Balloon Retention Nozzles.

"11.5" insertable" is too deep for me. That's just to get the inflatable part inside too. I'd prefer to see the balloon a lot closer to the tip. This nozzle almost appears to be "backwards" in design, imo. And yeah, where does the inflator attach?

I seen in the ad that "multiple balloon" versions were in the works. I'd like to see a version with a second balloon intended to be inflated outside the rectum, and something not too monstrous that would have to go so far up into the colon.

Silicone Nozzles has some interesting stuff, I've browsed their site often. I'm no enema newbie lol, but I have an interest in only a few of their items from their "beginner" and "junior" categories.

I had been intrigued by the rumors that they were working on some inflatable models... I have to say that I'm not too thrilled about this offering. I'll definitely keep watch for the unveiling of their newest inflatable items.

I am really intrigued by this new design of an old favorite! Like many of you, I was expecting a "traditional" design but the truth is, that has been tried and seen, perhaps, more failure than success.

The overall length of the nozzle is similar in length to my SN Model B, so the insertable length is not an issue for me. In fact, having the length at approximately 11 inches is a positive especially given that the tube is about one inch in diameter. I did notice in the description that it comes with 24 inches of tubing for the inflator bulb, which would allow you to have the bulb within easy reach...more so than with the traditional design balloon catheter.

I've been looking forward to the unveiling of this nozzle. Gotta think about adding this to my gift list for hubby!

Have fun and play safe!

Deb

Interesting design. I recall my first proctoscope exam the doctor proudly told me had gotten it 10" in. It was quite uncomfortable but of course the scope was rigid. I wonder about 11.5" even though this is flexible. I am a big fan of inflatables and use them almost exclusively but I think I will wait a bit and let others try this first. Still, I applaud their willingness to experiment and I am glad to hear that they plan more inflatables.

I'll pass! The design looks poor, and 11.5" is WAY too much for my enjoyment!

That’s a different approach. Ironic that Silcone Nozzels got me to give up on my double ballon nozzel with something that fits and works better, their KGL1. I feel like they have so many other products which are more appealing.

I agree that it seems to be designed upside down. Would also like to se a double balloon for the seal.

The design was unexpected, but I think that almost everyone's expectation was a redo of traditional designs. That's clearly not what SN has done.

I respect that they understand their market and clients pretty well and have a well-deserved reputation for quality, craftsmanship and backing their products. This new device has been talked about and "in the works" since 2015 or before, so I don't think this is a thrown-together effort with no understanding of what buyers like us might like. They prototyped, they tested and they delayed until they were comfortable going to market.

I'm sure they're going to listen closely to user feedback (I ordered one last night, too) and further design modifications may be made, as well as adjustments in durometer, thickness, length, etc. This is the first round, so I think we all owe SN some time to let users use and comment as well as offer suggestions and requests. As the owner of many SN products, I know that I like all of them, but some more than others and often not the ones I expected to like the most.

If the balloon(s) are durable and effective, they will have a strong new market for those who like balloon nozzles. Their investment will be for naught if they don't work or potential customers don't like them, so I'm sure SN has a well-vested interest in producing a product that sells well to customers who are happy with their purchase.

Give them some time ~ I'm betting on success and responsiveness.

Looks like a standard butt plug design with an extended tube added on and a missing stop base. Doesn't do it for me especially without a base. I need to have the stop to prevent it from going further up and not creating a complete seal.

A follow-up:

After having these latex balloon enema nozzles for about a month I've had more time to experiment and form a more informed opinion.

First, as noted previously, these nozzles have balloons that are smaller and not as deeply penetrating as the silicone double balloon nozzle that I own. I will also note that the latex balloon is more flexible than the silicone balloon nozzle. This actually seems to be a plus in how the balloons seat when inflated.

Second, I haven't completely cured the problem of being able to force out the inflated distal balloon. But I have found I can be a bit more aggressive when inflating the balloons. With 10 squeezes of the inflator bulbs that came with the set I bought, the diameter of the distal (inner) balloon increases to nearly 2.75 inches (it isn't completely round). This better fills the rectum and is a bit more difficult to push out. I perceive it as being "softer" and there isn't as much pressure in the rectum because of the balloon is smaller.

