TOPIC: Dr C. No longer offering Ellanse.

A good example of why I think Ellanse is a bad option would be what I experienced with FFT. When I went to my surgeon and told him I wanted it removed, he told me not to bother and that within two years it will all have absorbed anyway. This didn't actually happen. However, I assumed what the Dr told me was true and even knowing that I only had to wait a couple of years, I was still insanely depressed. This isn't an unusual reaction either. I doubt Reklaw is particularly happy having to wait years for his stuff to absorb. It's normal and I don't think that has been considered sufficiently. A temporary solution that lasts any longer than a year has to be reversable in my opinion or is a bad option.

randomword1234 wrote: Did they ever explain why they stopped using Ellanse? Were they getting bad results with nodules and such?

I also inquired about Ellanse and the problem wasn't bad issues. It's definitely the most expensive filler on the market, but in my opinion the best. It's durable, and firm. It just costs a lot. But they *can* get it.

It seems like I read somewhere that there is a possible Saline solution or something to smooth it out. Have you heard of this?

I think for A.D. it would be better worded (by them) if explained they have decided to not peruse trials with Ellanse or offer it as a potential option in the future.

If they did in fact say "discontinued" I feel that is disingenuous because it presupposes they've used it. (Perhaps things have changed) but I have an email exchange from wade explaining I would have been the first to get Ellanse from them. I also had to press hard to extract that information as I sensed that was the case. That was last Nov. In addition there is a different thread (somewhere here) were one other member was excited about getting Ellanse but then opted for PMMA instead. those are the only 2 Ellanse potential cases I could find for A.D. here.

It could be a bad product, I just don't think A.D. decided away from it for any specific reasons relating to the penis. But certainly if i'm wrong, I'd like to receive that information.

Bottom Line: I'm for any product that provides good and safe results, but yes I'm hoping more data will be collected for Ellanse as I still believe there could be benefits. I don't have fist hand experience with bad FFT injections and I completely acknowledge that long term temporary fillers aren't problem free physically/ mentally.

I just want to understand why it will/will not provide good results. So far I haven't seen any for PE.

Mustang2020 wrote: My responses where made in considering ALL the options of Girth, PMMA, HA and Ellanse. I think H10 was talking about only Temp options and it makes sense.

I think this is the only way to evaluate it--considering ALL factors. I still can see why some guys would consider Ellanse to be a middle ground between HA and PMMA.

~LL

I do agree that Ellanse is in its early stages as far as this particular procedure is concerned. That is going to make a lot of patient/doctors uneasy. There are the same issues with PMMA and over time those issues seemed to have went down quite a bit through trial and error. It seems after care alone can determine your final results. People complain about how far medical technology has come yet the PE industry is stuck in the middle ages. Without trying new things and seeing them through with trial and error, no growth can be made. I also find it difficult to believe that out of all the feedback that Dr. C is getting from Ellanse patients, none have made it to this forum. Ellanse sounds promising and has some beneficial qualities over other temporary fillers. Being 2 weeks post procedure myself, i can say that its not perfect but so far im happy with it. This forum has surely saved a lot of people's lives by keeping them informed enough to not go to certain irresponsible doctors. We need more inforation before making an educated assessment.

I think someone mentioned on here that injecting in the face is closer to the immune layer or something of that nature. if someone can clarify. Where it is injected in the penis is less of that.

Is it possible it is a cost issue for Dr C? Is it possible they feel a lot more knowledgeable/comfortable with PMMA than with new Ellanse?

PMMA is permanent and Removal is a very serious surgery where as with Ellanse while as you say 3 years is a very long time, is still less serious than PMMA if they were nodules and ridges issues and Removal is needed.

It just seems to me that they are offering so many new options now and to eliminate Ellanse, there has to be some very good reasons some of which H10 has touched on..

I guess one can ask the office directly and perhaps they will respond with a more clear answer.

hoddle10 wrote: Why take the risk of something that can leave you in a terrible mental state for years?

Not disagreeing with anything you said, just pointing out what seems obvious, that the question of "why take the risk" applies equally, if not more, to PMMA.

~LL

That really doesn't make sense to me.

It's true that I considered Removal after 2 months but mine was worse than the average case of a filler gone wrong, but if I had not such a rough past, I'd of maybe handled it better.
And I agree with H10, you have to experience it to know.