know what patients are thinking about in regard to the HA and Ellanse procedures.

I agree some of our updates are from years ago now, geological timeframes in penis enlargement as one member put it.

I will share a couple of things I have come to conclusions on over the past couple of years. I am not a doctor, so these are conclusions based on patient results and feedback rather than medical science. Regardless I think some of the conclusions can help guide people.

Too much HA is being injected per patient.
We have stopped this at Androfill as far as I am aware and have had warnings on the website about injecting too much filler for over 2 years now.

However, almost every other clinic and doctor doing HA (even the good doctors) still inject far too much filler. There is no other way to explain it aside from greed overriding patient care, assuming the doctors in question know that injecting too much is an issue.

Why is it bad to inject too much HA? (this means over 30ml, but probably over 20ml in many cases).

1. Stretching the tissue
The tissue in the penis is stretched irreversibly, including the skin. If too much HA is injected it means that a reversible procedure has led to an irreversible outcome.
Put simply, if you increase your girth from let's say 4.5 inches to 6.5 inches, and then decide you don't want HA anymore, you will be left with loose skin.
Picture an obese person that loses a lot of weight. Injecting too much turns a reversible temporary procedure into a permanent change.
If you increase your girth by 2 inches with HA, you can not go back to your original penis.

2. Natural feeling / slushiness
HA wasn't designed to support such a large increase in size. With too much HA the penis will feel very soft, particularly if you are not fast at metabolising it and so are left with filler in the late stages of isovolumetric degradation a year or so later. A penis with 40,50,60ml of HA is likely to feel slushy after 18 months.
If you have just 10 or 20 ml you are more likely to metabolise it all before it turns to slush.

Putting to one side the isovolumetric degradation issue, when the filler is freshly injected even fillers with the most structure (Volux, Teosyal UD) cannot support 2 inches in girth increase. The maximum increase with HA should be 1 inch for this reason alone (to feel normal), and also so as not to stretch the skin (point 1. above).

3. Uneven reabsorption. This is made worse when the layer of filler is thick.

Cheap filler
The use of cheap, counterfeit / made in China, parallel imported filler, or even completely contraindicated filler (Genefill / Hyacorp) is common in the UK.

I am not sure how a doctor can read a warning pamphlet inside a box of Genefill which clearly says "contraindicated for use in the genitals" and still proceed to inject it.
There is a case we are dealing with today in which a well-known doctor on Harley St, with a big Andrology practice, told the patient he was injecting Voluma, showed the patient the box of Voluma (for the first syringes) and then proceeded to inject some other type of filler for the remaining 20ml (later discovered to be Genefill upon investigation).

If patients do not get better at asking for the stickers from the box of filler, and observing and counting every syringe that goes in, they will continue to be a) ripped off, and b) injected with who knows what.

Men seem much less likely than women to check on what is being injected.
I have come to form a view from talking to patients and support staff at other clinics that around 70% of the product being injected is not what the patient thinks they are getting.

It annoys me because for a few reasons. Aside from the ethics of patient consent (if you agree to have one thing injected and it is another product, then you have not consented), and aside from commercial fraud, it also makes the clinics using authentic filler seem more expensive.

The only way to compete with another clinic advertising 40ml of HA for £2,000 is to also use a lower grade filler.

For a 40 ml procedure using Genefill filler, it will only cost us £200 in raw filler.
For a 40 ml procedure using Volux it will cost more than £4,000 for the raw filler alone.

I have been tempted to name the doctors and clinics in the UK doing this.

Ellanse
Long term followers will remember how hesitant we were at first to inject Ellanse.
It took years before we were routinely offering it and usually only to repeat patients who had an idea of what they were getting into.

I still feel it is very risky for first-time patients.

1. Consider, what if some aspect of the patient's penile anatomy is not suitable for filler generally (for example loose pockets into which filler wants to migrate), or tight bands of skin that pinch in and cause an uneven shape. Patients are better to discover that are not suited for penis fillers with a reversible substance like HA.

Otherwise, if they are given Ellanse and discover they are anatomically a poor candidate, they can do nothing to fix the situation for years if the shape is wrong, the filler has migrated to the underside or any other issues.

