TOPIC: Is there injectable AlloDerm?

I had dermal fat graft 11 weeks ago, but since then I saw some clinics mention injectable Alloderm, and I am quite curious if this is real or some marketing ploy? As far as I know, AlloDerm, Belladerm and dermal fat graft are sheets, only that they originate from different sources, and because AlloDerm are sheets how could they possibly be injected like a filler? The advantage I read is that AlloDerm is not harvested from your own body, so there is no big ugly scar like with dermal fat graft, and because of the harvesting required with dermal fat grafts, the latter is a longer and more complicated procedure (meaning the cost of the surgery is likely to be much higher too).

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.

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."

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.