TOPIC: Infections, Complications, Risks of PMMA?

Thanks for the links Supa! Looking forward to finding some time to thoroughly review these articles, the "G" word is of considerable importance to many on this forum that's for sure!

Re: The horror picture portraying a disfigured face.

It would seem down to poor technique; I read in the article:

" ... the PMMA microspheres were injected very near branches of the ophthalmic artery, which caused embolism in the vassel.2 We also know of complications also associated with the use of an autologous graft when the injection is carried out in the glabellar region.6
In this report, the complication mechanism was similar. PMMA was injected in the nasogenian groove, or directly into the right facial artery, or very near it. There was arterial embolism: right angular artery, right superior and inferior labial coronal arteries".

Not the product is to blame then, if we take the excerpt literally, but rather the location where it was injected.

Thoughts?

P.S.
I truly and deeply think that challenging info/doc/research documents are absolutely crucial for our long journey to a thorough assessment of PMMA. Thank you eqstudent for your contributions. Please, keep it up.

At the same time I did resent your patronizing attitude when replying to smartman. He has brought wealth of technical info to this forum on top of sharing his long-term experience with us: both extremely valuable assets.
I personally would welcome more imperturbability when objecting to points of view of a fellow forum brother. Rest assured that I still would avidily read your inputs. We are all here to learn and contribute. Btw, I confess, I do ignore the basic facts of biology, so I am happy to know more.

Final question: you "will not be using Artefill for chin augmentation" ... would you use Artefill for penis Girth augmentation?

supa wrote: Does anyone know the overall granuloma complication rate on Dr C.'s total number of patients (wrt PMMA to the penis)? After all, he has started PE via PMMA some five years ago.

I think I read he's only had one granuloma when injecting below the fascia on any part of the body. He doesn't think granulomas occur when injected below the fascia and this is why Artefill studies, which inject into the skin itself aren't really that relevant to us.

Thanks S.O.

@Hunglikeamouse
Like Ripple, I'm curious to learn what caused you to cite those specific risks and how your reasoning lead you to scratch PMMA off your list. I think some insight into your thinking may prove useful.

@hoddle

did u get a response on RealSelf?

@eqstudent

Thank you for your insightful research into unexplored territory. We all assume the associated risk when undertaking a new medical procedure. FBG can occur from a plethora of injectables in various parts of the body. Sometimes, our bodies just don't agree with our decisions. Good advice to all considering augmentation with PMMA. The pathology is similar, however, there are many variables as you well know. Some may experience serious adverse reactions long term; others may not have any. Some will be treatable. Some will require surgery. It is unwise to recommend such a procedure without acknowledging ALL associated risks. Thanks for shedding some light on this subject. Especially to some of the "young guns" that come on board and (due to their youth/ignorance) hop on board the PMMA proverbial wagon.

@hung,
" I would be very concerned about the use of this product for PE. I fear over the long haul you can expect the collagen to harden and eventually break down the tertiary tissue leading to necrosis. Hopefully a good plastic surgeon could save the penis.. Time will tell...but as for me FFT seems the best route. I wish you all the best and the girth augmenation is real but I really am terrified for long term consequences such as absorbtion(auto-immune) and migration(testicles). "

I understand your fear about the long-term consequences of pmma in our body, but we know the following points about pmma:-

1- It is used in human for more than 50 years ( Intra-ocular lenses in 1949 for cataract, for artificial joints and bone cement in spine ) without causing biological degradation or cancer and the pmma did not change in its composition.
2- It is used for more than 20 years as a tissue augmentation by Lemperle in europe.
This is an old article of Lemperle in 1991 for the worst PMMA generation "ArtePlast" in rats where he used the small beads 10 microns which he found later on that was the reason why he got 2.5% FBG in this product beside its irregular surface and its electro-static charges :-
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1994814
3- It had the FDA approval in 2006 .

Wouldn't be these 3 points enough in regard of long term complications of PMMA ??
In summary:- pmma is used for > 50 years in our body, so if there was one case of long term complication wouldn't we read about it ?? Would the FDA give the approval for this product to be injected in the face if there was a chance of ( hardening the collagen or break down the tissues surrounding it or absorption or migration) ??
N.B. we are talking only about the product per se (PMMA in general) and its late complications and not the technique of the doctor or the site of injection.
I think the only long term issues I will be more concerned are aesthetic looks (lumps and nodules) and Foreign Body Granulomas (6 months-5 years).

