Interesting thread! - Although I've now settled on Suporn, I was strongly leaning towards Schaff for my SRS. I will add that I am definitely not a crazed Suporn 'fan girl' as some accuse us of being. I made my choice with careful research, as we all should do. I would have preferred Schaff simply because I'm UK based and he's a lot closer!
I travelled to Munich to have a consultation with him in October 2015 & was very impressed - Genuinely nice guy and got the impression he is a very skilled surgeon and a very safe choice in terms of minimal complications - as he takes extra precautions - I know I would have chosen him if it weren't for some elements in which I feel Suporn has the edge. He also seems to genuinely care about giving us the best result possible and felt a real rapport with him. He spent way over an hour with me during our meeting which I appreciated.
I was so close to choosing him and was actually booked for surgery at start of 2017 until I did some final manic research and got in contact with 3 very honest previous Schaff patients.
I will say that all the Schaff women are happy with their results although 2 of them admit they would have travelled to Suporn (Or Chettawut) had they had the private funds to do so - all 3 girls are German so they had most of their surgery paid by German Healthcare. This doesn't apply to me so I will actually pay less going to Suporn when you consider the extra cost of the 2nd surgery with Schaff to perfect and 'tidy things up'.
The fact itself Schaff does 2 surgeries though (the 2nd usually about 6 months after initial surgery) is not a negative thing for me, personally - just a different approach. Schaff explained he likes to refine and remove excess tissue (including the 'dog ears' etc) at a later date because this reduces risk of circulation issues after the 1st procedure and his reasoning seemed sound. Of course, a 1 stage procedure is easier but as many of us know, a large proportion of Suporn women undergo minor revisions and touch ups during the month of recovery in Chonburi so it really isn't so different in that way. So a 1 or 2 stage procedure made little difference to me - other than the extra expense for hospital costs etc.
Although only one of Schaff's patients were willing to send a photo of their result, the others all confirmed comments made by 'Monamtb' regarding some of the finer details. These were the reasons I ultimately settled on Suporn.
The Clitoris: Schaff retains a portion of the glans but 'folds it' so the end result looks like a main clitoris at the top with sort of 'two legs' extending downwards either side - almost as if Schaff is attempting to recreate the frenulum' or the connection between the clit and the labia minora. The difference is, those 2 'legs' just end, by all accounts...and aren't actually connected to the labia minora at all.
Now for me, that was the main deal breaker - not because I think it's an awful approach - surely that would come down to personal preference and I'm confident his clitoris would be well formed for the most part and sensitive - but as someone who would like the choice to be able to have sex stealth when I want in future, it worried me. Sure, to the average guy who doesn't spent too much time inspecting in close detail, it could well pass as a natural clit (I've read of a couple of Schaff girls able to have sex stealth too) but my worry would be when faced with a guy who wants to spend considerable time down there. I was concerned at that point that it could be 'clocked' by some because natal Clits just don't look like that.
For me, what Suporn offers, with a small, quite natural looking Clit, including a frenulum of sorts felt the best choice for me. I believe Schaff described Suporn's frenulum as nothing more than 'Scar tissue' - but imo it looks good and the best way so far of trying to recreate it and that's good enough for me. In fact, as far as I know, no other surgeon in the world seems to even attempt to reproduce something similar - perhaps Chettawut but I'm not 100% sure on that.
Regarding all important sensation, from my resesarch I believe the penis glans is fed by 2 main nerves. Schaff (like almost every other SRS surgeon on the planet) is only able to retain one of these nerves (which innervates the dorsal part of the glans which he uses to form the clit). Suporn is somehow able to retain both nerves, one of which serves the main clitoris from the dorsal glans and the other to create his 'chonburi organ' which he tucks (in 2 pieces) into the labia minora on either side, between the clitoris and the urethra.
