ROI of implants

[MLGS0LD1ERB0Y]

I see lots of fear-mongering of implants on this forum with lots of users saying that filler logs, whereas I think implants are th much better option since they are permanent. If you are lacking in a specific area of the face (not a severe deformity with the only fix being a major osteotomy) like recessed infras, teased Caine fossia ect. Like only lacking in one certain area but otherwise you have a good structure. Wouldn’t implants be perfect? People say it’s dangerous and everything but I just don’t get it. Can someone explain why implants aren’t usually a go-to option for some?

 

[bossman]

implants are superior to filler in almost every regard

jfl at all the filler copers on here

implants are a cheat code to a chad face.

 

[MLGS0LD1ERB0Y]

implants are superior to filler in almost every regard

jfl at all the filler copers on here

implants are a cheat code to a chad face.

I know right? That’s what I’ve been saying. Filler seems like a such a fucking stupid thing to do when implants exist. All the sessions of re filling your filler could just be solved with permanent implants.

Full facial custom implants is law surely?

 

[kaydd]

implants are superior to filler in almost every regard

jfl at all the filler copers on here

implants are a cheat code to a chad face.

Woah man whats up with the switch up

 

[MLGS0LD1ERB0Y]

Woah man whats up with the switch up

What’s your take?

 

[kaydd]

What’s your take?

I have no take lol need to research more to have an opinion, but im planning to inject fillers until i can afford the time and money for hefty implants i need.

 

[MLGS0LD1ERB0Y]

I have no take lol need to research more to have an opinion, but im planning to inject fillers until i can afford the time and money for hefty implants i need.

Good luck soldier

 

[Firstname.Lastname]

They tend to stretch tissues, which isn't ideal. I think esp, infras are really risky since the skin/muscles in that area are very thin and delicate. Just do malars ffs.

 

[MLGS0LD1ERB0Y]

They tend to stretch tissues, which isn't ideal. I think esp, infras are really risky since the skin/muscles in that area are very thin and delicate. Just do malars ffs.

What are Malars? I need to fix my death teir infras.

 

[Brendeeno]

The reason implants aren't always the "go-to" despite being more permanent than filler is that facial surgery carries significantly higher risks and less room for error in a dynamic, aging face. Unlike fillers, which can be dissolved and are made of soft
hyaluronic acid, custom implants (often made of medpor or silicone) are rigid; if they aren't perfectly carved or placed, they can look unnatural when you smile, talk, or express emotion because the surrounding muscle and skin move while the implant stays static. Furthermore, there is a legitimate medical concern regarding bone resorption, where the pressure of a hard implant against the bone can actually cause the underlying skull to erode over time, potentially worsening the original recession. While implants excel at creating sharp, structural definition in areas like the infraorbital rim or canine fossa, the risk of infection, nerve damage, or the implant "shifting" means that many surgeons prefer the lower-stakes, "test-drive" nature of fillers before committing to a permanent foreign object in the face.

 

[Firstname.Lastname]

What are Malars? I need to fix my death teir infras.

So people here say "infras" they mean a combined infra/malar implant. Malar is an implant over the zygoma arch, where infra is directly below the eyes, in the tear trough/under eye area. You can get them combined or stand alone.

But most asthenic gain people get from these implants is on the zygoma arch. Where as most risk is the infra since your shoving an inflexible panel into an area that has/is near; tear duck, a shit load of small muscles, and the thinnest skin on the body.

 

[MLGS0LD1ERB0Y]

The reason implants aren't always the "go-to" despite being more permanent than filler is that facial surgery carries significantly higher risks and less room for error in a dynamic, aging face. Unlike fillers, which can be dissolved and are made of soft
hyaluronic acid, custom implants (often made of medpor or silicone) are rigid; if they aren't perfectly carved or placed, they can look unnatural when you smile, talk, or express emotion because the surrounding muscle and skin move while the implant stays static. Furthermore, there is a legitimate medical concern regarding bone resorption, where the pressure of a hard implant against the bone can actually cause the underlying skull to erode over time, potentially worsening the original recession. While implants excel at creating sharp, structural definition in areas like the infraorbital rim or canine fossa, the risk of infection, nerve damage, or the implant "shifting" means that many surgeons prefer the lower-stakes, "test-drive" nature of fillers before committing to a permanent foreign object in the face.

Okay this makes more sense then. I feel like the more effort you put in pre surgery with finding a good surgeon, finding perfect fit, trialing with filler ect, the more likely the implants carry less risk.

Mirin if this wasn’t ChatGPT slop.

 

[MLGS0LD1ERB0Y]

So people here say "infras" they mean a combined infra/malar implant. Malar is an implant over the zygoma arch, where infra is directly below the eyes, in the tear trough/under eye area. You can get them combined or stand alone.

But most asthenic gain people get from these implants is on the zygoma arch. Where as most risk is the infra since your shoving an inflexible panel into an area that has/is near; tear duck, has shit load of small muscles, and the thinnest skin on the body.

Ahh okay, this makes much more sense. So you think malar implants would be the better option?

 

[Firstname.Lastname]

Ahh okay, this makes much more sense. So you think malar implants would be the better option?

In nearly all cases yes. There are super rare niche cases where infras could make sense but I've yet to see them on org.

