Plastic surgery blog: The painless facelift… Does it deliver?Posted on June 8, 2017
It is not surprising that the painless facelift has become the cosmetic surgery darling of the past few years. Words like nonsurgical, noninvasive, painless, and affordable have dominated cosmetic surgery procedures marketing materials available on the Internet, television, and radio. Consumers have fallen for what appears to be an excellent alternative to a surgical facelift. A recent industry online article took issue with The December 2011 issue of Bazaar which describes three such technologies. “Clear Brilliant” is a new laser that’s safe for all skin colors, costs $250 to $500 per treatment and requires six treatments spaced two weeks apart. This treatment promises to stimulate collagen in the skin after the required six treatments. Matrix is designed to improve early signs of aging and improve acne and chicken pox scars.” To understand how Matrix works, imagine an inverted ice cream cone.” A Nashville dermatologist says. To get eMatrix under your skin it will cost $750 to $1,200 a treatment. ePrime is a nonsurgical facelift that promises to tighten skin and address thinning skin and volume loss. A clinical study co-authored by a dermatologist and assistant clinical professor at Yale quantifies the skin-tightening effects of ePrime as “37 percent of what you’d get with a facelift.” The article does not mention how the 37% tightening is quantified. ePrime purports to restabilize the whole supporting structure of the skin at $2,500 to $4,500 per treatment. The fact that this is even called the facelift is pretty amazing. Dr. Kim is not opposed to the benefits of laser and in many cases laser resurfacing can be an excellent procedure for the right patient. When patients consult with Dr. Kim and ask if a nonsurgical facelift will provide the same benefits as a surgical facelift he is clear that it is impossible to expect results even close to a surgical facelift. Even in the advertisements for the procedures mentioned in this article, the claim is less than 40% effectiveness when compared to a surgical facelift. Obviously, a blepharoplasty which tightens the skin on the eyes or a brow lift which takes care of a sagging brow is not mentioned in the effectiveness of the nonsurgical facelift. Consumers should use common sense when investing in these types of nonsurgical treatments. Even if there best case scenario is true, at 37% effectiveness the procedure is still expensive when compared to the long-term results patient can expect from a surgical facelift.