Under-Eye Filler and Tear Trough Filler: Who Suits It, the Risks and the Alternatives

Scroll through any beauty feed this month and you will meet the same two clips back to back: a before-and-after where a shadowed under-eye groove vanishes in ninety seconds, and a dermatologist dissolving a puffy, bluish lump that was injected years earlier. Both clips are honest. That tension is why under eye filler is one of the most searched cosmetic procedures right now, and why the search phrase “can filler be removed” has climbed alongside it.

Two things pushed the topic from niche to mainstream. In 2023, US regulators cleared the first hyaluronic acid gel specifically for hollows under the eyes, which turned a long-standing off-label habit into an on-label procedure. Around the same time, imaging studies and viral ultrasound videos showed that filler can linger far longer than the twelve months people were told. As of 2025, the conversation has shifted from “does it work” to “who should have it, how much lasts, and what happens when it goes wrong”.

This piece answers those questions with the evidence that actually exists, graded for strength, and with a clear view of who is a poor candidate.

Why under eye filler is trending right now

Cosmetic trends usually ride one wave. This one is riding three at once.

The first is regulatory. Hyaluronic acid fillers, gels made from a sugar molecule that occurs naturally in skin and holds water, have been injected under eyes for roughly two decades, almost always off-label. Off-label means a licensed product used in a location or for a purpose that the regulator has not formally reviewed. A product approved specifically for under-eye hollows changed the framing: clinics could now describe the treatment as on-label, and the approval trial gave the first large randomised dataset for this delicate area.

The second wave is technology turned into content. Point-of-care ultrasound lets injectors see blood vessels and old filler in real time. Those scans make dramatic videos, and they have revealed something uncomfortable: hyaluronic acid under the eye can be found on imaging years after injection, not months. Reversal requests, using hyaluronidase (an enzyme that breaks down hyaluronic acid), have risen with it.

The third wave is cultural. Under-eye shadows are one of the most common cosmetic complaints across every age group, and the area is unforgiving on video calls and phone cameras. A procedure promising a quick fix without surgery was always going to spread.

What the trend obscures is that the under-eye is anatomically one of the riskiest places on the face to inject. The skin is the thinnest on the body, lymphatic drainage is sluggish, and an artery that connects to the blood supply of the eye runs close to the usual injection path. None of that makes the procedure unreasonable. It does mean the decision deserves more care than a thirty-second clip can give it.

What changed recently

A few dated developments explain the current shape of the debate.

In October 2021, England made it illegal to give dermal fillers or botulinum toxin for cosmetic reasons to anyone under 18, a change the NHS now highlights in its dermal filler guidance. The same guidance stresses that fillers in the UK are not medicines and that anyone can legally inject them, which is why the NHS urges readers to check training, insurance and experience before booking. The Health and Care Act 2022 then gave the government power to introduce a licensing scheme for non-surgical cosmetic procedures in England, and consultation on that scheme ran through 2023.

In 2023, the US Food and Drug Administration approved the first hyaluronic acid filler specifically indicated for under-eye hollows in adults over 21. Before this, every under-eye injection in the US used a product approved for cheeks, lips or nasolabial folds, a practice that remains legal and common but sits outside the tested indication.

Through 2023 and 2024, dermatology and plastic surgery journals published a steady stream of case series and imaging studies documenting long-term persistence of hyaluronic acid under the eyes and the use of ultrasound to locate it before dissolving. Harvard Health’s long-standing warning that fillers are “the good, the bad and the dangerous” reads as more relevant now than when it was written.

Finally, Cleveland Clinic and Mayo Clinic patient guidance has been updated to list vascular occlusion (a blocked blood vessel) and vision loss as rare but recognised filler complications. The language is measured, and the risk is small, but it is now stated plainly by mainstream institutions rather than confined to specialist journals.

What is tear trough filler, and what is it actually treating?

The tear trough is the groove that runs from the inner corner of the eye diagonally down and outward across the upper cheek. In a young face it is barely visible because the fat of the cheek sits flush against the lower eyelid. With age, that cheek fat descends and deflates, the skin thins, and the groove deepens. Light falling from above casts a shadow into the trough, and the eye reads as tired.

Tear trough filler is the placement of a soft hyaluronic acid gel beneath the skin and muscle of the groove, usually against the bone, to lift the floor of the shadow so that it catches light again. The filler does not change pigment, tighten skin or remove fat. It fills a hollow.

