TOPIC: Infections, Complications, Risks of PMMA?

@smartmanyou sent twice the same link, I cannot see any pic.In my case, it was hard to touch, and if for the big granuloma it was a mixture or tissue and PMMA, I can imagine the injections could work, for the small granulomas, the surgeon extracted small white platic Balls, 100% PMMA, so I cannot imagine injections could help

fran_berlin wrote: after extarcting them, the surgeon made the following analysis: the small or middle ones were only PMMA product, in small bowlsthe big bowl was a mix of tissue and PMMA

I would imagine these smaller/middle ones were more like nodules than an actual granulomas, and probably could have been treated without excision - then again I\'m no doctor.

Sorry Fran I have just corrected the mistake.

fran_berlin wrote: @hoodle10As you have experience on this forum, could you please tell me if others went through a similar experience?

None of the members of this forum have had an experience like yours that I know of. We\'ve had people report nodules, but nothing as big as yours or as many as you had.

@smartmanok thanks for the picture.It has nothing to do with what I had, i would have been pleased to have only what the woman on the pic has. As I said, it was like small plastic Balls, the shape of a pepper grain, but 2/3 times biggerfor the bigger one, it was a mixture of PMMA and tissue (Nodule?), that\'s what the results of the analysis showed. The surgeon told me while extracting the big one (as i was awake and talking with him), that he had never seen such tissue before, from appearance (he is experienced, professor and teaching to other surgeons)

Your English has improved quickly!

hoddle10 wrote: Your English has improved quickly!

^^

fran_berlin wrote: they were more precupied by risk of cancer. the analysis from the laboratory showed there was PMMA and some tissue which \"could\" lead to cancer

In even the most scathing articles on PMMA/Bioplasty, I can\'t recall a significant concern for cancer risks. Can you elaborate on what made them think this was a possible risk?

fran_berlin wrote: @smartmanok thanks for the picture.It has nothing to do with what I had, i would have been pleased to have only what the woman on the pic has. As I said, it was like small plastic Balls, the shape of a pepper grain, but 2/3 times biggerfor the bigger one, it was a mixture of PMMA and tissue (Nodule?), that\'s what the results of the analysis showed. The surgeon told me while extracting the big one (as i was awake and talking with him), that he had never seen such tissue before, from appearance (he is experienced, professor and teaching to other surgeons)

I wonder if the diagnoses were valid. A Nodule of tissue & PMMA in itself is not necessarily a granuloma ?? After all, the physicians you worked with clearly didn\'t know what they were dealing with (which explains why Kenalog injections weren\'t used or considered).

@Skeptical oneThe Dermatologist and the surgeon, before the operation, both told me it seems it is something not bad (no cancer)but after the analysis from the laboratory from the tissue, the surgeon told me the tissue had characterictics towards what it known to be a possibility to be develop as a cancerbut after he told not to worry
difficult to go further here on this point

exactly, the surgeon, and the Dermatologist were trying to find infos about PMMA, but did not find any collegues of them having heard about such consequences, nor injected in the penis

fran_berlin wrote: the opinion of the doctors: my body rejected the PMMA, this happens often after 2 or 3 years

If these doctors were so new to the idea & use of PMMA in the penis, and couldn\'t even find colleagues to aid in their treatment of your situation, how could they have possibly known this?

I n terms of the PMMA rejection at years 2 to 3 I believe he is referring to the Brazilian blog Hoddle posted. To my surprise most posted devastating results from penile PMMA procedures with entries going all the way back to 2006. Please lets give Fran a little more sympathy and his doctors a little more respect. It sounds like he found one of the best surgeons in his city and I would not so quickly discredit a pathology report from a lab in Europe. Especially if we are willing to take everything Dr Cassavantes says at face value as well as the scientific papers that are published by founders of the PMMA industry. They may have more experience but clearly they are financially motivated so there is a fundamental conflict of interest in terms of what information they disclose and withhold.
For the benefit of the community we should take what Fran has to say seriously and offer him support. He has been through a lot and coming forward like this is not easy. I would hate to see this discussion reduced to a list of bullet points summarizing why this likely will never happen to anyone injected in Mexico or Europe because the thought of having our current belief system challenged is too scary. And acting insensitive and skeptical will surely discourage others with serious complications from coming forward. Fran our prayers are with you. Please know we wish you a speedy recovery and hope you can continue to exchange information in a way that works best for you.
'\"Be as smart as you can, but remember that it is always better to be wise than to be smart.'

@Cabron, agreed that an open discussion is needed. The key question I\'d imagine everyone would like answered is whether these issues occurred because of this particular doctor, or the technique or equipment he used, or whether a similarly unpleasant result is possible even when the doctor is highly skilled and using equipment and techniques which are regarded as optimal.

Cabron wrote: I n terms of the PMMA rejection at years 2 to 3 I believe he is referring to the Brazilian blog Hoddle posted. To my surprise most posted devastating results from penile PMMA procedures with entries going all the way back to 2006. Please lets give Fran a little more sympathy and his doctors a little more respect. It sounds like he found one of the best surgeons in his city and I would not so quickly discredit a pathology report from a lab in Europe. Especially if we are willing to take everything Dr Cassavantes says at face value as well as the scientific papers that are published by founders of the PMMA industry. They may have more experience but clearly they are financially motivated so there is a fundamental conflict of interest in terms of what information they disclose and withhold.
For the benefit of the community we should take what Fran has to say seriously and offer him support. He has been through a lot and coming forward like this is not easy. I would hate to see this discussion reduced to a list of bullet points summarizing why this likely will never happen to anyone injected in Mexico or Europe because the thought of having our current belief system challenged is too scary. And acting insensitive and skeptical will surely discourage others with serious complications from coming forward. Fran our prayers are with you. Please know we wish you a speedy recovery and hope you can continue to exchange information in a way that works best for you.
'\"Be as smart as you can, but remember that it is always better to be wise than to be smart.'

With all due respect, no one is taking away from the seriousness of Fran\'s complications, and I don\'t believe there has been any sort of disrespect to his situation and/or his doctors.
What is imperative is that facts come to light where they can be found. Many men (myself included) have undergone this procedure, many more are scheduled. It shouldn\'t come as a surprise that some of us are alarmed about a situation that has never been experienced by an actual forum member (till now). Questions will be asked about things that are typically involved with what might cause complications - i.e. PMMA Brand, Cannulas, technique/training, etc - to better our understanding of the situation and to get a better grasp of the overall risks.
The notion that there is some current belief system is preposterous - the topic of PMMA has been an ever-evolving topic and I\'d be the first to challenge the status quo. The reason why I (or anyone else) discuss the need to analyze factors involved (i.e. cannulas, brand, etc) is because they may play a role in reducing risks associated with this type of procedure. We may learn one day that those factors have nothing to do with it - but we wont know until we assimilate all the information in one place - and the only place taking that initiative is PB!
There is a difference between being insensitive and being inquisitive. Rest assured the former will not be tolerated.