Looking Younger Gets Simpler
Looking Younger Gets Simpler
Minimally Invasive Procedures Offer Less Risk Than Traditional Plastic Surgery
April 19, 2004 (Vancouver, BC) -- As minimally invasive facial rejuvenation procedures become more widely available, more men and women are skipping traditional facelifts. But do these simpler procedures really work as well as traditional plastic surgery?
Depends on the procedure, the patient, and the perceived problem area, say experts speaking at the annual meeting of the American Society of Aesthetic Plastic Surgery (ASAPS) in Vancouver, British Columbia.
Examples of these less-invasive procedures are:
But are these youth defying procedures too good to be true?
Minimally invasive techniques "are terrific for individuals who do not need more invasive procedures to enhance their appearance," says ASAPS president Robert Bernard, MD, a plastic surgeon in White Plains, N.Y.
"There is a very large segment of the population for whom less is more, but there is a very fine line between doing enough to make a difference to justify the cost and doing the procedure," says Peter B. Fodor, MD, a plastic surgeon based in Los Angeles. "A lot of patients would love rejuvenation in a bottle," he says
Fodor performs the Aptos feather lift on certain patients.
"Feather implies only a feather result, so I am not sure that would be the term I prefer," he says, noting that the technology is new so there is no official vernacular.
In its simplest terms, the procedure involves using stitches like cables to reposition portions of the face (such as the forehead, midface, or neck) that have started to sag. Aptos or antidrooping stitches are placed under the skin to elevate the drooping jowl, brow, or cheek.
There are knot-like barbs along the stitch that hook to the tissue; lifting it.
"The procedure has much less risk, inconvenience, and expense, plus a quicker recovery time than the traditional facelift," he says.
Looking Younger Gets Simpler
Minimally Invasive Procedures Offer Less Risk Than Traditional Plastic Surgery
April 19, 2004 (Vancouver, BC) -- As minimally invasive facial rejuvenation procedures become more widely available, more men and women are skipping traditional facelifts. But do these simpler procedures really work as well as traditional plastic surgery?
Depends on the procedure, the patient, and the perceived problem area, say experts speaking at the annual meeting of the American Society of Aesthetic Plastic Surgery (ASAPS) in Vancouver, British Columbia.
Examples of these less-invasive procedures are:
- Thermage. This technique uses radiofrequency waves to tighten tissues, while cooling the skin to minimize redness
- "Feather" lift. A technique that uses stitches to tighten sagging cheeks and necks,
- Injectable wrinkle fillers. These include the recently FDA-approved Restylane and others in the works.
But are these youth defying procedures too good to be true?
Is Less More?
Minimally invasive techniques "are terrific for individuals who do not need more invasive procedures to enhance their appearance," says ASAPS president Robert Bernard, MD, a plastic surgeon in White Plains, N.Y.
"There is a very large segment of the population for whom less is more, but there is a very fine line between doing enough to make a difference to justify the cost and doing the procedure," says Peter B. Fodor, MD, a plastic surgeon based in Los Angeles. "A lot of patients would love rejuvenation in a bottle," he says
Fodor performs the Aptos feather lift on certain patients.
What's in a Name?
"Feather implies only a feather result, so I am not sure that would be the term I prefer," he says, noting that the technology is new so there is no official vernacular.
In its simplest terms, the procedure involves using stitches like cables to reposition portions of the face (such as the forehead, midface, or neck) that have started to sag. Aptos or antidrooping stitches are placed under the skin to elevate the drooping jowl, brow, or cheek.
There are knot-like barbs along the stitch that hook to the tissue; lifting it.
"The procedure has much less risk, inconvenience, and expense, plus a quicker recovery time than the traditional facelift," he says.
Source...