Offering No-Cost Cosmetic Revisions: The Experience of an Academic Cosmetic Surgery Program

Abstract

Background The financial principles of a no cost revision policy and their implications for revision rates are not well understood. Objectives Therefore, the primary objective of this retrospective study is to report our no cost revision rates and, secondarily, to survey the cosmetic revision policies of other cosmetic surgery practices and detail the financial principles underpinning no cost revisions. Methods All aesthetic surgeries and no cost revisions performed by the plastic surgeons, oculoplastic surgeons, and facial plastic and reconstructive surgeons at our academic outpatient cosmetic surgery center from January 1, 2016 to June 30, 2022 were identified using procedural codes. Data on number of surgeries, number of revisions, operative minutes, and time intervals between initial and revision surgeries were collected. A survey was administered to assess the revision policies of similar cosmetic surgery practices. Results A total of 1491 aesthetic surgeries and minimally invasive procedures were included, and 125 revision procedures were performed (8.4%). Thigh lifts (3, 13.6%), rhinoplasties or septoplasties (25, 15.8%), and otoplasties (3, 27.3%) had the highest revision rates. Three practices (15%) offered cosmetic revisions at no cost, 9 (45%) did not apply a surgeon’s fee, 5 (25%) evaluated fees on a case-by-case basis, 1 (5%) offered revisions with an insurance policy, and 2 (10%) cosmetic surgery practices did not offer revisions at a reduced rate. Conclusions Despite offering revisions at no cost, our revision rates are reasonable for an academic cosmetic surgery practice. The revision policies offered to patients on the private market are varied, but most surveyed practices offer revisions at either a reduced rate or no cost.

Commentary on: Offering No-Cost Cosmetic Revisions: The Experience of an Academic Cosmetic Surgery Program

“…In this paper, 1 the authors describe a “no cost cosmetic revision policy.” They found their revision rate was reasonable and helped their practice. They also surveyed a number of mostly private practices and found the majority did not offer a no-cost revision policy.…”