That single sentence does more to predict satisfaction than anything else. If the under-eye problem is a hollow, filler addresses the problem directly. If the problem is a bulge of fat above the hollow (an eye bag), filler added below can make the bag look larger by removing the contrast. If the problem is brown pigment in the skin or blue-purple vessels showing through, filler changes nothing, and in some cases the blue tint worsens because the gel scatters light.

Injectors typically use a lower-density gel than they would in the cheek, because the under-eye skin is thin enough to show lumps and swelling from thicker products. Some use a blunt cannula (a thin, rounded tube) rather than a sharp needle, on the theory that it is less likely to pierce a vessel; the evidence for that is observational, not from randomised trials, but it is widely practised.

Who suits under eye filler, and who does not

The ideal candidate is more specific than marketing suggests. Clinicians generally look for all of the following together.

• A true hollow: a shadow that softens when you gently press the cheek upward or when light comes from the front rather than above.
• Thin but smooth lower eyelid skin without crepey wrinkling or loose folds.
• Little or no fat bulging above the trough.
• Good cheek support, so the filler is topping up a modest gap rather than being asked to rebuild a whole mid-face.
• No history of persistent under-eye swelling, allergies that cause puffiness, or thyroid eye disease.

People who usually do poorly with under eye filler are the ones who most want it. Prominent eye bags are a surgical problem, not a filler problem. Festoons, which are soft, fluid-filled swellings on the upper cheek, almost always get worse with filler because the area already drains poorly. Dark circles caused by melanin or by visible vessels under translucent skin are not hollows and will not respond. Anyone with an active skin infection, uncontrolled autoimmune disease, or a known hypersensitivity to hyaluronic acid or the local anaesthetic mixed into most gels should be assessed by a doctor before any decision.

Age matters less than anatomy. A 28-year-old with inherited deep troughs can be a better candidate than a 55-year-old with lax skin. Pregnancy and breastfeeding are usually treated as reasons to wait, because fillers have not been studied in those groups.

A reasonable rule of thumb from clinical guidance: if a clinician cannot show you, in a mirror, that your shadow is a hollow rather than a bag or a pigment issue, filler is unlikely to be the right first step.

Dark circles, hollows or bags: why the diagnosis matters

“Dark circles” is a description, not a diagnosis, and it bundles together at least four different problems with four different solutions.

Structural shadow is the hollow described above. Light from a ceiling lamp drops into the groove and the brain reads darkness. This is the one problem filler reliably helps.

Pigmented circles come from extra melanin in the skin, which is more common in people with darker skin tones and often runs in families. Rubbing from allergies or eczema deepens it. Here the mainstream approach is sun protection, treating the itch, and dermatologist-supervised topical or light-based treatments. Filler has no effect on melanin and may add a grey cast.

Vascular circles are purple or blue because the skin is so thin that the underlying muscle and vessels show through. Fatigue, nasal congestion and dehydration make vessels dilate, which is why these circles vary day to day. Filler placed too superficially can intensify the blue through the Tyndall effect, the scattering of light by a clear gel under thin skin.

Bags are forward bulges of the fat pads that normally cushion the eye, held back by a membrane that weakens with age. Fluid retention, salt, alcohol and poor sleep swell them temporarily; the structural bulge is permanent without surgery. Mayo Clinic’s guidance on bags under the eyes lists lower eyelid surgery, not filler, as the treatment that addresses the fat itself.

Most people have a mixture. A good consultation should name the proportions: for example, mostly hollow with some pigment. That assessment is clinical judgment rather than a test, which is why experience with the under-eye specifically carries so much weight.

What the evidence actually says

Graded honestly, the evidence base for under eye filler is thinner than its popularity suggests, though it has improved.

Randomised controlled evidence. The pivotal study behind the 2023 US approval randomised adults with under-eye hollows to treatment or a no-treatment control and measured improvement on a validated hollowness scale at three months, with follow-up through twelve months. A majority of treated participants showed at least a one-grade improvement, and most of that effect was still present at one year. One well-designed trial of one product is a meaningful step, but it is one trial; it did not compare products, techniques or cannula versus needle.

