Does this mean that an uncircumsized penis would be filled much closer to the glans and therefore have a smaller gap if any at all (except the head of course)?

How do you quote properly by the way?

No it does not.

strange coincidence... my \'assymetry\' is on the left as well (post one procedure). I will be posting some 3 month results of 10% procedure one. I will compare in the same stretching device visually to indicate initial loss (from immediate post procedure results).

yep that sums it up in fact mine is also on the left. I do have smore skin so it kinda blends in sorta which is why I might not bother doing anything about it.

@ EP Yep that area has for now shrunk back to almost what it was before and this is after round thee. basically the circ scar measurement remains around the 6-6.125 measurement and has done so since round round one. unfortunately for me its the left side only so it does create some asymmetry however it is not unsightly or obvious . three round have given me 1.25 estimated and I would say 0.25 stayed from FFT. That\'s a crude guess. Others have gained more and some a lot less. in my opinion it all depends what you start with. if your penis is 3 inches in circumference you could probably gain 1 Inch plus in one round. if you start with 6 you might only gain 0.4 in round one.

I think the gains indicated are not only reasonable ... they\'re fantastic. I had alloderm which provided an immediate gain of about 1\". That lasted about 3 years before it slowllllyyyy atrophied. Eight years later it had deterioriated somewhat (Though tolerable) and ended with likely half of that at best. That was a 10k procedure. So, I estimate my yearly cost at about 1200$, with a law of diminishing returns. PMMA appears to have a similiar impact, but much slower in building (.5,.3.,.25) which makes more sense if you think about it. This allows the the new growth time to \'acclimate\'. Cost for 3 procedures: 6-7k. Efficacy: good, based on anecdotal results. Permanency: yet to be seen long term (with a few rare anecdotal results, primarily with 30% and previous procedures). If you read the posts and progress, it is easy to see that many members have already pursued other methods and spent 10\'s of thousands (I\'m sure I\'ll hit 20k) in pursuit of the holy grail of PE. There isn\'t one. But is this the best one? I personally will be completely satisfied, as I was for several years, with a 5.56Lx5.75-6G Flaccid and a 7Lx6.5G erect. That is my \'ideal\'. length could be a half Inch longer, but Girth I would not to exceed 6.5. I believe these pmma treatments can provide those kind of results- and if it requires occasional touch-ups, average it out. Would you pay 1500 a year to \'maintain\' your ideal result. I\'d pay double that, and I\'m not mega-loaded... just \'comfortable\' (financially). Long term safety seems a moot point. There\'s millions of gallons of silicone tits out there- They aren\'t imploding!. We\'ll survive. Just acknowledge several members have already done allo, bella, prft (sp?), fft, the elist thing, scaffolds(?), etc... - all at extreme financial and psychological cost- not to mention those super extreme indivuduals whom have injected their own penis and scrotum with disturbing amounts of silicone oil. PMMA presents the least complications for those who have had the most reasonable/modest goals and expectations. Complications seem to manifest when people over do it and have unrealistic goals, even against the doctors recommendations or advice (this was true of allo, fft, skin graft,etc. as well). Remain reasonable and I think the results will be reasonable. Regards

Hi Skatezy,

Good question! What I\'ve found when researching PMMA used as a filler is lots of descriptions of foreign body granulomas but not much mention of the actual incidence. I found one mention in one article that in one small study, the incidence was 0.01%. The rest of the articles merely state that the incidence is \"very rare\" or something similar.

I\'m encouraged by the idea that most of the granulomas respond well to serial Kenalog injections. There was one mention of one patient whose granulomas subsided after treatment with allopurinol, which is an oral medication. It seems that surgical exision is also a rare necessity.

So given the ideas that there are risks to any procedure, PMMA is being widely used outside the US, the incidence of granulomas seems very low, the treatment seems uncomplicated and the response to treatment is good for the most part, I\'m confident in my decision to proceed with the procedure. I\'m not advocated for or against because we all have to determine what level of risk we are comfortable with when it comes to our bodies, I\'m just stating that given what I\'ve seen of the procedure, including the risks, and the positive outcomes I\'ve seen so far, I personally am comfortable going forward and having it done.

bernardil wrote: I would agree with Bighat. As a physician who does cosmetic surgery in the US, I can tell you that the general consensus is \"permanent filler= bad, temporary filler = great!\" Part of this is because as you age, at least in the face, there are changes that occur around the filler such that you may not want something permanent lodged against something that is changing. It may not look as good in 15-20 years as it does when the face is much fuller and more elastic. Also, if the patient doesn\'t like the filler, it\'ll go away in 6-18 months depending on the filler used.