The only consistently difficult situation to deal with can be the initial fill since the presence of fecal matter further up the rectum and sigmoid can block or limit the enema solution from flowing upward through the colon and pressurizing the lower colon. The larger diameter tubing allows the flow to be faster with bag elevation. A slower initial flow to allow the fecal matter to soften or move and help the solution to flow upward reduces this pressurized "blowout" situation. Also, the position that I assume during filling plays a role in how the enema flows into me. Other than this, this nozzles seals really well.

I like attach the nozzle to the hose and fill the hose with liquid (to avoid a sudden flow of air where I open the valve) and then insert the nozzle and inflate the balloons. It tethers me to the bag while I fill my bag of choice with whatever enema solution I'm going to use. I like the sensation of the inflator bulbs as they brush the back of my legs while I am moving around.

I have been doing things a little differently, however. The normal sequence would be to lubricate the nozzle, insert it and then inflate the inner balloon first, followed by the outer balloon. Recently, I have been holding the tube in place while I inflate the outer balloon. Naturally, this tends to pull the nozzle out as the outer balloon inflates. Once I get the outer balloon inflated, I begin the process of inflating the inner balloon. As it expands, it tends to draw the outer balloon in more tightly. It may be my imagination, but it seems to seal more effectively this way. Again, the latex is more flexible than the silicone.

Finally, another adaptation is putting a flow control valve (roller type) on the main hose. I have seen pictures where people have put the click type flow control valves on the balloon inflation arms. This valve seals everything. So, after filling myself (without too much pressure), I can close the my usual flow control valve on the hose feeding the nozzle and then roll the valve closed on the nozzle. I can then disconnect from the hose and bag so I can move around without concern for the balloons deflating if the inflation bulbs come loose. It is an interesting way to retain an enema.

So, if you have a silicone double balloon nozzle and you find it uncomfortable because of the amount of inflation required to expand the fluting of the balloons to provide an adequate seal, this nozzle may be for you. Initially, I had a less favorable impression. But as I've experimented and played with this style of nozzle, I've liked it more and more. Next up up the inflatable experiment is the the new siliconenozzles design.

Let me add one more thing. I have multiple butt plugs of different sizes and types. Many are glass and some are quite large and weighty. However, nothing tones the sphincter muscles and the pelvic floor muscles quite like the Njoy 2.0 XL. Although smaller in diameter than some of my plugs, the fact that it is stainless steel gives it a mass and density that gravity is always trying to pull out. Being able to hold onto it for progressively longer periods of time is an indication of strengthening and toning of the muscles. To avoid overstimulation of my prostate, I insert it such that the pointy end of the head is pointed towards my back and away from the prostate (It's still stimulating, but not overly so). The toning of these muscles may make the ability to hold the inflated balloon in much easier.

On the original question -- yes I have their R150, a butt plug nozzle. I have had it for several years. I have been satisfied with it but it is interesting that it has the opposite problem of the "classic" butt plug nozzle. The classic has too short a neck and I need to tape the neck tightly with 3/4" electrical tape. The R150 has too long a neck. When I first got it I had a problem with it leaking. Part of the problem was because the outside shoulder is soft and hollow and is easily compressed by your cheeks. I filled the outside with a flexible calk and supported it tip down while it cured. It made a big improvement and I have been quite happy with it for several years.

On a different note I agree with most of what enema_runner said. The double balloon is the best, most comfortable, and leak free nozzle. Yes, not a long life, but a happy one. I find I have little in the way of "pop out" problems if I lie on my back so my cheeks are easily compressed during cramps. When I get up to go to the toilet I give maybe 2 extra pumps (from 4 or 5 to a total of 6 or 7) to the inner balloon and then transition to the toilet when there is no cramping.

From the SN ad:

"This balloon will expand to well over 1,000 ml and should easily adapt itself to any and all contours of the rectum."

Looking at the pictures though, the inflation may be more axial than radial (football vs basketball shape). Unless the idea is to completely fill the rectum up with the balloon, effectively blocking the backflow of water at the upper end where the sigmoid starts, I'd be concerned about getting a good seal with a single balloon.

Also, the distance between the south end of the balloon and the retention flare seems excessive, so seating the inflated balloon tight against the sphincter (as with double balloon types) could be problematic.

I ordered one last night. I will let you know my thoughts after I try it.

Looking forward to your review @FunnStrict - thanks for taking one (heh!) for the team!