Observational evidence. Dozens of prospective and retrospective case series over two decades report high patient-rated satisfaction, usually in the 70 to 90 percent range, and describe complication rates. These studies are valuable for mapping what goes wrong, but they are prone to selection bias and rarely use blinded assessors.

Imaging and persistence data. Ultrasound and MRI studies published since 2020 consistently find hyaluronic acid in the under-eye region well beyond one year, sometimes several years after a single treatment. This is observational, but the finding is reproducible and it has shifted expert opinion on how often people should be re-treated.

Safety signals. Vision loss after facial filler is documented in several hundred cases worldwide across all injection sites, with the nose, glabella (between the brows) and forehead most often implicated. The under-eye is lower on that list but is not exempt. These are case reports and registry data, the weakest form of evidence for frequency but strong evidence that the event exists.

Expert consensus. Guidance on technique, product choice and reversal rests mainly on consensus statements from injector groups, not trials.

How long does under eye filler last?

The honest answer is: longer than the visible result, and longer than the brochure.

Visible improvement is usually quoted at nine to eighteen months. The randomised trial data support roughly a year for most people. Hyaluronic acid breaks down slowly under the eye because the area has little muscle movement and sluggish lymphatic drainage; the same slow metabolism that makes lips need top-ups within months lets under-eye results persist.

Persistence of the product, however, is a different measurement from persistence of the result. Imaging studies repeatedly find gel in the tear trough two, three and occasionally more years after injection. Over time the gel absorbs water and can migrate a few millimetres downward into the cheek, so the original hollow may partly return while a soft fullness appears lower down. People who assume the filler is “gone” and request a top-up annually can accumulate product without realising it, which is one explanation for the puffy, over-filled look that now drives reversal appointments.

Several factors shorten or lengthen duration.

• Product: softer, less cross-linked gels are safer under thin skin but may fade faster.
• Depth and placement: filler laid on the bone lasts longer and lumps less than filler placed in the superficial layer.
• Metabolism and activity: higher metabolic rates and vigorous exercise are associated with faster breakdown in observational reports, though the effect is modest.
• Prior treatments: repeat sessions seem to last longer, probably because residual gel is still present.

The practical implication favours restraint: a single conservative treatment, then a review at twelve months with the question “is anything still there?” rather than “is it time for more?” Some injectors now use ultrasound to answer that question before adding product.

The risks of tear trough filler, from bruising to blindness

Most people who have tear trough filler experience nothing worse than a bruise. The problem is that the uncommon complications in this location are harder to fix and, at the far end, more serious than almost anywhere else on the face.

Common and short-lived. Bruising, redness and swelling for several days to two weeks. The under-eye swells readily and can look worse at day three than day one. Tenderness and mild asymmetry usually settle within a fortnight.

Common and persistent. The Tyndall effect, a blue-grey discolouration from gel placed too close to the surface, does not fade on its own and typically needs dissolving. Visible lumps or a “sausage” ridge along the trough are the same story. Malar edema, chronic puffiness of the upper cheek, can appear weeks or months later as the gel draws in water; it is more likely in people with pre-existing fluid tendency and can be stubborn even after dissolving.

Uncommon. Infection, including delayed biofilm infections that present as firm, tender nodules weeks later. Hypersensitivity reactions and inflammatory granulomas, sometimes triggered by illness or vaccination months after an uneventful treatment. Migration of the gel away from the injection site.

Rare but severe. Vascular occlusion, where gel enters or compresses an artery. Skin in the area loses blood supply, turning blotchy white then dusky purple, with pain that can be out of proportion. If gel reaches the arterial network connected to the eye, the result can be sudden, usually permanent, vision loss in that eye. Reported cases run to a few hundred worldwide for all facial sites combined, against millions of treatments, so the absolute risk is very small. It is also the reason reputable injectors keep hyaluronidase on hand and know the signs.

None of these outcomes depend on the product’s price or a clinic’s reputation. They depend on anatomy, technique, and whether the person holding the syringe recognises trouble in the first minutes.

Why cheek filler is often suggested before under eye filler

People arrive asking for tear trough filler and leave with a recommendation for cheek filler more often than you might expect. The reasoning is structural rather than a sales pivot.

The tear trough deepens largely because the fat of the mid-cheek, which once propped up the lower eyelid, has descended and deflated. Re-inflating the cheek with a firmer gel placed deep against the bone lifts the floor of the trough from below and reduces the shadow, sometimes enough that nothing needs to go directly under the eye. Clinicians describe this as treating the cause rather than the symptom.

