TOPIC: Why do some doctors induce an erection before performing a filler surgery?

Long time lurker, first time I believe posting.

My questions are:

Why do some doctors perform filler surgeries while the patient is Erect or semi-Erect when some doctors don’t?

Does it make a difference in the final aesthetics?

Is one way less safe than the other?

Thanks!




Could not find the answer to this in the forum.

The premise is that the doctor can get a more "even" fill of the injected product, creating less lumps and nodules.

How well it works in practice I don't know, but in theory it sounds like more of a marketing technique than a surgical technique. What I mean by this is that your penis will eventually go Flaccid shortly after your surgery, and the window of time your penis can lump & clump can be as long as days...making the Erect approach kind of unnecessary.

Not saying doing it Erect is a bad thing, I just don't see it really making much of a difference when you're dealing with fillers.

Hi Kev,

When I started about 6 years ago I used Caverject to get an Erection on all of my patients. I thought it would help me get a better spread of product. Sometimes I would find a patient looked good Erect or Flaccid but not both and with Foreskin retracted being the most difficult to get right. As I usually do 2 session for most treatments I then moved to doing 1 Erect and 1 Flaccid. There is a risk, especially in young fit guys of priasm (prolonged Erection) with caverject, which is not fun. So now, if I can avoid using it I do. But when I think it can help, or if a guy says there is a irregularity that can only be seen with Erection then I will use Caverject.

Dr_Oates wrote: Hi Kev,

When I started about 6 years ago I used Caverject to get an Erection on all of my patients. I thought it would help me get a better spread of product. Sometimes I would find a patient looked good Erect or Flaccid but not both and with Foreskin retracted being the most difficult to get right. As I usually do 2 session for most treatments I then moved to doing 1 Erect and 1 Flaccid. There is a risk, especially in young fit guys of priasm (prolonged Erection) with caverject, which is not fun. So now, if I can avoid using it I do. But when I think it can help, or if a guy says there is a irregularity that can only be seen with Erection then I will use Caverject.

To be honest, I've never thought of that... it definitely makes a lot of sense if we're talking Revision & Repair work, where "ridges" or "nodules" are perhaps more discernible in an Erect state. That's why we have Specialists & Surgeons like Dr. Oates around, to help explain these topic(s) in their totality.

I should say, however, my bias against induced erections stem from a highly unethical and unscrupulous clinic (which wont be named) who employed the technique and touted it as a reason they were cutting-edge. If a legitimate practitioner is finding consistent success with the technique, then more power to him or her. Like I said originally, the technique in it of itself doesn't seem terribly risky (relatively speaking), and Dr. Oates pointed out the necessary precautions that can be taken if a patient were to undergo an induced Erection.
.