|
Post by stanlee on Mar 10, 2011 18:52:02 GMT -5
I have gone through every post on the massive PMMA thread and the only opinions about this are 1) it cannot be removed 2) it can be removed through some sort of very difficult surgical technique.
Even if the risk is minimal it would be nice to know exactly how this stuff can be taken out of the body if it needs to be. That may be my last consideration before I make my decision......
Does anyone really know?
|
|
|
Post by hoddle10 on Mar 10, 2011 20:30:17 GMT -5
I'd imagine the same as with silicone. The surgeon would make and incision through the circ line and peel the skin back. If the problem is due to lumps, he'd then remove them. If the problem is due to an infection, he'd probably have to remove it all, which is a tricky surgery and can damage the skin and facias, causing necrosis. Here is a photo of a guy who has self injected some sort of filler, which Dr Reed has had to remove. www.penisdoctor.com/photo5b.htm
|
|
|
Post by sparticus on Mar 11, 2011 0:23:50 GMT -5
The PMMA is going to be near impossible to remove once injected, it spreads out and consists of millions of plastic microbeads. What you are readng about having it removed is probably surgical excision of a granuloma that developed due to the PMMA, not really the PMMA itself although some will come out in that procedure.
|
|
|
Post by envisionmore on Mar 11, 2011 0:36:34 GMT -5
Wade, Dr C's nurse said "it can" be removed but only through a surgical procedure. One of the guys on here that has actually had the PMMA performed said Dr C told him they Have removed the PMMA in one patient due to overfilling by another Doctor. Dr C's associate Plastic Surgeon performs the removal. I'm not sure what the outcome is after removal but it "can" be removed.
|
|
|
Post by sparticus on Mar 11, 2011 2:04:11 GMT -5
I haven't read anything in regards to an effective technique to remove PMMA. Did Wade give you any details about how they would be able to remove the PMMA?
|
|
|
Post by hoddle10 on Mar 11, 2011 6:53:07 GMT -5
The PMMA is going to be near impossible to remove once injected, it spreads out and consists of millions of plastic microbeads. What you are readng about having it removed is probably surgical excision of a granuloma that developed due to the PMMA, not really the PMMA itself although some will come out in that procedure. They'd just remove all the tissue between the dartos and bucks facia. The fact there are millions of microbeads shouldn't be an issue as the they are surrounded by collagen. The key is to make sure when removing anything that one doesn't damage the fascia and the skin. If there isn't an infection then the surgeon would leave a thin layer, to avoid skin damage and make sure the bucks and dartos fascia don't become joined together. Dr Reed says that even when removing silicone he likes to leave and thin layer, which isn't noticeable to the patient, to ensure the shaft skin still glides along the shaft.
|
|
|
Post by sparticus on Mar 11, 2011 14:41:11 GMT -5
The doctors posting on makemeheal.com generally imply that it is very difficult to impossible to remove PMMA, maybe they mean it's impossible to remove all of it.
If they are able to remove most of it, it sounds like your unit is probably not going to look the same after the removal based on how all of the collagen has to be cut out. Have you seen pictures after the removal of liquid silicone? Not sure if those are exactly comparable, but from what I have seen with slicone removal is that you will most likely experience significant scarring and deformities.
|
|
|
Post by hoddle10 on Mar 11, 2011 15:32:09 GMT -5
We aren't talking about the face though, so what is said on makemeheal isn't particuarly relevant here. They can actually remove it from the face from what I've read, but I can't see how without cutting out lots of tissue and leaving obvious scarring. The same is true of the butt. But remember the penis and face differ greatly, especially in the fact the penis has an obvious and undectable entry point via the circ line.
When I consulted with Dr Gordon Muir regarding my FFT removal he showed me photos of all sorts of reconstructions he'd done on guys who has even injected vaseline and silcone. I think he showed LondonLad (well known poster from MNS) the same. The reason he did so was to us how well the body heals itself. But he also said there have been cases when the entire shaft skin has been lost and Dr David Ralph said the same thing.