Cheek filler has several practical advantages in this context. The skin is thicker, so lumps and the Tyndall effect are far less likely. Drainage is better, so persistent swelling is less common. The deep plane on the cheekbone is relatively vessel-poor compared with the under-eye. A larger, firmer product can be used, which gives structural lift that a soft under-eye gel cannot. Evidence here is observational and from consensus statements rather than head-to-head trials, but the anatomical logic is consistently described in the plastic surgery and dermatology literature.

The approach has limits. Over-filled cheeks are their own well-documented aesthetic problem, and adding volume to the cheek does nothing for a person whose cheeks are already full but whose trough is inherited and deep. In that case a small amount directly in the trough, on top of good cheek support, is the usual plan.

Ask in consultation which of the two the clinician would do first, and why. An answer rooted in your anatomy, with a mirror and a finger pressing the cheek upward to demonstrate the effect, is a good sign. “Both, today” without that explanation is not.

Under eye filler vs lower blepharoplasty

Lower blepharoplasty is surgery on the lower eyelid, usually to remove or reposition the fat that forms bags and sometimes to tighten skin. Comparing it with filler is a comparison of two tools for two different jobs, with some overlap.

Filler suits a hollow with no bag. Surgery suits a bag, with or without a hollow. Where both exist, surgeons increasingly reposition the bulging fat downward into the hollow rather than removing it, which addresses both problems with one operation and avoids the sunken look that aggressive fat removal produced in earlier decades.

The trade-offs are stark. Filler is done in a treatment room under topical anaesthetic in under an hour, with days of bruising and a reversible result. Blepharoplasty is done in an operating facility, often under sedation, with one to two weeks of visible swelling and bruising and a result that is permanent. MedlinePlus lists the surgical risks: bleeding, infection, dry eyes, difficulty closing the eyelids, a pulled-down lower lid (ectropion), scarring and, rarely, vision problems. Those are real, and they are the price of a durable fix.

Durability flips the calculation over time. Someone having filler every year or two for fifteen years has accumulated repeated small risks and, as imaging studies suggest, may have accumulated product. Someone who was a good surgical candidate at the start has had one recovery.

Evidence for both is largely observational. Satisfaction rates in blepharoplasty case series are high, and revision rates are low in experienced hands. Neither option has been compared directly in a randomised trial, so the decision rests on anatomy, how much downtime a person can accept, and a surgeon’s or dermatologist’s judgment about which problem dominates. For anyone whose main complaint is a bulge rather than a shadow, the conversation should start with a surgeon, even if the answer turns out to be “not yet”.

What can I do instead of under eye fillers?

The alternatives depend entirely on which under-eye problem you have. The table compares the main options as mainstream guidance describes them.

Option	Best for	Evidence strength	Downtime	Reversible?	Typical duration
Under eye filler (hyaluronic acid)	Hollow tear trough, smooth skin, no bags	One randomised trial plus many case series	Days to 2 weeks of bruising or swelling	Yes, with hyaluronidase	About a year visibly; product may persist longer
Cheek filler	Deflated mid-cheek causing shadow	Observational and consensus	Days	Yes	12–24 months
Lower blepharoplasty	Fat bags, with or without hollow	Large observational series	1–2 weeks visible	No	Permanent
Fat transfer	Hollows in people wanting a longer result	Observational; variable take rates	1–2 weeks	No	Years, but unpredictable
Laser, chemical peel or microneedling	Crepey skin, some pigment	Small trials and case series	Days to weeks depending on depth	No	Months to years
Sun protection, allergy control, sleep, retinoid or vitamin C creams	Pigment and vascular circles, mild texture	Modest; strongest for sunscreen and treating allergy	None	n/a	Ongoing

A few notes on reading it. Fat transfer uses a person’s own fat, harvested elsewhere and injected into the hollow; it avoids a foreign gel but a variable share of the fat does not survive, and lumps under thin skin are difficult to correct. Energy-based treatments improve skin quality, not volume, so they pair with filler or surgery rather than replacing them. The simplest measures, daily sunscreen and treating hay fever or eczema that provokes rubbing, have the best evidence for pigment-type circles and no downside.

