Orbital decompression vs orbital implants

[swaggerdoodle]

Why would you get orbital decompression and risk ending up like frank Tufano if you can get implants instead?

 

[Bryce]

You are one of the most retarded recurring posters I know of.

 

[swaggerdoodle]

You are one of the most retarded recurring posters I know of.

Uh no, my question is valid. projecting the orbitals with implants will make the eyes look more deep set.

 

[BronzeSpartan2]

Uh no, my question is valid. projecting the orbitals with implants will make the eyes look more deep set.

You’d have to use very large implants to compensate for the bulging eyes and fix the negative orbital vector when you have proptosis like Frank did. It’ll end up looking extremely uncanny.

A better solution is to do a combination of both orbital decompression and implants. Orbital decompression makes the eyes deeper set, implants add further support to correct for midface deficiency.

This probably has been repeated thousands of times, but Frank got botched because he got the both lateral and medial walls decompressed, which is too much decompression for a cosmetic patient, causing his eyes to appear sunken in. Medial wall decompression can also reduce IPD which is why he looked like a cyclops after the surgery. Frank basically fell for Taban’s marketing and trusted him blindly.

A single lateral wall decompression has been shown to have pooled complication rates of 3% for double vision. Keep in mind this statistic is likely much lower for people who don’t have TED, inflammation and extraocular muscle enlargement in TED patients increases their risk of double vision after decompression surgery. Surgeons who are highly specialised in the procedure have close to 0% complication rates for cosmetic decompression.