TOPIC: Infections, Complications, Risks of PMMA?

It seems to me that understanding exactly where the PMMA is injected will go a long way towards accessing how difficult it would be to remove. Has anyone already confirmed with Dr. C the exact plane in which the PMMA is injected? Is it put between the Dartos fascia (dt) and buck\'s fascia (bf) or between the buck\'s fascia and the tunica (a)?

Yes, but a useless one that didn\'t address the question.

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.

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.

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?

skatezy777 wrote:

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?

I agree that it\'s a question of what we will be tolerating.

It takes upto 24 hrs before questions are even posted on realself, so I\'m not expecting any answers for another day or 2.

skatezy777 wrote: ...@eqstudentI 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?...

Definately not an odd bump here or there. I like the cases from Salles because they are from real world clinical referrals to a hospital as opposed to speculation and propaganda. 'The interval between injection and first symptoms varied from 6 months to 1 year. Patients developed localized pain and nodule formation at the site of injection. The nodules could be palpable, visible, or both and could be associated with pain or not.' see page 4 of the pdf. This article was uploaded earlier in this thread phalloboards.websitetoolbox.com/post/sho...726355&postcount=92I suggest you talk to a plastic surgeon that has treated PMMA granulomas for their opinion. I posted a quote from 1 of the 3 I spoke to in a prior post.

But I think we have to ask Dr\'s who have treated granulomas at a deeper level. I\'m having trouble finding any useful information in that regard. There are reports of granulomas in the buttocks but we don\'t know the amount, type of PMMA or the concentration used. It\'s a shame we don\'t have any Portuguese speakers on the forum as bioplasty is very popular there and so there must be reports on Brazilian plastic surgery forums etc.

@hoddle10 ' I suspect that the amount and concentration will be difficult to get after the fact unless the patient remembers and the treating physician records it.In any event the 2 butt granulomas in the Salles study was from Bioplasty(Newplastic).

eqstudent wrote: @hoddle10 ' I suspect that the amount and concentration will be difficult to get after the fact unless the patient remembers and the treating physician records it.In any event the 2 butt granulomas in the Salles study was from Bioplasty(Newplastic).

According the their website, they use 30% concentration in the buttocks. But it\'s still unclear if in the Salles study it was indeed New Plastic. From what I understand New Plastic, as we know it, has only been around since 2005 (i\'m sure I read that somewhere), whilst Nacul started his Biolplasty procedures in early 90\'s. I think New Plastic is a newer generation of Bioplasty. Also the Salles study was from 2006 and reviewed cases from the previous 5 years, so for 80% of the study duration, New Plastic probably wasn\'t even being used.

Very true. Newplastic is the latest generation of Bioplasty, thats why I put it in paren just like Artefill is the latest gen of Artecol which is also in Salles.

From I can gather old versions of Bioplasty had far greater range of particle size from 30-103.

But to be honest whatever the particle size or generation of PMMA, it seems there will always be a risk of granuloma formation. I just want to know how what having a granuloma would be like in reality (ie how bad in the \"pain\" etc), as like I mentioned before, I definitely don\'t want to have this stuff cut out.

@hoddle

did u get a response on RealSelf?