TOPIC: Infections, Complications, Risks of PMMA?

Thanks for the info, Mikehok.

eqstudent wrote: If you can tolerate the granuloma there does not appear to be any general health risk in not resolving them.

@eqstudent
I have been thinking about this a lot lately. To me, it is a question of what \"tolerate\" encompasses. Is there a chance of significant pain? Or is it just an odd bump here and there? Even it if were painful, would resolution occur in a few years?
For me personally, this is one of of my main concerns and I am going to try to research this.
@hoddle
Did you get any responses on realself?

hoddle10 wrote: 'But we want to know what will happen if treatment fails and one just leaves the granulomas alone. Will there be any health risks or just aesthetic issue\'s? ...

If you can tolerate the granuloma there does not appear to be any general health risk in not resolving them. There is some speculation around increasing the likelihood of autoimmune type systemic disease but at this point there is no data supporting such speculation. There is some speculation by Lemperle and Carruthers that the granulomas will spontaneously resolve in 3 to 5 years but at this point there is no data supporting such speculation.

@hoddle

i was saying not big deal in terms that for what i understood dosen\'t cause any health risk if left untreated.
Is correct assuming that no health risk can develop form untreated FBG?

marcop83 wrote: @hoddle

i was saying not big deal in terms that for what i understood dosen\'t cause any health risk if left untreated.
Is correct assuming that no health risk can develop form untreated FBG?

I think so seeing as it\'s been mentioned that if left alone that can resolve themselves upto to 5 years later. But that\'s things I want to be sure of. If they don\'t damage the surrounding tissue, which I\'d previously assumed they would and they aren\'t infectious, then I can\'t see why there would be health risks and can see why they can be left untreated.

hoddle10 wrote: I think so seeing as it\'s been mentioned that if left alone that can resolve themselves upto to 5 years later. But that\'s things I want to be sure of. If they don\'t damage the surrounding tissue, which I\'d previously assumed they would and they aren\'t infectious, then I can\'t see why there would be health risks and can see why they can be left untreated.

Occam\'s razor: we compile a list of plastic surgeons and call/email them on this specific question

supa wrote:

hoddle10 wrote: I think so seeing as it\'s been mentioned that if left alone that can resolve themselves upto to 5 years later. But that\'s things I want to be sure of. If they don\'t damage the surrounding tissue, which I\'d previously assumed they would and they aren\'t infectious, then I can\'t see why there would be health risks and can see why they can be left untreated.

Occam\'s razor: we compile a list of plastic surgeons and call/email them on this specific question

I\'ll ask the question on RealSelf.

I\'ve posted the question on RealSelf. I spent ages typing it out on Word, only to find that you can only use a very limited amount of characters when asking a question on RealSelf, so have to dramatically shorten and edit, but think I made myself clear.

Originally Posted by hoddle10
I think so seeing as it\'s been mentioned that if left alone that can resolve themselves upto to 5 years later. But that\'s things I want to be sure of. If they don\'t damage the surrounding tissue, which I\'d previously assumed they would and they aren\'t infectious, then I can\'t see why there would be health risks and can see why they can be left untreated.

We can ask Dr Lemperle

hoddle10 wrote: ' I guess what I\'m saying is that if it occurs at a deeper level, such as under the Dartos fascia, is there really much difference between lumps and granulomas from a practical point of view? If it occurs on the surface, then obviously the redness, makes a big difference. But if one can\'t see the difference, other than perhaps feeling some soreness, how would one be able to tell they have a lump or a granuloma? '

I see your point. I guess one would not be able to differentiate the mildest granuloma and a lump. A lump or Nodule is a small hard mass that will not change size over its lifetime. A granuloma is a small squishy inflammatory mass that will grow over its lifetime. In most cases it will present with swelling, inflammation, and pain. Note that if one reads the Salles 'Complication'' paper I posted earlier and used Lemperle's definition, 26 of the 32 cases are granulomas. Note that the 2 butt implants (deep) presented with pain and nodularity. A plastic surgeon I just spoke to, who has treated several moderate/severe filler granulomas said 'think of Kidney/Lima bean sized cold sores but in some cases more swollen and painful extending the length of your nasolabial fold.' Now imagine living with that condition for 4 months to 3+ years of treatment. He also said forget about surgical excision if used in penis augmentation. That situation would likely require a > 10 surgery reconstruction nightmare.

marcop83 wrote: ..We can ask Dr Lemperle

If you read the two papers posted he recommends very early detection and treatment.

It seems then it comes down to how painful they are and how big they are. I had two lymph noduels that were coffee bean size, but again, they were actually pretty hard to detect. Even when parts of my scaffold hadn\'t dissolved, no one would have noticed other than me. But my fats lumps were noticeable, as they were very soft and there was a real contrast between the feel of Erect penile tissue and soft fat.

Has anyone come across any pictures of large size granulomas? Just how big can these things potentially become? I saw a photo of a woman who had huge lumps in her butt, but she\'d had over 600cc of the stuff.

eqstudent wrote:

marcop83 wrote: ..We can ask Dr Lemperle

If you read the two papers posted he recommends very early detection and treatment.

But we want to know what will happen if treatment fails and one just leaves the granulomas alone. Will there be any health risks or just aesthetic issue\'s? What has previously left me uncertain about getting PMMA is the thought of needing to have it removed. The idea of cutting away the tissue and the damage it would do scares the hell out of me. But if I knew that my penis wouldn\'t be damaged by just leaving them, then I\'d be much more comfortable going ahead with this. I\'ve lived with aesthetic issue\'s for years.

@eq student

do you know if systemic reaction like those experienced with silicone gel are possible with PMMA?

@marcop83 - could you be more specific about \"systemic reaction like those experienced with silicone gel \"? Note the current consensus in the medical community supported by the FDA does not support silicone gel (from implants) causing systemic disease.