Since I believe that I could accomplish my (modest) 0.5' Girth goals with any of the options I don't currently see PMMA as giving the 'best' results. This following is strictly my opinion, others may differ: At this point NewPlastic is totally off the menu. From the info available it is likely somewhere in the Arteplast to early Artecol stage of refinement, not good enough for me to risk it. The Caldellas study of 21 people biopsied 180 to 450 days after injection did it for me. Elist/Implants were barely on the menu and quickly dropped off. Silicone injections? No way! FFT ' not sure the spongy 'fat' feel would work for me. Artefill is an option I would wait on.The Allografts (Alloderm/Belladerm/Repriza) looks like the best options for my particular situation. If I simplify the argument, It comes down to the risk of surgery (skill, loss of function, long term complications, or death) for Allograft vs. potential 'known unknowns' ( loss of function, tissue degeneration, embolism from migration, potential auto immune issues(granuloma) , or death ) on the Artefill side.
@Dd71 ' 2 of the docs inject Artefill in their practice which is why I chose them; the other doc is very much against permanent and semi-permanent fillers due to 'risks'. Neither of the Artefill docs recommended that I have Artefill put in my penis at this point in time. Both suggested waiting at least 3 to 5 years to see to see how it plays out. One doc was extremely knowledgeable about PMMA and claimed to have been around since Arteplast, which in his words was a disaster, as was early Artecol. He was the doc that gave me the reference to the very damaging independent study on NewPlastic which I posted on the other site. All 3 recommended that 'if I absolutely had to have PE' then find the most experienced allograft surgeon and go that route. Their consensus was that with 20 years of detailed study on Alloderm they are comfortable in how it behaves and the only real risk is from the implantation procedure itself, which after all is surgery and carries a known set of risks. History is filled with new procedures that seemed fantastic at first blush but turned out to be disasters 5 years down the road. Hope this helps!Just noticed that you and I have the exact same stats!
@EQ what did they say about injectables? Out of the 15-20 people here who have recived PMMA the satisfaction rate is is close to 100% with minor complications. Aside from granulomas there dosent seem to be horrible future complications AS OF NOW. Also the complications that do exsist , seem to react well with steroid/5-FU injections. So does the lack of long-term studies of PMMA in the PENIS lead you to belive that there are very high risks? Or did these plastic surgeons tell you otherwise? Curious to see what you opinion is, being it seems you do extensive reaserch on all facets of PE surgery.
sparticus wrote: ...I have read highly mixed reports regarding the results of dermal matrix grafts for PE. Several members have had the procedure and have posted accounts here, most done by Dr. Rosenthal. Some of the negative results have seriously impacted the patients lives...
You are preaching to the choir! I have done 3 (paid) consultations with prominent local plastic surgeons about PE. We discussed Implants, FFT, Allografts, Injectable, Scaffolding and new/experimental. The consensus was that all the PE procedures at this time would be at best be considered investigational and carry very high risks and have very low patient satisfaction rates. I will add that there are almost no formal studies available on this subject. Two of the docs referenced a British survey which showed a > 50% dissatisfaction rate for lengthening procedures. Two of the docs had done 'several' Revision procedures to correct bad results done elsewhere
I have read highly mixed reports regarding the results of dermal matrix grafts for PE. Several members have had the procedure and have posted accounts here, most done by Dr. Rosenthal. Some of the negative results have seriously impacted the patients lives. Even the successful reports only note a .5-.6 Girth gain, but with a price tag around 8.5 thousand.
if it is the same Dr. Solomon from NY or Philly then I\'d say stay far away as possible I called him and spoke with a lady who worked there, and all she did was feed me a bunch of bullshit. It was all lies about my results and compared with the ones he had posted on his website, it wasnt even close.
I am sure they will sew several sheets together without any problem, but the most important question would the thickness stay the same after 1-2 years or more, because my experience with Alloderm (2007 by Dr.Rosenthal) not so good I lost most of the thickness before my PMMA. I am not saying that PMMA is better than Repriza, I would if there is a guarantee that the Repriza will not resorbed after 1-2 yrs or more like other grafts and there will be no chance later on of scar tissue formation which can cause penile retraction---> it will be a very good product .
Repriza looks like an interesting option as compared to Alloderm. Anyone know how thick, \'extra thick\' is as described on Dr. Solomon\'s site? I couldn\'t find the dimensions on the manufacturer\'s site, but it does seem like they do a lot of custom sizing.
I looked at the before and after pics, have to say this made laugh:
\"Note the fact that the tip of his penis is located at the bottom of the scrotum in the after photo, demonstrating the increase in length that was achieved. \"
Conveniently forgetting that the scrotum rises and falls due to a wide variety of factors such as temperature.