2. Overall, despite Ellanse being a higher risk product (mainly the fact it can't be reversed), the results are generally better than with Hyaluronic acid, and will unlike HA support a larger increase in girth, to maybe +1.5 inch, without compromising on hardness.

My ideal pathway into penis enlargement with dermal filler would be:

1. To begin with a small 6-10ml HA procedure (to practice moulding and to make sure the filler sits well in the penis / the penis is anatomically well suited to filler without the higher likelihood of issues such as migration).
2. Then 10-20 ml of Ellanse (over 2 or more visits) to bring the maximum gain to something like 1 - 1.5 inches.

One issue to consider with Ellanse. It can become difficult to inject more using a cannula after around 3,4 months. The cannula simply can't break through the new tissue stimulated by the Ellanse / PCL.

I am not sure which other information is useful to patients. Perhaps what I am sharing here is already known.

Hallo Francis, Reading again your post, a couple of questions raised to my mind, here they are:
1. Too much HA is being injected per patient.
We understood your explanation about all possible short and long term issues using too much filler, so that your suggestion is to go with 6/10ml of HA first and see how it goes, then move to Ellanse.
Question: based on what we see on your website regarding thickness increase estimate, 10 ml of filler would give 0,3 inches on a 7" penis or 0,4 on a 6" penis.
Is that erect girth gain?
2. After the first 6-10ml of HA, and realized that moulding has been successful, and all swelling subsides (in some cases after one month, is it immedialty possible to go with Ellanse or you should wait for HA to reabsorb or dissolve it before going with the new filler? Let's say 18 months?
3. "anatomically a poor candidate: some aspect of the patient's penile anatomy is not suitable for filler generally (for example loose pockets into which filler wants to migrate), or tight bands of skin that pinch in and cause an uneven shape. Patients are better to discover that are not suited for penis fillers with a reversible substance like HA."
Question: is this something that can be expected/observed before the treatment during a visit, or it's somehting that cannot be foresee?
4. For foreing travellers: "The earlier you start moulding the filler the better, by day 4 or 5 the filler is almost ‘set’ and becomes very difficult to mould."
Does that suggest that it's better to plan 5 days in London after the treatment to be sure everything is going ok and have supevision?

Thank you in advance

From some of my readings tonight, CMC appears to be an HA alternative, but a lot "newer" on the cosmetic scene, relatively speaking. Much like HA, depending on brand/formulation, you'll find differences in firmness, longevity, etc. If you choose the CMC route, I implore you to start a Progress Report here because there simply isn't any sufficient data for its use in penile augmentation. How it truly compares to HA in all the "check box" categories is just hard to say at present time.

Having read every post on the forum and in many discussions with my readership through private messages & emails, I'm convinced Hyaluronic Acid (HA) is the best "starting filler." It boasts both being temporary and reversible, making it like the "tattoo you won't have to regret." It occurs naturally in our body making it the safest non-surgical filler option on the market. Lastly, almost every Sponsor here offers it, so there are plenty of quality options depending on your region.

Fat is also safe but technically a "surgical" route - if done right (not to overfill in order to ensure proper vascularization + sufficient quality fat from harvest site) by an experienced physician (Dr. Carney would be my recommendation here), free fat transfer remains a viable option. Also has a strong safety profile due to it being your own tissue.

PMMA is permanent and removal can be invasive. That said, it's shown to be remarkably resilient and efficacious --> guys have been getting it injected in their penises for over a decade and reports here show that no one's dick has fallen off yet, so it remains the most effective non-surgical permanent solution available.

Fillers can sometimes be mixed yes, but I'm of the camp of trying to stick to one if possible. Also depends on the fillers used and the comfort level of the performing physician. You have a great starting size, I'd say 1-2 rounds of filler treatment and you'll have a hefty unit. Good luck.

Androfill wrote: I would be interested to know what patients are thinking about in regard to the HA and Ellanse procedures.

I agree some of our updates are from years ago now, geological timeframes in penis enlargement as one member put it.

