When it comes to improving the aesthetics and functionality of the penis, patients have several options: hyaluronic acid fillers, lipofilling, and penile implants. However, these techniques differ significantly in terms of effectiveness, risks, and results. In this article, Dr. Luca Zattoni shares his personal experience, delving into the advantages and disadvantages of each treatment.
Hyaluronic Acid Filler: The Minimally Invasive Solution
Hyaluronic acid filler is a fast, safe and versatile treatment for increasing the girth and length of the penis.
Hyaluronic Acid Fillers vs Lipofilling vs Penile Implants: Which is Better?
Main advantages:
Outpatient procedure: it is performed in about 30 minutes with local anesthesia.
Immediate and reversible results: the filler can be modulated or removed if necessary.
Reduced risks: fewer complications than other techniques, low risk of infections, irregularities can be corrected without resorting to invasive interventions.
Quick recovery: the patient can resume daily activities immediately after the procedure.
Therapeutic efficacy: in cases of penile pathologies such as La Peyronie's syndrome or induratio penis plastica (IPP), hyaluronic acid modulates collagen deposition, reducing the course and symptoms in these patients.
Post-treatment precautions:
Avoid public baths and saunas for a few days.
Maintain scrupulous personal hygiene.
Avoid sexual intercourse for about a week.
Scrupulously follow the therapy indicated by the doctor.
Considerations: The filler is ideal for those looking for a minimally invasive treatment with an excellent safety profile.
Lipofilling: A Solution Not Without Risks
Lipofilling involves a surgical procedure to remove body fat from donor areas for injection into the penis. It may seem like a natural solution, but in practice it has some disadvantages:
Rapid reabsorption: the injected fat is almost completely reabsorbed within 12 months, while the implant that remains can give rise to cysts.
Complications: the tissue that takes root can form visible and palpable fat cysts (fat balls), which can cause discomfort. These formations can only be removed surgically, leaving scars on the shaft of the penis.
Infections: the risk of infection is significant, which requires long antibiotic therapies and, in some cases, surgery.
Uneven results: the swelling can involve the skin itself, making it difficult to slide and the inability to uncover the glans, causing discomfort during sexual intercourse. Fat cysts can cause an uneven shape of the penis, which is difficult to correct.
The infiltration of hyaluronic acid after lipofilling is more complex, due to the formation of scars where the fat has been reabsorbed and less predictable or less homogeneous results. The patient may be subject to hematomas, edema or greater susceptibility to infections.
Advantages:
Stem cells: adipose tissue is rich in stem cells that can be collected and used for regenerative purposes. This method is helpful in the case of degenerative diseases of the penis (IPP, La Peyronie) and to prevent and reduce cases of mild impotence, it can be associated with PRP to maximize the effects.
Conclusions: Given the instability of the results and the high risks, lipofilling is poorly recommended by Dr. Zattoni for penile enlargement.
Penile Prosthesis: Option for Selected Cases
Penile prostheses include two main types: those for restoring erection and those for increasing girth.
1. Erection Restoration Prosthesis
Indicated for those suffering from impotence, these prostheses allow an erection to be obtained by manually activating a pump hidden under the skin, in the testicles.
Disadvantages:
Preventive circumcision required.
Disconnection of the suspensory ligament of the penis
High risk of infection and visible scarring.
Invasive procedure with long recovery times.
2. Girth Enlargement Prostheses
These prostheses are implanted under the skin and require disconnection of the suspensory ligament of the penis.
Disadvantages:
Visibility and palpability of the implant.
Disconnection of preventive circumcision.
Risk of visible scarring and post-operative complications.
Conclusions: Penile prostheses are definitive, but invasive solutions, suitable for particular cases and not always recommended for purely aesthetic improvements.
Here is a summary of the three techniques:
Procedure | Duration | Risks | Recovery | Suitale for |
Hyaluronic acid filler | 6-12 months | Low | 7 days | Those looking for safe and reversible results |
Lipofilling | 12+ months | Fat Cysts, Infections, Irregular Results | 30 days | Subjects incompatible with hyaluronic acid |
Penile Prosthesis | Permanent | Risk of infection, scarring, implant palpability | 6-8 weeks | Those with erectile dysfunction or specific requests |
Conclusion
Among the available options, hyaluronic acid filler stands out for its safety, effectiveness and speed of execution. It does not require hospitalization or surgery and has an excellent safety profile. It is an ideal solution for those who want a non-invasive treatment, with significantly lower risks than lipofilling or penile prostheses.
At AEM Clinic, Dr. Luca Zattoni offers personalized visits to help you choose the solution that best suits your needs.
Call us at 3516936538 for more information or send an email to aemclinic@icloud.com
Commentaires