Comparing Minimally Invasive Vs. Traditional Surgical Techniques In Facial Rejuvenation

Abstract

Background: Facial aging shows three main features which include loose skin, decreased volume appearance and developing wrinkles. Medical professionals have established both surgical procedures and non-surgical interventions to treat facial aging problems. Patients who opt for minimal invasive procedures get faster recovery times through injectables and laser treatments at the cost of needing regular maintenance. Surgical procedures that perform face lifts and eyelid surgery deliver enduring effects but lead patients to experience more complications during treatment time. The research seeks to evaluate both intervention methods against their therapeutic efficiency and security performance along with patient contentment outcomes.

Objectives:  This prospective study evaluates the clinical outcomes and patient satisfaction associated with both minimally invasive and conventional surgical techniques for facial rejuvenation. It aims to determine the optimal treatment modality tailored to varying patient age groups and aesthetic preferences by analyzing recovery times, complication rates, and subjective satisfaction levels.

Study design: A Prospective Comparative Study.

Place and duration of study. Department of Plastic Surgery & Burns Unit Khyber Teaching Hospital Peshawar from jan 2021 to jan 2022

Methods: this study conducted in the Department of Plastic Surgery & Burns Unit Khyber Teaching Hospital Peshawar from jan 2021 to jan 2022 Patients presenting for facial rejuvenation procedures over a one-year period were enrolled after informed consent. Participants were categorized into two groups based on the selected treatment modality:

• Group A (Minimally Invasive Procedures): Botox, dermal fillers, and thread lifts
• Group B (Surgical Interventions): Facelift, blepharoplasty, or a combination of traditional surgical methods

Demographic data, procedure details, recovery duration, complication rates, and patient satisfaction (measured via standardized postoperative satisfaction surveys) were recorded. Outcomes were compared using independent t-tests and chi-square tests, with a p-value < 0.05 considered statistically significant. All procedures were performed by board-certified surgeons under standard protocols.

Results:  100 patients in its investigation. The patient age averaged to 52.4 years (± 8.6) while 48% received minimally invasive procedures alongside 52% choosing traditional surgery. Patients required 7.3 days (± 2.5) for recovery after minimally invasive procedures and spent 29.6 days (± 5.8) recovering from surgical interventions (p < 0.001). The patient satisfaction scores showed a difference where 85% satisfied with minimally invasive surgery but 92% chose traditional surgery (p = 0.04). A higher percentage of patients in the surgical group experienced complications amounting to 15% while the minimally invasive group showed only 5% complication rate (p = 0.02).

Conclusion:  The main benefit of minimally invasive facial rejuvenation approaches includes fast treatment times and minimal risks while patients need multiple procedures for continued outcomes. The benefits of traditional surgery comprise both noticeable long-term effects while it demands additional risks and extensive recovery periods. People should choose their treatment based on what they prefer combined with how severe their aging symptoms are and how much risk they can handle. Additional examinations will help define the best patient groups for each specific treatment protocol.