Dr. Schaff definitely clarified this for me and he (like most surgeons) makes his clitoris a little larger and, 'tucks some under the skin', underneath the smaller visible part to compensate for only being able to retain one of the main nerves. A good approach for sure but Suporn (and possibly Chettawut too?) seems to offer a means of retaining both nerves to create his secondary sexual area so my gut instinct told me that was the way to go. Because you end up with a very natural looking Clitoris with less anxiety about it looking different from the norm but also, hopefully, no less sensation (and quite possibly more) due to making the clitoris so small, because Suporn patients get the extra Chonburi organ.
From the one or two pictures I saw of Schaff's in his office (most were not labia spread, sadly which would have been a lot more usefl than the many labia closed results he showed me) it would seem the look of his labia minora are less 'defined' than Suporn's. I've seen results of Chettawut that look similar to Schaff's. More flat, if that makes sense. Suporn's seem to have very defined ridges and the labia raise up considerably - I think that looks more natural in some ways but natural vulvas vary so much, of course, so probably comes down to personal preference again.
With regards to the use of the inner sheath of the foreskin (where it is available!) and lining the inner side of the labia minora, Schaff's result is very similar to Suporn. This is a great thing in terms of sensation in the labia minora and something I wish all surgeons would do.
Regarding incision lines, it's true Schaff places them in the most common place (among the labia folds) and that wouldn't be a deal breaker for me. They looked very neat in the few photos Schaff showed me in his office and would probably fade nicely. Suporn might edge it because he places his close to the natural groin creases and his stitching is considered to be extremely neat. This comes down to personal preference, I suppose.
As for hair in the vagina itself, Suporn seems to guarantee there won't be any. Schaff says he's confident there won't be. Considering patients of both have on occasion reported a few hairs, I think it's more luck of the draw but most women should be lucky and have no hairs with either choice.
One benefit of Schaff's is his use of urethral mucosa which he stitches with the other tissue so that it lines the whole depth of the vagina, thereby helping with lubrication. This seems to work well, although one Schaff girl I spoke to said she is constantly a little wetter that she'd ideally like and often wears pantyliners to deal with this even after a year post-op. So that's something to consider. For me though, I thought it was a great touch and I'd rather be too wet than too dry (maybe thats just me ;p) but decided this wasn't enough to make up for the other shortcomings as described above, when compared to Suporn. I figured many Suporn girls report being able to lubricate somewhat (by means of our bulbourethral glands) so this seems more luck of the draw again and probably depends on how much precum you produced with the old equipment during arousal - as the process and origin of that liquid, I hear, is the same.
I will also add that I've read some people have described Schaff's technique as just another 'mofidied' penile inversion. Well yes, but only in the sense that he uses some of the base of the penile skin inverted which becomes the entrace to the vagina but that is minimal. Most of the vagina itself is scrotal tissue (and urethral mucosa stitched along the top...like 'lighting in a tunnel'). Most of the penile skin is used for the outer structures (inner labia and clitoral hood) like Suporn and Chettawut etc.
My post has ended up a liiiiiiiiiittle longer and rambling than I'd planned but hopefully can add some perspective for others researching surgeons like I was.
If it wasn't for the few perceived benefits of travelling to Suporn, I would have certainly gone to Dr. Schaff and I'd have been very happy to pay privately for his skill. it's true he's only done in the region of 250 - 300 surgeries using his new 'combined' technique but that's not a bad amount and certainly enough to have perfected a technique.
Sure, I'm comforted by knowing Suporn has 2 or 3k surgeries with his 'non-penile' inversion under his belt but that is a bonus and wasn't my main consideration.
I give Schaff a lot of credit for being one of the few surgeons trying to constantly modify and improve his method - it takes a certain kind of surgeon to be like that - Many SRS surgeons seem unwilling to risk complications and prefer to stick to the tried and tested penile inversion (even if a modified version). I much prefer a surgeon to strive for improvement or our surgical techniques and their results simply won't progress at all!
Gx