 

[kaydd]

In nearly all cases yes. There are super rare niche cases where infras could make sense but I've yet to see them on org.

i may qualify for them..... care enough to take a look?

 

[Veridic]

I see lots of fear-mongering of implants on this forum with lots of users saying that filler logs, whereas I think implants are th much better option since they are permanent. If you are lacking in a specific area of the face (not a severe deformity with the only fix being a major osteotomy) like recessed infras, teased Caine fossia ect. Like only lacking in one certain area but otherwise you have a good structure. Wouldn’t implants be perfect? People say it’s dangerous and everything but I just don’t get it. Can someone explain why implants aren’t usually a go-to option for some?

Agreed, I don't get why implants haven't gone more mainstream yet.

I used to inject my own filler everywhere I lacked structure, and still do occasional touchups on top of invasive work I've had and plan to finish. Tbh, the entire thing with the occasional botch or migration occurring which was annoying to deal with, got old pretty quick.
With implants the only risk is the surgeon you choose to go with, but other than that once you heal, it's there for good. Of course if you don't like the results it's always reversible.

I feel like the community is waiting on a bandwagon to jump on every few years like we've seen with peptides and steroids within the last 2, perhaps implants will be the next standard once enough results with good outcomes have started showing up, and then you'll see more activity about it on here.

Great post op, grafts and implants are the final way to go.

 

[Veridic]

implants are superior to filler in almost every regard

jfl at all the filler copers on here

implants are a cheat code to a chad face.

Filler and implants go together. It's common practice to put filler over implants in case of wanting to smoothen out certain angles or ridges.

If I get anywhere below 12-14% bf, I literally have to do this, or my zygos look fake since my facial soft tissue is naturally atrophied.

 

[MLGS0LD1ERB0Y]

Agreed, I don't get why implants haven't gone more mainstream yet.

I used to inject my own filler everywhere I lacked structure, and still do occasional touchups on top of invasive work I've had and plan to finish. Tbh, the entire thing with the occasional botch or migration occurring which was annoying to deal with, got old pretty quick.
With implants the only risk is the surgeon you choose to go with, but other than that once you heal, it's there for good. Of course if you don't like the results it's always reversible.

I feel like the community is waiting on a bandwagon to jump on every few years like we've seen with peptides and steroids within the last 2, perhaps implants will be the next standard once enough results with good outcomes have started showing up, and then you'll see more activity about it on here.

Great post op, grafts and implants are the final way to go.

Agreed man, nice take. Mirin.

 

[Aqualad]

The reason implants aren't always the "go-to" despite being more permanent than filler is that facial surgery carries significantly higher risks and less room for error in a dynamic, aging face. Unlike fillers, which can be dissolved and are made of soft
hyaluronic acid, custom implants (often made of medpor or silicone) are rigid; if they aren't perfectly carved or placed, they can look unnatural when you smile, talk, or express emotion because the surrounding muscle and skin move while the implant stays static. Furthermore, there is a legitimate medical concern regarding bone resorption, where the pressure of a hard implant against the bone can actually cause the underlying skull to erode over time, potentially worsening the original recession. While implants excel at creating sharp, structural definition in areas like the infraorbital rim or canine fossa, the risk of infection, nerve damage, or the implant "shifting" means that many surgeons prefer the lower-stakes, "test-drive" nature of fillers before committing to a permanent foreign object in the face.

You know people can tell when you use AI right

 

[ltn_looksminner]

implants are superior to filler in almost every regard

jfl at all the filler copers on here

implants are a cheat code to a chad face.

Is this troll or what , @yussimania what's your unc doing brah

 

[monecel]

The reason implants aren't always the "go-to" despite being more permanent than filler is that facial surgery carries significantly higher risks and less room for error in a dynamic, aging face. Unlike fillers, which can be dissolved and are made of soft
hyaluronic acid, custom implants (often made of medpor or silicone) are rigid; if they aren't perfectly carved or placed, they can look unnatural when you smile, talk, or express emotion because the surrounding muscle and skin move while the implant stays static. Furthermore, there is a legitimate medical concern regarding bone resorption, where the pressure of a hard implant against the bone can actually cause the underlying skull to erode over time, potentially worsening the original recession. While implants excel at creating sharp, structural definition in areas like the infraorbital rim or canine fossa, the risk of infection, nerve damage, or the implant "shifting" means that many surgeons prefer the lower-stakes, "test-drive" nature of fillers before committing to a permanent foreign object in the face.

Just get PEEK or ti64 and most complaints here are about improper design. Implants don't migrate like HA.

Also this reads like AI so kys

 

[kaydd]

So people here say "infras" they mean a combined infra/malar implant. Malar is an implant over the zygoma arch, where infra is directly below the eyes, in the tear trough/under eye area. You can get them combined or stand alone.

But most asthenic gain people get from these implants is on the zygoma arch. Where as most risk is the infra since your shoving an inflexible panel into an area that has/is near; tear duck, a shit load of small muscles, and the thinnest skin on the body.

Could a saddled malar implant theoretically address a wide face(low esr) with hypoplasia in that same area?

 

[MLGS0LD1ERB0Y]

Could a saddled malar implant theoretically address a wide face(low esr) with hypoplasia in that same area?

Yeah Idk bout that since my IPD is rather narrow.