Hi @FunnStrict

We would love to read your thoughts and review of the new nozzle.

😃

I ordered one on 11/20. Still waiting for shipping notice . . . . .

Will post a review as soon as it's delivered.

I am looking forward to giving the review. Have not received it yet, although

they said it would be shipping soon.

Holidays are jammed packed with out of town guests through the

new year so at this point I am thinking the first week of the new year before I get to use it

Shipping notice received; delivery 12/19. Zero opportunity to test drive before 12/28 - 1/4.

Nozzle received on Monday. Seems very well made and exactly as pictured on the SN website. I could only "bench test" it so far, but Inflation was easy and there was no leakage from the balloon without any external anatomic pressure. The durometer is soft enough to suggest easy insertion, but firm enough not be floppy.

I won't have an opportunity to try it out until late this month.

Nozzle received on Monday.

I won't have an opportunity to try it out until late this month.

Can't wait to hear about the "test drive"! Keep us posted...inquiring minds want to know!

Deb

Can't wait to hear about the "test drive"! Keep us posted...inquiring minds want to know!

Deb

Seconded. Waste not a moment man! Critical research is at stake!

Can you take some photos? I've been curious about the size, and the website doesn't really do it justice.

I'd love to see the balloon fully inflated, that's one pic I know they didn't put on the site.

Thanks, and look forward to hearing more when you get to test it out!

I've had one since it released. It's well made and seemingly durable, but I'm not 100 percent sold on the sealing qualities of it. For me, I have to really inflate it a lot to get a good seal, and there is more of a football shape to it than the round design of the Klystra nozzle. Uninflated, the device looks almost reminiscent of a squid with it's long nozzle and smooth body, and it's super comfortable when fully inserted. When inflating, the end tends to push out some (I assume due to the football shape) but it stays put. The key with this nozzle is that there's a definite line between leaking and a good seal, and it's hard to tell where that is without fiddling with it a lot. For example, I found 20 pumps of the bulb to be an absolute tight seal that isn't going anywhere, but 15 pumps led to some leakage. Overall, I really like the design, but not the retention aspect of it as much as I'd hoped. I really hope the double balloon nozzle that is coming is what I'm looking for. This nozzle is not bad, but I think they can do better.

The balloon ones are so effective. Actually, aren't all the enema equipment great at what they do? For a retention enema, balloon is the best.

@Distension were there any issues with discomfort at the north end of the nozzle, i.e. discomfort / pain with it seating at the upper end of the rectum?

Sorry, couldn't figure out how to reply @Agasmic. No, that part is very comfortable I found. I mean, there's a certain amount of depth involved, so if you aren't used to 11 inches or so ymmv. It's a much thinner extension that seats deep, so my thought is that you shouldn't have any trouble with it so long as you take your time. The tip is basically like a mid-sized colon tube, and it's pretty flexible.

In retrospect the biggest issue I have with it is that for me, it kinda requires a clean out enema with a different head first, because on the three occasions that I've used it as my starting cleanse, I ended up having seating issues and when you're not cleaned out, that's a nasty problem. I'm conflicted because I like the design very much overall, but the true test of a balloon nozzle should be how well it effectively seals off leakage and I find it to be hit or miss in that regard, I think mostly due to the balloon design and lack of a second balloon to keep it taut against the sphincter. I still plan on buying their double balloon nozzle when it hits, just to support them in hopes they will keep producing them and improve on the design.

Oh, and as for inflation, it can get really big. I pumped mine up to 20 a few times and it handled that with no problem at all. No way of telling how long it would take that kind of use long-term, but as far as capacity goes, this seems to be the largest balloon nozzle yet. I'd say it's over 5 inches around when pumped 20 times.

This review sounds about like what I was expecting. Kind of similar to my experience with the silicone double balloon with the 750 ml inner balloon. Its way too hard to get seated correctly, have to inflate way to o much to get a good seal, and requires a pre-cleanout before using especially since it has to go in so far. I think I will wait for their more traditional double balloon nozzle... A good silicone double 500ml balloon would be perfect. The key is havein smooth inflatable bulbs(no flutes) that are the correct spacing between them. I have a real nice latex Bard** nozzle that is practically useless because they put the balloons too far apart.

I'd say it's over 5 inches around when pumped 20 times.