For some general plastic surgeons, temporary fillers and botox have become the bread and butter of the practice. I\'m not a general plastic surgeon but I\'ve had ladies come in a spend $3-4000 every 6 months on their botox and filler indefinitely. And that takes 20-30 minutes. They leave happy and can be playing tennis in a few days feeling great.

My point in telling you this is, in medicine whatever way a certain physician does something is always the best way and he/she will have a million reasons to sway you against something he doesn\'t do or doesn\'t agree with. Do you own research, ask questions and don\'t just trust that one way is necessarily the only way. If the people you\'re talking to don\'t use PMMA for FDA approval or preference reasons, they\'re going to tell you not to do PMMA.

In the US, we don\'t really use PMMA much. If you ask the average doc in the US, he\'s going to want you to do juviderm, Restylane, Radiesse, etc and come back in 6 months and do it again.

PMMA is mentioned as permanent in some articles and semi-perm in other articles. Given the fact that its basically an acrylic and its also used in orthopedics to cement bone, I would venture to say its at the very least semi-permanent but on the order of decades vs a few years or permanent. Again, I don\'t use it at all so this is just my opinion based on knowledge of the physiology and characteristics/chemical makeup of the PMMA.

But its good that you\'re going into any procedure with reserve and questions. The procedure will be available whether you do it now or 2 years from now.

Hi bernardil,
I don\'t want to veer too much from the original poster\'s subject, but I was wondering, as a physician, how you view the likelihood and importance of complications associated with PMMA, and in particular foreign body granulomas.
Best, and good luck,Skatezy

That is true M7 I have PMMA over 3 years and still the gain is the same and I didn\'t need to go for a 3rd round at the present I am very happy with my PMMA girth but I will need a touch-up and to fill the gap behind the glans but I will ask for the lowest conc. (for a better aesthetic result and NO more girth).
PMMA beads will be in our bodies for the rest of our lives its only the collagen with aging will be affected.
Lemperle mentioned that the final permanent result you will see is after 6 months.
Check these pictures after pmma injections (4, 8, 10 and 15 years) they show and prove some good long term results :-
www.artefilldallas.com/beforeafterphotos.htm#Howlong ( male brow pic. after 4 yrs)
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2872008/ (after 8,10 and 15 yrs)
There is also a study from Brazil showed successful result after > 9 years of pmma injection :-
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19438669

---

In regard of how much is the permanent gain in cc\'s after a certain injected pmma volume ??
Lemperle mentioned to me before (and in another site I read also Dr.C. has the same opinion) it is almost 1:1 (of course it will depend on the conc.)
But there are some doctors said your final result will be between 75-100% of the initial volume.
And in another site I read something different :-
30% PMMA ---> the final volume is 75% of the injected volume.10% PMMA ---> the final volume is 55% of the injected volume.
I will agree with this \"the final result after 6-12 months is 75% (sure not less than that) of the injected volume\"(@30%).

Dr. Gottfried Lemperle, a plastic surgeon who pioneered PMMA has made mention on several occasions that for all intents and purposes, PMMA is PERMANENT! There will of course be reduction in size due to aging (collagen loss), dissipation of swelling (>8months post op), etc. You will lose size but it CANNOT go away like a temporary filler! Rudimentary knowledge of how PMMA microspheres work in the body will tell you that. Your penis will be PERMANENTLY larger... how much is the question. Indeed you will experience loss over time. DO NOT believe for 1 second that you will lose all of your gains over the course of a couple of years. It is scientifically not possible without altering human physiology. The microspheres stay suspended in collagen as supported by the biopsy provided by Lemperle that was taken 20 years ago with inferior PMMA. Also, DON\'T expect it to NEVER shrink some. SOME.