I will share a couple of things I have come to conclusions on over the past couple of years. I am not a doctor, so these are conclusions based on patient results and feedback rather than medical science. Regardless I think some of the conclusions can help guide people.

Too much HA is being injected per patient.
We have stopped this at Androfill as far as I am aware and have had warnings on the website about injecting too much filler for over 2 years now.

However, almost every other clinic and doctor doing HA (even the good doctors) still inject far too much filler. There is no other way to explain it aside from greed overriding patient care, assuming the doctors in question know that injecting too much is an issue.

Why is it bad to inject too much HA? (this means over 30ml, but probably over 20ml in many cases).

1. Stretching the tissue
The tissue in the penis is stretched irreversibly, including the skin. If too much HA is injected it means that a reversible procedure has led to an irreversible outcome.
Put simply, if you increase your girth from let's say 4.5 inches to 6.5 inches, and then decide you don't want HA anymore, you will be left with loose skin.
Picture an obese person that loses a lot of weight. Injecting too much turns a reversible temporary procedure into a permanent change.
If you increase your girth by 2 inches with HA, you can not go back to your original penis.

2. Natural feeling / slushiness
HA wasn't designed to support such a large increase in size. With too much HA the penis will feel very soft, particularly if you are not fast at metabolising it and so are left with filler in the late stages of isovolumetric degradation a year or so later. A penis with 40,50,60ml of HA is likely to feel slushy after 18 months.
If you have just 10 or 20 ml you are more likely to metabolise it all before it turns to slush.

Putting to one side the isovolumetric degradation issue, when the filler is freshly injected even fillers with the most structure (Volux, Teosyal UD) cannot support 2 inches in girth increase. The maximum increase with HA should be 1 inch for this reason alone (to feel normal), and also so as not to stretch the skin (point 1. above).

3. Uneven reabsorption. This is made worse when the layer of filler is thick.

Cheap filler
The use of cheap, counterfeit / made in China, parallel imported filler, or even completely contraindicated filler (Genefill / Hyacorp) is common in the UK.

I am not sure how a doctor can read a warning pamphlet inside a box of Genefill which clearly says "contraindicated for use in the genitals" and still proceed to inject it.
There is a case we are dealing with today in which a well-known doctor on Harley St, with a big Andrology practice, told the patient he was injecting Voluma, showed the patient the box of Voluma (for the first syringes) and then proceeded to inject some other type of filler for the remaining 20ml (later discovered to be Genefill upon investigation).

If patients do not get better at asking for the stickers from the box of filler, and observing and counting every syringe that goes in, they will continue to be a) ripped off, and b) injected with who knows what.

Men seem much less likely than women to check on what is being injected.
I have come to form a view from talking to patients and support staff at other clinics that around 70% of the product being injected is not what the patient thinks they are getting.

It annoys me because for a few reasons. Aside from the ethics of patient consent (if you agree to have one thing injected and it is another product, then you have not consented), and aside from commercial fraud, it also makes the clinics using authentic filler seem more expensive.

The only way to compete with another clinic advertising 40ml of HA for £2,000 is to also use a lower grade filler.

For a 40 ml procedure using Genefill filler, it will only cost us £200 in raw filler.
For a 40 ml procedure using Volux it will cost more than £4,000 for the raw filler alone.

I have been tempted to name the doctors and clinics in the UK doing this.

Ellanse
Long term followers will remember how hesitant we were at first to inject Ellanse.
It took years before we were routinely offering it and usually only to repeat patients who had an idea of what they were getting into.

I still feel it is very risky for first-time patients.

1. Consider, what if some aspect of the patient's penile anatomy is not suitable for filler generally (for example loose pockets into which filler wants to migrate), or tight bands of skin that pinch in and cause an uneven shape. Patients are better to discover that are not suited for penis fillers with a reversible substance like HA.

Otherwise, if they are given Ellanse and discover they are anatomically a poor candidate, they can do nothing to fix the situation for years if the shape is wrong, the filler has migrated to the underside or any other issues.

2. Overall, despite Ellanse being a higher risk product (mainly the fact it can't be reversed), the results are generally better than with Hyaluronic acid, and will unlike HA support a larger increase in girth, to maybe +1.5 inch, without compromising on hardness.