You say 5 inches around. Five inches circumference isn’t very big at all. Do you mean 5 inches diameter?

You say 5 inches around. Five inches circumference isn’t very big at all. Do you mean 5 inches diameter?

Yes I meant in diameter. Sorry about that.

Very interesting review on the single balloon nozzle, but as expected not 100% leak proof. I am holding out on a purchase for the double balloon version as aerodynamically that is much more likely to seal the deal as it were! Conventional single balloons are nice but the physics always precludes a lock s they can move and they are similar to inflatable catheters. For bomb proof enemas or CI siliconenozzles 2.5 inch diameter CI retention sleeve is the business and lately I have been much more focused on mega colonic irrigation sessions which are slicker and have much higher throughput. Due to the holidays I have been entirely off-air from enemas and colonic irrigation but will resume mid January.

In the meantime Happy New Year and best wishes to the klismos on this excellent board!!

My new balloon retention nozzle from Silicone Nozzles (http://www.siliconenozzles.com/Single-Balloon-Enema-Retention-Nozzle-SNGLBLNNZL-1SM.htm) arrived yesterday. I ordered it on 21 November and it was despatched on 28 December, which (with allowance for end-of-year holidays) gives an idea of the lead time for this product at present. According to the SN site, the pace of manufacturing is also limited by a shortage of moulds.

My regular enema setup comprises a bucket, a fuel primer bulb as Higginson pump, and a Rüsch double balloon latex nozzle as pictured here: https://www.medtech3000.de/Klistier/Einlauf/Heilfasten/Doppelballon-Darmrohr-Ruesch-nach-Gaul-Doppelballondarmrohr::8.html?MODsid=9jim2htelic7qedgfusjt07a07. I ordered the SN nozzle as a possible replacement for the Rüsch nozzle — partly due to the limited lifespan of the latex balloons and partly because I had often wished the Rüsch nozzle was longer. In this review I will be comparing the two.

On opening the packet I found, bent double and wrapped in tissue paper, the carefully crafted product that we expect from Silicon Nozzles. I also found that the 24" inflator tube and connector mentioned in SN’s description were missing; however, the metre-long inflator tube from medtech3000, https://www.medtech3000.de/Klistier/Einlauf/Heilfasten/-Geblaeseball-fuer-Ballondarmrohr-Ruesch-und-extra-langem-Schlauch::18.html?MODsid=9jim2htelic7qedgfusjt07a07, turned out to fit the air hole in the SN nozzle, so I was able to test the new toy immediately.

As I and others have noted, the SN nozzle is designed quite differently from the well-known Rüsch and other comparable (silicone) double-balloon nozzles. In these traditional nozzles the inner balloon is designed to seal against the internal anal sphincter, while an outer balloon is spaced so that the two balloons when inflated pull towards each other and seal the anal sphincter at each end. The SN nozzle, on the other hand, simply seals by filling the rectum.

Before either nozzle can seal, however, it must be inserted, and this was where I noticed the first major difference between the two nozzles in use. The insertable length of the Rüsch is something like 10 cm (4 inches), while its tip is just over 10 mm (0.4 inch) in diameter. I find it very quick to insert. The insertable length of the SN nozzle is something like 29 cm (11.5 inches), and the tip is around 25 mm (1 inch) thick. As I began to insert it, the tip quickly butted up against the sigmoido-rectal sphincter(*) , and I had to wait for the musculature to relax before gently pushing the nozzle fully in. So insertion took two or three minutes as against perhaps ten seconds, and the tip ended up well inside the sigmoid.

Ten or twelve squeezes of my primer bulb are enough to inflate the two balloons of the Rüsch nozzle to form an effective seal. Inflating a balloon to fill the rectum obviously takes more air: at least fifteen squeezes. Initially, prompted by an earlier review, I tried twenty squeezes, but this felt unbearably full and I had to let some of the air out. Then I pumped in two litres of a soapy solution, held it for fifteen minutes (longer than I usually do). Some have queried the integrity of the balloon seal against the rectal tissues, but I found it absolutely tight. Then I released the air and the nozzle slipped out very smoothly. During expulsion it was noticeable that the solution had gone higher than usual and it took longer to come out.