The alternative that is most often skipped is doing nothing for six months while sleeping properly and managing allergies, then reassessing. For vascular circles that fluctuate with fatigue, that experiment answers the question better than any injection.

Common myths about under eye filler

Viral claims cluster around the same half-dozen ideas. Here is where each stands against the evidence.

“It fixes dark circles.” Only the shadow type. Pigment and visible vessels are unaffected, and a superficial injection can make blue circles bluer through the Tyndall effect.

“It dissolves completely in a year.” Imaging consistently shows otherwise. Visible benefit fades in roughly a year; product can be detected for years. Treat “gone” as something to check, not assume.

“Hyaluronic acid is natural, so it is safe.” The molecule is natural; the cross-linked, injected gel is a medical device with documented risks including blocked vessels and, rarely, vision loss. Natural origin says nothing about what happens inside an artery.

“If you don’t like it, just dissolve it.” Hyaluronidase works well in most cases, but it is itself an injection with its own allergy risk, it can take more than one session, it may dissolve some of your own tissue hyaluronic acid, and chronic swelling sometimes outlasts the gel. Reversibility is an advantage, not a free undo button.

“Cannulas make it risk-free.” Cannulas probably lower the chance of entering a vessel, based on observational data and anatomical reasoning, but occlusions with cannulas are documented. There is no risk-free technique under the eye.

“The on-label product is the only safe one.” The 2023 approval reflects one product’s trial data, not evidence that others are unsafe. Many off-label gels have long observational track records. Product choice is a clinical judgment and belongs with the treating clinician.

“Filler ages you faster.” There is no good evidence that appropriately placed filler accelerates ageing. There is good evidence that repeated over-filling creates a heavy, puffy appearance that reads as older, which is a different and avoidable problem.

Questions to ask before you book tear trough filler

Because under-eye injection is technically demanding and the law around who can perform it varies by country and state, the consultation is where most of the risk is managed. The NHS advises checking a practitioner’s training, experience, insurance and the exact product being used; the same checklist translates to any country.

Useful questions, and what good answers sound like:

• Is my problem a hollow, a bag, pigment or a mix? A good answer uses a mirror and shows you.
• Would you treat my cheeks first? Either answer is fine if it is explained anatomically.
• Which product, and is it on-label for this area? Off-label can be reasonable; the point is that the injector knows and tells you.
• What do you do if you see signs of a blocked vessel? The answer should include stopping immediately, having hyaluronidase in the room, and a plan for urgent eye assessment.
• How often do you treat this specific area, and what complications have you managed? “Never had one” after years of practice is less reassuring than a frank description.
• What happens at follow-up? A review at two weeks and a willingness to dissolve rather than add is a good sign.

Red flags before any needle: pressure to treat the same day, bundled offers for several areas, no medical history taken, no mention of risks, or any suggestion that complications “don’t happen here”.

One point on regulation. In the US, hyaluronic acid fillers are prescription medical devices and must be obtained through licensed channels; in the UK, the NHS notes they are not classed as medicines, which makes practitioner vetting even more important. Products sold directly to consumers online for self-injection are not legitimate in either system and should never be used.

When to see a doctor

Most after-effects of under eye filler are expected and settle on their own. A small number need urgent medical attention, and the window for the most serious one is measured in minutes to hours.

Seek emergency care immediately, in person, if you notice any of the following during or after treatment:

• Sudden change in vision in either eye: blurring, a dark patch, double vision or loss of sight.
• Severe pain at the injection site or in the eye that feels out of proportion to a bruise.
• Skin that turns white, blotchy, net-like purple or dusky grey, especially if it spreads beyond the injected area.
• A drooping eyelid, an eye that will not move normally, or a severe headache with any of the above.

These can indicate a blocked blood vessel. The injector should be contacted at the same time, but do not wait for a callback if vision is involved; an emergency department or eye emergency service can start assessment.

Contact the treating clinician promptly (within a day or two) if you have:

• Swelling or redness that is increasing after the first 48 hours rather than easing.
• Firm, tender or warm lumps, fever, or discharge, which can signal infection.
• A blue-grey tint or visible ridge that is still present at two weeks.
• Puffiness of the upper cheek that appears weeks or months after treatment.

See a dermatologist, oculoplastic surgeon or plastic surgeon rather than relying on cosmetic treatment at all if you have thyroid eye disease, chronic eyelid swelling, a bleeding disorder, or if “dark circles” came on quickly, affect one side only, or are accompanied by itching, flaking or eye symptoms. Those patterns suggest a medical cause that filler would mask rather than address.