My ideal pathway into penis enlargement with dermal filler would be:

1. To begin with a small 6-10ml HA procedure (to practice moulding and to make sure the filler sits well in the penis / the penis is anatomically well suited to filler without the higher likelihood of issues such as migration).
2. Then 10-20 ml of Ellanse (over 2 or more visits) to bring the maximum gain to something like 1 - 1.5 inches.

One issue to consider with Ellanse. It can become difficult to inject more using a cannula after around 3,4 months. The cannula simply can't break through the new tissue stimulated by the Ellanse / PCL.

I am not sure which other information is useful to patients. Perhaps what I am sharing here is already known.

Having had 40 ml of HA since last March, I wish I had known this before I did it. I didn’t realize the more layers the more it would turn to slush . No clue what the right out is for me knowing this now. I wonder if I should get it dissolved and hit reset ? Ugh

I do appreciate that you took time to make this update especially in light of the fact you’re not looking for new patients .

I would be interested to know what patients are thinking about in regard to the HA and Ellanse procedures.

I agree some of our updates are from years ago now, geological timeframes in penis enlargement as one member put it.

I will share a couple of things I have come to conclusions on over the past couple of years. I am not a doctor, so these are conclusions based on patient results and feedback rather than medical science. Regardless I think some of the conclusions can help guide people.

Too much HA is being injected per patient.
We have stopped this at Androfill as far as I am aware and have had warnings on the website about injecting too much filler for over 2 years now.

However, almost every other clinic and doctor doing HA (even the good doctors) still inject far too much filler. There is no other way to explain it aside from greed overriding patient care, assuming the doctors in question know that injecting too much is an issue.

Why is it bad to inject too much HA? (this means over 30ml, but probably over 20ml in many cases).

1. Stretching the tissue
The tissue in the penis is stretched irreversibly, including the skin. If too much HA is injected it means that a reversible procedure has led to an irreversible outcome.
Put simply, if you increase your girth from let's say 4.5 inches to 6.5 inches, and then decide you don't want HA anymore, you will be left with loose skin.
Picture an obese person that loses a lot of weight. Injecting too much turns a reversible temporary procedure into a permanent change.
If you increase your girth by 2 inches with HA, you can not go back to your original penis.

2. Natural feeling / slushiness
HA wasn't designed to support such a large increase in size. With too much HA the penis will feel very soft, particularly if you are not fast at metabolising it and so are left with filler in the late stages of isovolumetric degradation a year or so later. A penis with 40,50,60ml of HA is likely to feel slushy after 18 months.
If you have just 10 or 20 ml you are more likely to metabolise it all before it turns to slush.

Putting to one side the isovolumetric degradation issue, when the filler is freshly injected even fillers with the most structure (Volux, Teosyal UD) cannot support 2 inches in girth increase. The maximum increase with HA should be 1 inch for this reason alone (to feel normal), and also so as not to stretch the skin (point 1. above).

3. Uneven reabsorption. This is made worse when the layer of filler is thick.

Cheap filler
The use of cheap, counterfeit / made in China, parallel imported filler, or even completely contraindicated filler (Genefill / Hyacorp) is common in the UK.

I am not sure how a doctor can read a warning pamphlet inside a box of Genefill which clearly says "contraindicated for use in the genitals" and still proceed to inject it.
There is a case we are dealing with today in which a well-known doctor on Harley St, with a big Andrology practice, told the patient he was injecting Voluma, showed the patient the box of Voluma (for the first syringes) and then proceeded to inject some other type of filler for the remaining 20ml (later discovered to be Genefill upon investigation).

If patients do not get better at asking for the stickers from the box of filler, and observing and counting every syringe that goes in, they will continue to be a) ripped off, and b) injected with who knows what.

Men seem much less likely than women to check on what is being injected.
I have come to form a view from talking to patients and support staff at other clinics that around 70% of the product being injected is not what the patient thinks they are getting.