Thanks a lot EP.

Great table and very informative.

At the same time, my uneducated guess is that CHL refers to something else: his use of the verb "titrating" would seem to refer to manufacturing of ad-hoc percentage product from mixing official products with different concentrations. Unless of course I've plain misunderstood his post, which is quite possible as I have hinted in my previous post.

Well if your question is true, the evidence is when you have the problem. You'll know it when you have it & then i'll buy you a beer!

Could one of you guys refresh us on the Cadellus stuff? This was in the 180 page thread if I recall. I think we came to conclusion risk 1) Necrosis: not happending "later" happens early on due to needle, not just PMMA but injection related2) migration: PMMA biocompatible not going to cause cancer, your system can respond3) absorption: not discussed, not a lot of evidence4) granuloma: down the line, Kenalog shot.Lemperle said straight out biggest risk he sees is assymetry/aesthetics. It would be no suprise to see some people unhappy, including possibly me! Touch up sessions available for this. Changing your unit is a big risk, and once you change it there is no going back.

@hoddle10

Nobody is to blame or is "at fault". You've done a great deal to help others. Surgical as well as non-surgical augmentation of one's "pride and joy" is not something that should ever be entered into lightly. I implore all considering PMMA or any other augmentative procedure to explore all possible methods/procedures and the corresponding risks. Each procedure has pros and cons and associated risks. I would advise anyone under the age of 25 to use this forum as an education center. SO, EP, Supa, EQ, smartman, myself and others have touched on this topic before. That being said... I personally see PMMA as the best choice/alternative for Girth enhancement at this point in time. Who knows, in six months, PMMA could be considered outdated and a barbaric attempt of the past to enlarge one's penis. To our younger members/guests, realize that the ramifications of surgery are real. Complications (though rare) DO occur. I'd hate to be in my teens/twenties and lose the use of my penis; the joy that it brings both myself and my respective partner. It is catastrophic; physically, emotionally and mentally. I know. I suffered from peyronie's for 15 long years. Think about it people. That is all.

I have to report that after 12 days I have 4 hard areas in my base/groin area, they are basically at the entry points. I also have white spots and hardness at each entry point.
I am intermittently massaging them (partly because I am a very aware of them).

@eq - (( @smartman - You are all over the map, I am done with this. Good Luck! ))
Why have you said that?? The most important topic we have discussed before was:-
Was there any patient in the literature complaining of a serious complication (e.g. DISTANT ORGAN) from Newplastic which can be due to migration of the SMALL beads , correct ???
These studies you have mentioned above were NOT the answer for that Q. , so if you think it was the answer , I am sorry you might be right.
But the most important thing I have found is the presence of <1% of smaller beads in Artefill , if that is true , and as we were discussing before that the Newplastic has small beads too , so why did the FDA give the approval for Artefill in 2006 ??
So it is either the FDA has missed that serious complication of the possibility of migration of the small beads ---> liver or lung failure . It will be a big mistake if it was true .
Or they did know about the presence of <1% of small beads (< 20 micron) in Artefill , but they were 100% sure there will be no distant organ complication from these small beads (i.e. small beads doesn't cause any serious complication).
So eqstudent I dont know who is all over the map ?? I will let the others to decide about that . May be the 3 minutes were too short for the research.
Would you still do the chin augmentation with Artefill by your doctor ??

@mustang, why would Dr.C mix his own? I mean 10% comes out of a 10% container and same for 20% correct? So why any mixing need be performed?
However in the event that he did that anyway. We still should be able to see the batches and dates of the groups he mixed. I mean lets say he put 2-5% together to make 10% its not impossible to say which two he used. Also I would believe its to his benefit to track it based on a possible complication from a bad batch which would need to be traced to pinpoint the culprit. So there may be more questions that may arise from this practice if it is confirmed. I know Wade reads the boards so maybe they will address this and present a bit of re-assurance.