I'm definitely not trying to tell anyone this stuff is safe or can't lead to terrible complications. But most of that which has been highlighted as a concern here, is to do with the face and correcting facial deformities is very different from in the penis. My concern with this wouldn't even be infection, as the one case I've read about was cured with a drain and antibiotics. My worry would be serious inflamatory reaction, which can happen many years later. If that were to occur, then removal would probably be needed and there is a good chance one could lose their shaft skin and require a graft. But in terms of risk analysis, from what i can make out, PMMA is still a far better bet than the other opitions.
If you go through all the messageboards it seems that most of the people complaining about complications from this stuff are due to not liking the costmetic result or from small lumps (possible granulomas). These aren't so much issue's for us here. We need to worry about inflamatory reactions and aggressive granuloma formation. I can find examples of these in medical journals, but when searching messageboards, I've not come across any (other the when lots of granulomas have formed following large injections into the butt.) Of those with concerns on Realself and makemeheal etc, it seems very few of these concerns are relevant to what we are trying to achieve. It's usually stuff like the "Dr put too much in and now it sticks out". This is then replied to by a Dr warning that this is yet another example of why PMMA should be avoided etc etc. But how is that really relevant to us? You put just 1cc too much into a wrinkle line and it's going to look bad. But an extra cc in the penis and would we even really notice? Another example, could be a woman complaining of small nodules and asking how to remove them. You can already guess that answer from the plastic surgeon who responds. But would a few small nodules in the penis, below the dartos fascia (the skin on the face doesn't have this) even be noticeable? And if they were, would having an incision through the circ or raphe line to remove them be anywere near as traumatic as having a scalpel remove chunks from you face?
Basically, whilst there are definitely areas of real concern with PMMA for PE, most of the issue's you'll find on messagboards and the frightening responses from plastic surgeons are more to do with the face and the problems surgeons have removing it from an area that patients don't want to be deformed. With the face you can't just peel the skin back to get access to the lumps or overfill and these are the issue's plastic surgeons seem to most often confronted with. If the boards were full of complaints of women with chronic inflamation, requiring major skin and tissue excision, then there is no way we should even consider this, but in my research to date, that hasn't been the case.
|
|
|
Post by sparticus on Mar 11, 2011 20:27:58 GMT -5
Well aesthetics is certainly a concern to me. I understand some people are more concerned about size than appearance, but to me I'm not comfortable having lumps on my penis and I know I'm not the only one. If you are ok with the visual aspects of granulomas, Im not 100% sure they in themselves can't lead to other issues. The complications are not just granulomas, I found a webpage that stated the physicians associated with the site had seen 32 patients for pmma complications and two of the patients had it injected in their penis and experienced necrosis. I posted the link in the main pmma thread.
|
|
|
Post by hoddle10 on Mar 11, 2011 21:53:35 GMT -5
Well aesthetics is certainly a concern to me. I understand some people are more concerned about size than appearance, but to me I'm not comfortable having lumps on my penis and I know I'm not the only one. If you are ok with the visual aspects of granulomas, Im not 100% sure they in themselves can't lead to other issues. The complications are not just granulomas, I found a webpage that stated the physicians associated with the site had seen 32 patients for pmma complications and two of the patients had it injected in their penis and experienced necrosis. I posted the link in the main pmma thread. I'm not talking about large granulomas that would be noticebale in the penis. I've got nodules left over from FFT removal and can't see them. It's only if I feel carefully. But if they were in the folds on the face, they'd stick out and feel weird. The report you posted about 32 complications had already been posted by me. Necrosis can happen with any injectable, but is very rare when a canula is used. Some Dr's wont inject restylane into the forehead for this reason. Necrosis in these cases is down to poor technique. The other complications were all to do with granuloma's in the face or butt. The main issue from that report was, as I've already suggested, was that it mentioned inflamatory reaction. Having lumps and nodules is one thing and they can be removed, but if they are accompanied by aggressive inflamatory reaction, then it might require total removal of the PMMA and that is risky surgery. It's clear that PMMA isn't for you. I'm not in any hurry to get it done either. But there are numerous guys on this board that have had it done and they are going to be scared to death if they read half of the negative stuff posted about it. Therefore it's important that we put it into context. Yes there are some possible major complications associated with PMMA. But that is