TOPIC: Ellanse over time

My understanding from past forum research is no one has lost their Ellanse size yet.

I’m year 1.5 on a 2 year product and am still same size.

Anyone lost size yet with older Ellanse?

That's exactly correct!! we are very happy with Ellanse and its longevity, is beating all the records. We are happy to read any of your experiences. In conclusion, your statement summarizes everything so far!!

For any interested readers on the topic, we leave you this article that our founder Dr. Casavantes wrote about Ellanse:

phalloboards.info/ellanse-nonsurgical-ph...ure-by-dr-casavantes

Excited to read about your experiences on Ellanse. It helps our research and continuing our results.

Currently at 5 years 3 months of the 4 year version, have not lost anything. If I do, I'd definitely do it again.

If Ellanse essentially does not go away (no one has reported losing any product even after it's supposed duration) then what is really the pro/con between it and PMMA?

Delonman wrote: If Ellanse essentially does not go away (no one has reported losing any product even after it's supposed duration) then what is really the pro/con between it and PMMA?

Well PMMA is guaranteed permanence, whereas Ellanse's duration is a guess, in that it could eventually dissipate, but not as early as the manufacturer suggested (perhaps maybe why it's having issues with FDA Approval in the U.S., but that's just speculation on my part).

That said, Ellanse's longevity thus far makes it an attractive filler in that the microspheres themselves do in-fact dissipate, it's the type of collagen produced (similar, if not identical) by PMMA, and that collagen's half-life is seemingly hard to get a precise answer on (I've tried researching online but I may have to defer to the Doctors here in hopes of a clear answer). PMMA ensures that there is always a neocollagenesis and angiogenesis process by virtue of simply being there (too large to break down or remove by the body, and too small & biological inert to raise red flags by the body, hence its effectiveness in cosmetic medicine). Ellanse's eventual dissipation of its PCL microspheres may put a lifetime on the nature of the collagen type produced, and how long that lasts is seemingly something I'm currently investigating.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but we don't currently know if the reason for Ellanse's longer than advertised duration is that the collagen is sticking around after the spheres have absorbed or if the spheres themselves are taking longer to absorb than anticipated. Maybe you could tell with some sort of scan?

otis wrote: Correct me if I'm wrong, but we don't currently know if the reason for Ellanse's longer than advertised duration is that the collagen is sticking around after the spheres have absorbed or if the spheres themselves are taking longer to absorb than anticipated. Maybe you could tell with some sort of scan?

There are different types of collagen produced by the body, and probably fibrosis in the process of injecting these dermal fillers in large volumes, it is most likely (from what I've gathered thus far) just the longer half-life of this type of collagen and fibrosis that provides its longevity. I believe the PCL microspheres do absorb in the time projected by the manufacturer (hence their confidence in originally issuing 1, 2, 3, and 4 year versions), but I suppose it's plausible that these microspheres may take longer to absorb/breakdown for some more than others. Suffice it to say, there is every reason to believe the PCL will eventually go.

I had thought there was something about injecting it in the penis vs the face that was causing it to last longer. That when they were tested in the face they lasted the advertised time but that there's less blood flow in areolar space of the penis than the face so it's not breaking down as quickly.

phalloboards.info/forum/dr-casavantes-dr...se-l.html#1308699987
"Clinically, we have seen a better collagenesis response when compared with PMMA, and also, the effects seem to be longer lasting than what is described by the manufacturer; this is due to the difference in the dynamics and metabolism of the penis compared to the face, where clinical trials have been made."

otis wrote: phalloboards.info/forum/dr-casavantes-dr...se-l.html#1308699987
"Clinically, we have seen a better collagenesis response when compared with PMMA, and also, the effects seem to be longer lasting than what is described by the manufacturer; this is due to the difference in the dynamics and metabolism of the penis compared to the face, where clinical trials have been made."

This could factor in too, it's just that I haven't seen or heard an official statement by the manufacturer themselves (I myself tried to reach out, but who knows how their correspondences are handled?).

I am at a little over 2 years and have 60% the 3year and 40% the 2year and have not lost anything. I get a bit more size from pumping than I did a year+ ago and with 1/10th the time in the pump. I don't pump consistently. Also, I am more often in the larger range of my average size the past year. Suggesting I added collagen from 3 months out to about 16-18 months.

I will continue to monitor as I'm now past the stage where 40% of my filler should be gone and soon will be past the life of the rest of it.I am encouraged with how things have been going so far and hope to keep these results without needing more filler aside from filling in the base which is where I am thinnest.

Is Ellanse or PMMA harder?

I know they both host collagen. But different collagen type ? And what is the concentration % of the stimulating substance in Ellanse? For example like in PMMA 10% or 30%.

And what exact is the carrier substance / stimulating substance in Ellanse ???

PmmaFan wrote: Is Ellanse or PMMA harder?

I know they both host collagen. But different collagen type ? And what is the concentration % of the stimulating substance in Ellanse? For example like in PMMA 10% or 30%.

And what exact is the carrier substance / stimulating substance in Ellanse ???

The microspheres are known as PCL (Poly-Caprolactone) that will eventually be broken down and absorbed by your body, however I'm can't recall off the top of my head what its carrier was (I'll look into it). While I don't have microscope slides to show you, I suspect the collagen is similar if not identical to that of PMMA because they effectively induce the same immune response to a micro foreign bodies.

Perhaps @Avanti_Derma can chime in on both Ellanse's carrier as well as the collagen comparison between Ellanse & PMMA.

Linnea is comprised of 10 or 30% of PMMA microspheres.
Ellansé contains 20% of PCL microspheres.
Both are suspended in carboxymethylcellulose.
Clinically, they don't show any substantial difference to the touch, but we have observed that collagenesis is stronger with PCL.
We get more volume from Ellanse using similar quantities of Linnea 30 or Ellanse.
The only difference is that PCL is a chain whose edges are slowly metabolized by the body and eventually disappear.
PMMA is a solid microsphere that the body cannot metabolize.
For more information about Ellanse, please click on the following link: phalloboards.info/ellanse-nonsurgical-ph...ure-by-dr-casavantes