I completely agree with bernadil and others that the procedure should be weighed heavily upon as it is imperfect and may require many sessions to achieve one\'s goals long term.

M7

I would agree with Bighat. As a physician who does cosmetic surgery in the US, I can tell you that the general consensus is \"permanent filler= bad, temporary filler = great!\" Part of this is because as you age, at least in the face, there are changes that occur around the filler such that you may not want something permanent lodged against something that is changing. It may not look as good in 15-20 years as it does when the face is much fuller and more elastic. Also, if the patient doesn\'t like the filler, it\'ll go away in 6-18 months depending on the filler used.

For some general plastic surgeons, temporary fillers and botox have become the bread and butter of the practice. I\'m not a general plastic surgeon but I\'ve had ladies come in a spend $3-4000 every 6 months on their botox and filler indefinitely. And that takes 20-30 minutes. They leave happy and can be playing tennis in a few days feeling great.

My point in telling you this is, in medicine whatever way a certain physician does something is always the best way and he/she will have a million reasons to sway you against something he doesn\'t do or doesn\'t agree with. Do you own research, ask questions and don\'t just trust that one way is necessarily the only way. If the people you\'re talking to don\'t use PMMA for FDA approval or preference reasons, they\'re going to tell you not to do PMMA.

In the US, we don\'t really use PMMA much. If you ask the average doc in the US, he\'s going to want you to do juviderm, Restylane, Radiesse, etc and come back in 6 months and do it again.

PMMA is mentioned as permanent in some articles and semi-perm in other articles. Given the fact that its basically an acrylic and its also used in orthopedics to cement bone, I would venture to say its at the very least semi-permanent but on the order of decades vs a few years or permanent. Again, I don\'t use it at all so this is just my opinion based on knowledge of the physiology and characteristics/chemical makeup of the PMMA.

But its good that you\'re going into any procedure with reserve and questions. The procedure will be available whether you do it now or 2 years from now.

Smartman is over 3 years out and has maintained his Girth of 6.75\" in circumference. I think some loss is inevitable; especially considering aging. I believe that if one maintains a healthy lifestyle, PMMA size should not falter by a large margin. Fred is over 5 years out and has maintained his size. I would imagine that loss is governed by a number of factors and that PMMA is permanent; to an extent.

Most of the independent research I have done suggests that PMMA is permanent, or close to it. For example: dermnetnz.org/procedures/pmma.html It\'s hard to understand using common sense why the gains would not be, if the gains represent the bodies own collagen. Perhaps collagen degradation? I am not sure I trust US doctors to tell me about PMMA since they don\'t use it. Are US Dr\'s using Artecoll for other purposes marketing Artecoll as only lasting \"months\" ? I doubt it or it would not be so popular. For me I\'d be willing to do more procedures every few years if necessary as I can afford it, I just more concerned with health, safety and aesthetics and risks othan 100% permanency per se.

EP: I\'ve called and have discussed with many plastic surgeons regarding PMMA, and the general consensus is that it is not permanent, but rather \'semi-permanent,\' meaning that loss in Girth is guaranteed. Most insisted that PMMA results will suffer after 5 months, ultimately losing most of it in 1-2 years. I\'m going to stick around here for a while, and if gains are still had, I\'ll pull the trigger. This is not permanent, at least according to the many surgeons I\'ve talked with.
Now, I did talk to two who said that at least some added Girth will remain, but the question is how much, if they\'re right?
I think it\'s just best to keep up with people who actually have had it, and decide if it\'s worth it or not. Hopefully members will keep updating.

Oh whoops! Yes, I meant .5 and so on
Well, for me to gain 1 Inch, it will cost around 8k, assuming I would gain that much each round. That\'s a lot of moolah, especially if gains are not permanent. I think I\'m going to wait 6 months and check up with updates on this board before I make my final decision. I would hate to spend that kind of cash (which is a fortune to me) if it\'s not going to be permanent.

I think you need to remove the \"0\". Those gains are sad!
I believe you are correct though.
Round 1 = 1/2\" or .5\"Round 2 = 1/3\" or .3\"Round 3 = 1/4\" or .25\"