So for me the nozzle works well for its primary purpose. A couple of observations:

The opening of the bore for the liquid and the opening of the airway are very close together. SwitchableSusie sees a danger of water entering the airway, but I see no such danger: the airhole, nominally 1/8 inch, is actually very small, and I don’t believe water could enter it unless you deliberately pumped it in. For my usual setup, however, the close spacing of these openings was inconvenient: I connect the enema hose to the Rüsch via a non-return valve, and when I plugged the valve into the SN nozzle the body of the valve interfered with the air tube connector. I was able to work around this by connecting the air tube first, and of course I could use an in-line connector instead of the non-return valve, but the two openings might be spaced further apart without any loss of function.

Another small contretemps occurred while I was injecting the solution: the hose slipped off the aforesaid non-return valve and I had to stop the flow and reconnect it (rather awkwardly with soapy fingers). This has never happened while using the Rüsch, but it is obviously not the fault of the SN nozzle either; I suppose it was due to the greater back-pressure from the higher filling. If it turns out to be more than a one-off I may have to find a way to secure the hose more firmly to the valve. [See second edit below.]

So, to sum up my impressions after a single use: it seems to be a well-made and well-designed product, and I am pretty sure I will find the experience of using it improves with practice.

(*) or junction: authorities differ as to whether there is a sphincter there.

[Edit: I don’t know how to get the links in the above to appear as blue clickable links. I composed the post offline and pasted it into the form.]

[Further edit: The higher back-pressure is due to the narrow (¼") bore being compressed where it rounds the bend into the sigmoid. The Rüsch nozzle is much wider and is not significantly bent as it does not reach beyond the rectum.]

I finally had the opportunity to take my new SN single-balloon nozzle for a test drive.

I like it!

The overall insertable length (11.5") was easier to fully insert than many other SN nozzles because the durometer (10 - soft) is just about right for comfortable, complete insertion. If you're not accustomed to something of that length it might take a bit of getting used to, but it went in about 8" without any resistance and after just a bit of solution flow (plain water for the test) the rest of the nozzle was fully seated. The 1" thickness is thick enough to be pleasurable, but for experienced SN customers, this is a modest size.

Once fully inserted, the water flow was smooth and the narrow bore kept the pressure at an even pace. When I began inflation, the first five pumps were enough to make me feel full and just uncomfortable enough to pause. At this point there was a tiny bit of leakage (not unexpected) as the balloon settled into position. I never clamped the line and as second quart began to flow, I pumped it up three more times. Once again, there was some initial discomfort (some might consider that a good thing!) as my colon adjusted to the larger balloon diameter, but that soon dissipated as my body adapted again.

At this point, there was zero leakage and I could feel the third quart beginning, increasing the internal pressure but with the certainty that whatever flowed in would remain there. I gave the bulb two more squeezes, again creating some momentary discomfort but also with a specific sensation of (balloon) fullness that submissives will appreciate. The sensations are much different than double-balloon nozzles - more fullness and "bigness" in your ass and a balloon that is clearly much bigger. By now, three quarts were in - half of my 6 quart latex bag and I decided to stop there. It was evident that I could have left the clamp open and more would have flowed in, but not out. This was a nozzle test, not a self-test.

It was easy to stand up and move around with no leakage or discomfort from internal articulation of the nozzle. Deflation and removal were as easy as one would expect.

My overall impression is that it is well made and well designed - and it is not intended to be a copy of a traditional balloon nozzle, it's a unique design. Some might wish for a shorter length, but I found it comfortable even when fully inserted. Some might wish for more girth (including me) but for an initial design, the 1" thickness worked very well, indeed!

I had no problems with connecting it to the enema bag and the longer inflation tube made self-administration and nozzle inflation a LOT easier than silicone or latex single or double balloon nozzles.

From my perspective, this will become one of my regular go-to nozzles and it will probably replace the pair of silicone double balloon nozzles I own (500 and 750). Those are OK, but leakage is sometimes an issue and the "reach around" for bulb inflation can be awkward for self-administration. Once inflated (10 pumps) there was no chance of a blow-out and leakage was practically impossible. Others have commented on more inflation than I tried, but my test left me confident that I could take (or be forced to take - hypothetically) far more liquid than I might with other retention nozzles. I don't plan on pursuing an inflation record - everyone's anatomy is different and I'm not in this to win a prize.

I may update this a bit more after I've had some time to reflect further, but I will say that if you've been waiting for a "go for it" recommendation, I'm saying exactly that.