TOPIC: Compiled Summary of Alloderm Complication Rates (ongoing)

Skeptical One wrote: His stats for length loss/scar formation post-op are not listed independently of traction therapy. In other words, there is no telling if length loss is common initially after a surgery. I consider this gap in the information a problem personally. Not saying he was intentionally misleading, since the stats themselves are likely accurate...

How does his adverse event disclosure compare to the other PE docs you have seen. It sounds like they provide more complete data. Could you point me to that data? I will try to get those questions answered once my consultation is scheduled with Whitehead.

I wasn\'t comparing AE disclosures, I was simply stating the convenience of a doctor to forgo retraction stats post-op since, even though it is a major deal and would be a huge, glaring negative... Retraction is a bit of a paradoxical side effect, since we really don\'t want to go into surgery knowing there is a chance we will actually get \"smaller.\" If the doctor is willing to go as far as publishing these stats on his website, like few other doctors ever do, he aught to be as comprehensive as possible (which means stating the number of patients who experienced loss of length post-op period, independent of external stretching devices).
The \"with a stretching device\" is a bit of a red flag if you ask me, and similar to the Elist implant, patients have been told that \"length will eventually return after stretching...\" implying of course that retraction/length loss is indeed a serious side effect post-op. You wouldn\'t know that was the case one way or the other if you were to rely solely on Dr. Whitehead\'s stats (found on his website).

Again, not saying his stats are misleading, but the absence of the crucial \"retraction\" risk reported commonly in Phalloplasty complaints drew my attention.

@S.O. I see your point. IMO most of the other PE surgeons make no attempt to address any data around risks on their site. He does have this on the same page above his complications

\"A penile stretching device is suggested after the widening procedure to combat Allograft Dermal Matrix Graft (Alloderm ') contraction that might occur.\"

That\'s true, although I think Dr C did tell JAM how good his FFT was.

By using an Alloderm you can get :-
Penile curvatures, shortening, chronic infection, penile distortion, abnormal texture and occasionally dorsal skin shaft loss.
Also it is mentioned that the chronic infections of penile Alloderm are often seen (infected sinus, drainage and erythema) and the treatment should be started as soon as possible (antibiotic and graft removal) otherwise severe scar contractures of the dartos, buck fascia and the skin will happen --> permenant shortening of the penile length (you will need a thick skin graft or even a flap).
And during the surgical removal of the graft :-
It will be very difficult to perform a proper dissection if the graft is adherent to the Buck fascia , the doctor might injure the dorsal neuro-vascular bundels , also in severe cases you can have severe fibrosis of the penis which requires penile ligation.
The doctor also has to fill the peno-pubic space with a vascular fat flap after the graft removal just to help in prevention of penile retraction.
books.google.co.uk/books?id=GahMzaKgMKAC...omplications&f=false

My consultation with Whitehead's staff did not garner any additional detail. I was told that Dr. Whitehead had worked on putting together study data over the years. Maybe one of his teaching assistants will finish and publish.

The staff member gave his opinion that the Alloderm risk numbers was similar to using Alloderm in other off brand applications (such as Hernias). His caution was that because PE is considered an elective cosmetic procedure most in the medical community felt that any such risks were unacceptable.
So, not that the risk numbers were higher, just that any serious adverse outcome was unacceptable for an elective cosmetic procedure.