Whatever the symptom, the decision about dissolving, re-treating, prescribing medication or referring for surgery sits with the clinician who assesses you. This article can tell you what to watch for; it cannot examine you.

Frequently asked questions

How long does filler under eyes last?

Visible improvement usually lasts about a year, with a range of roughly nine to eighteen months reported in trials and case series. The gel itself can persist much longer: ultrasound and MRI studies have found hyaluronic acid under the eye two or more years after a single treatment. Because of this, many clinicians now advise checking whether product remains before adding more rather than re-treating on a fixed schedule.

Are under eye fillers a good idea?

For the right person they can be, specifically someone with a hollow groove, smooth thin skin, no eye bags and no tendency to swelling. For people with bags, pigment-type dark circles, loose skin or festoons, the results are poor or can look worse. The area carries small but real risks, so the answer depends on an in-person assessment by an experienced clinician rather than on the procedure itself.

What can I do instead of under eye fillers?

It depends on the cause. Hollows can sometimes be improved with cheek filler or fat transfer; bags respond to lower eyelid surgery; pigment-type circles respond best to daily sunscreen, treating allergy or eczema that causes rubbing, and dermatologist-supervised topical or light treatments; vascular circles often improve with sleep, hydration and managing nasal congestion. A clinician can tell you which type you have.

How much does it cost to get under-eye fillers injected?

We do not publish price figures because they vary widely by country, product, amount used, and the training of the person injecting, and because cost is a poor guide to safety. A sensible approach is to ask any clinic for an itemised written quote that includes follow-up and the cost of dissolving if needed, and to compare the injector’s experience in this specific area before comparing numbers.

Is tear trough filler safe?

It is generally safe when performed by a trained, experienced clinician, with most people experiencing only bruising and swelling. The under-eye is, however, one of the higher-risk facial sites because of thin skin, poor drainage and nearby arteries. Documented complications include lumps, a blue tint, chronic puffiness, infection and, rarely, blocked vessels with skin damage or vision loss. Reputable injectors assess suitability carefully and keep reversal enzyme available.

Should I get cheek filler before under eye filler?

Often, yes. A deflated mid-cheek is a common reason the tear trough looks deep, and lifting the cheek with firmer filler placed on the bone can reduce the shadow from below with lower risk than injecting the thin under-eye skin. This is consensus-based rather than trial-proven. If your cheeks are already full and the trough is inherited, treating the trough directly may still be the better plan.

Can under eye filler be dissolved?

Hyaluronic acid filler can be broken down with injections of hyaluronidase, an enzyme that digests the gel. It works well in most cases, sometimes needing more than one session. It carries a small allergy risk, may temporarily soften surrounding tissue, and does not always resolve chronic swelling the filler triggered. Whether and how to dissolve is a decision for the clinician who examines you.

Why do under eye fillers sometimes look blue or puffy?

Blue-grey colour comes from the Tyndall effect, where clear gel placed too close to the surface scatters light under thin skin. Puffiness can come from too much product, from gel that has absorbed water and migrated, or from malar edema, a chronic fluid swelling of the upper cheek that filler can provoke in people prone to it. Both usually require dissolving rather than waiting, so report them to the treating clinician.

Does under eye filler help eye bags?

No. Eye bags are forward bulges of fat pads, and adding filler beneath them can make the bulge more obvious by removing the contrast of the hollow underneath. Lower blepharoplasty, surgery that removes or repositions the fat, is the treatment that addresses bags directly. Some people have both a bag and a hollow, and in those cases a surgeon may reposition fat into the hollow rather than use filler.

What age is appropriate for under eye filler?

Adults only: the US-approved product is indicated for people over 21, and in England cosmetic fillers are illegal for anyone under 18. Beyond that, anatomy matters more than age. A younger adult with inherited deep troughs and firm skin can be a good candidate, while an older adult with loose skin or bags may not be. Pregnancy and breastfeeding are usually reasons to postpone because safety has not been studied.

References

• Cleveland Clinic: Dermal Fillers
• MedlinePlus: Eyelid lift (blepharoplasty)

This article is for general information only and is not a substitute for professional medical advice. Please consult a qualified doctor about your individual situation.