9 dated source summaries from 2020-05-19 to 2020-07-20, with original links and related topics.
These English summaries describe the original Korean posts. Dates belong to the source posts. Earlier posts may name Secret, DA or NOTE; those names describe the source’s historical context. Case reports and clinic explanations are kept separate from published research.
This reported case describes cheek and jawline concerns after earlier bone-contouring surgery in a woman in her thirties. The writer discusses facial liposuction combined with elastic-thread fixation and contrasts this choice with more extensive lifting when appropriate. Seven-day comparisons show the reported early change, without establishing long-term support or comparative effectiveness.
In this post, a male eyelid case introduces the distinction between skin covering the eye and reduced eyelid-opening strength. The writer describes combining a buried crease with nonincisional correction in the reported patient. The discussion emphasizes examination before adopting an online diagnosis, while the one-week example remains an early recovery observation.
This reported case follows jaw contouring, chin implant placement and subsequent removal. The patient described a rounded, upward-bunched chin rather than simple downward sagging. The post discusses treating residual capsule and repositioning soft tissue through an oral incision, emphasizing that different chin deformities require different explanations. The illustrated follow-up is early.
In this post, forehead reduction is discussed through facial proportions, scalp mobility and a reported early postoperative example. The writer describes periosteal preservation and tension management while comparing surgery with hair transplantation. The discussion identifies scarring, sensory change and hair loss as relevant considerations; stated recovery times and ideal measurements should not be treated as personal recommendations.
This reported case combines a nonincisional crease and eye-opening procedure with inner and outer corner surgery. The writer relates the choice to limited skin excess and discusses the desired in-out crease shape. The post also stresses anatomical limits on widening, caruncle exposure, swelling and dry-eye discomfort, rather than treating a preferred look as achievable in every eye.
In this post, a four-month forehead-reduction case introduces discussion of scars, hair loss and altered sensation. The writer describes incision placement, layered fixation, scalp release and wound-edge alignment as considerations in planning. The example is used to discuss scar maturation, but the post's broad reassurance and ethnicity-based expectations should not predict an individual patient's healing.
This reported case concerns recurrent skin coverage and asymmetry after an earlier nonincisional eye-opening procedure. The writer describes incisional revision and compares early recovery with an eleven-month result. The explanation emphasizes assessing excess skin alongside the desire for a barely visible crease and discusses how fixation technique may influence the appearance of a closed-eye scar.
This reported revision case follows dissatisfaction with a previous crease operation and inner-corner opening. The post considers the exposed caruncle's shape as well as the distance between the eyes, then describes reconstruction with eyelid revision. Early and one-month comparisons illustrate evolving scar shape, without establishing a fixed recovery schedule for other patients.
This reported male case concerns naturally high, uneven eyelid folds with a tired appearance. The writer explains why limited crease adhesion influenced the decision to use a nonincisional eye-opening procedure, while stronger adhesions could require an incision. A one-week comparison is presented, with later changes discussed as expectations rather than documented long-term results.