true of all costmetic procedures and particuarly true of PE procedures. I don't recomend any, but from my current research i'd say PMMA is a safer option than the others, for reasons I've stated in another thread. You seem determined to convince people that PMMA isn't safe. I understand that, but I've learned from years of posting of PE forums, that once a guy has decided he's getting an enlargement, not much will deter him - not even horror stories. We saw it time and time again with the Elist implant. Even now we get guys coming along asking to hear about success stories with the implant, as if they are determined to find something to encourage them to ignore all the horror stories and go for it. So from that point of view, I'm not keen on pushing people away from PMMA, due medical reports questioning it's safety and towards other procedures that have a disaster record multiple times as bad as the small perecentage of problems found with PMMA patients. From what I can see of PMMA, the serious complication rate is not greater than many of the most popular cosmetic surgery procedures that are routinely performed. That simply isn't true of the other PE methods available. There is almost no such things as a safe cosmetic procedure. I remember looking into vaser liposuction and found numerous articles that scared the hell out of me. The trouble with elective surgery is that all procedures carry risk and therefore we are taking a gamble we don't need to. Alot of guys are having their lives seriously impaired due to the insecurites they have over their penis size. They have to decide it it's worth the risk and should make themselves aware of possible complications. However, they need to know that many of the concerns expressed about PMMA inmedical literature is concerned with its application as a facial filler. Most of the problems we've read about on messageboards tend to be concerned with poor cosmetic results. We need to worry about the complications that would require total removal and thus the very real possibility of serious damage or complete loss of the penile skin. At the end of the day we can all live with a few nodules and if they are noticebale then surgical removal is far more viable than in the face. But if we get a lumpy inflamation, then we coold lose our shaft skin and that would be very tough to handle. As we've seen recently on MNS a guy had necrosis from FFT (Ibraveheart was his name). I had necrosis only two weeks ago after fat removal, though luckily we were able to deal with it. Bonehead recently had necrosis after PLGA scaffs. Silicone Disaster had it from the implant. Gary Alter has written an article on the devestating effects on the sfat skin that can happen when removing Alloderm. Losing the skin of our penis is the biggest worry we have here. We aren't going to lose our actual penis, it's the shaft skin that is at risk from PMMA, but it's a risk with all procedures.
|
|
|
Post by stanlee on Mar 12, 2011 16:01:53 GMT -5
At some point everyone who gets PMMA is probably going to want to get it out. Better methods are going to be coming for length and girth. Ten years may feel like a long way away but, it's really just around the corner.
I am not convinced PMMA can be removed without causing damage to the penis. This is a subject matter that I need to hear about from Dr. C and preferably another doctor who doesn't have any financial benefit to saying removing it will be relatively easy.
|
|
|
Post by bigbizo8 on Mar 12, 2011 16:16:13 GMT -5
Stanlee what makes u say at some point everybody is going to want and have PMMA taken out? You can only speak for yourself. Here goes another negative who's talking and have NO CLUE what he's talking about
|
|
|
Post by stanlee on Mar 12, 2011 16:37:05 GMT -5
Huh. There is some serious belligerence and paranoia going on around this forum and the subject of PMMA. I am seeing it more on the side of people who seem intent on shutting down discussion on PMMA.
I am finding this very alarming. As a former member of MNS I would hate to think that a pro doctor group is posting propraganda on this site as well. Dr C. is certainly making money off lot's of people from this site. I am getting a bit skeptical.....
To answer your question bigbiz medical technology is approaching a point where organs may be able to be enhanced using stem cells perhaps allowing for an infinitely perfect penis, in which case the PMMA would probably have to be removed.
|
|
|
Post by ripple on Mar 12, 2011 17:21:38 GMT -5
I wouldn't say there's a pro-doctor group forming. Rather, I'd call it more of a reaction to one poster's comments that could be considered consistently slanted towards the negative.
And it's a bit of an presumptuous to say that EVERYBODY who has PMMA is going to want it out, and that the perfect penis via stem-cell technology is just a decade away. It's a nice idea, but there's no way of knowing if that will be the case.
|
|
|
Post by Skeptical One on Mar 12, 2011 17:42:36 GMT -5
In fairness, I believe it is imperative that members bring to our attention the potential complications that can arise from PMMA... members like sparticus enrich the debate by offering their insight and resources (links) on the subject matter.
With that being said, we must also put all these studies, stats, and physician opinions into perspective. Like Hoddle said, PMMA in its present understanding is the "safest" of the available girth enhancement options. Relatively speaking of course.
|
|