It annoys me because for a few reasons. Aside from the ethics of patient consent (if you agree to have one thing injected and it is another product, then you have not consented), and aside from commercial fraud, it also makes the clinics using authentic filler seem more expensive.

The only way to compete with another clinic advertising 40ml of HA for £2,000 is to also use a lower grade filler.

For a 40 ml procedure using Genefill filler, it will only cost us £200 in raw filler.
For a 40 ml procedure using Volux it will cost more than £4,000 for the raw filler alone.

I have been tempted to name the doctors and clinics in the UK doing this.

Ellanse
Long term followers will remember how hesitant we were at first to inject Ellanse.
It took years before we were routinely offering it and usually only to repeat patients who had an idea of what they were getting into.

I still feel it is very risky for first-time patients.

1. Consider, what if some aspect of the patient's penile anatomy is not suitable for filler generally (for example loose pockets into which filler wants to migrate), or tight bands of skin that pinch in and cause an uneven shape. Patients are better to discover that are not suited for penis fillers with a reversible substance like HA.

Otherwise, if they are given Ellanse and discover they are anatomically a poor candidate, they can do nothing to fix the situation for years if the shape is wrong, the filler has migrated to the underside or any other issues.

2. Overall, despite Ellanse being a higher risk product (mainly the fact it can't be reversed), the results are generally better than with Hyaluronic acid, and will unlike HA support a larger increase in girth, to maybe +1.5 inch, without compromising on hardness.

My ideal pathway into penis enlargement with dermal filler would be:

1. To begin with a small 6-10ml HA procedure (to practice moulding and to make sure the filler sits well in the penis / the penis is anatomically well suited to filler without the higher likelihood of issues such as migration).
2. Then 10-20 ml of Ellanse (over 2 or more visits) to bring the maximum gain to something like 1 - 1.5 inches.

One issue to consider with Ellanse. It can become difficult to inject more using a cannula after around 3,4 months. The cannula simply can't break through the new tissue stimulated by the Ellanse / PCL.

I am not sure which other information is useful to patients. Perhaps what I am sharing here is already known.

Some-Book2543 wrote: Thanks for replying Skeptical_One! I am new to the site, but I have read through some archived forums. The Penuma definitely does not seem popular here, and for good reason from a lot of the stories. However, on other sites and forums, I am finding more people with positive results than negative. So I am weighing all sides. This site does seem like a haven for folks with terrible outcomes. That said, fat transfers and dermal matrices seem even way more risky than the Penuma. I've seen reports of necrosis, and horribly shaped endings. Forgive me for still learning, but what are some of the non-surgical girth enhancements you referenced?

What other sites exactly? You mean the Penuma subreddit that does some soft censorship (I posted once or twice asking questions about the complaints people have made on places like this forum and they weren't having it). I say "soft" because they do still let a good number of dissatisfied and/or removal patients post, although if they still exist I don't know (??).

As someone who's moderated the only forum devoted to the topic of surgical penis enlargement for over a decade, I would strongly suggest taking my word that fat transfers aren't as "dangerous" as a rigid silicone implant, in-fact, the fat is your own tissue. That's neither here or there.

As for non-surgical girth options, there are a few popular & viable ones spoken of today:

Hyaluronic Acid (HA): Temporary filler that provides instant volume. Temporary implies that you may require top-offs in the future as the product will absorb over time. Anecdotal evidence suggests HA can survive 18+ months before a top-off. HA naturally occurs in the body and is relatively safe for cosmetic use.

Ellanse: Long-term temporary filler that stimulates collagen growth for girth. This is predicted to survive 2-4 years (possibly longer?) before any necessary top-offs.

Radiesse: Much like Ellanse in how it generates new girth, but not reported to last nearly as long.

PMMA: The only recommended permanent filler option available. Trade-off is travel to Mexico (Avanti Derma), since the American iteration of PMMA (patent-enforced) is not only very expensive per volume, but uses a bovine carrier making it less ideal for penile application.

Avoid silicone fillers.

The aforementioned, especially HA, Ellanse, and PMMA, are most popular here. Deciding what's best for an individual depends on a number of variables (advantages of temporary-vs-permanence, travel & costs, expertise of practitioner, etc.)