Retrospective study evaluates functional and psychosocial outcomes of blepharoplasty in 970 patients, highlighting therapeutic benefits.
Purpose: To assess the impact of upper eyelid blepharoplasty on patient-reported outcomes related to functional vision, esthetics, and psychosocial wellbeing in a large patient cohort and to contribute comprehensive PROM (Patient-Reported Outcome Measure)-based data to the literature. Design: Retrospective, observational case series. Methods: This retrospective observational study included 970 patients who underwent upper eyelid blepharoplasty at a single tertiary care center between 2017 and 2023. Inclusion criteria were dermatochalasis with visual or psychosocial complaints. Patients with prior periocular surgery or incomplete follow-up were excluded. Intervention or Observation Procedure(s): All procedures were performed by the same experienced oculoplastic surgeon using a standardized upper blepharoplasty technique. Main Outcome Measure(s): Patient-reported outcomes were collected via a structured postoperative questionnaire evaluating daily visual function, mirror appearance satisfaction, social confidence, and overall wellbeing. Results: Of 970 patients (82.9% female, mean age 54.7 ± 9.8 years), 93.3% reported “Good” to “Very Good” improvement in functional vision and daily activity performance. High satisfaction was reported with mirror appearance (96.9%), social confidence (94.7%), and general quality of life. Notably, 96.8% of participants indicated they would recommend the procedure. These results were consistent across age and gender subgroups. Conclusions: Upper eyelid blepharoplasty significantly improves not only esthetic satisfaction but also functional vision and psychosocial wellbeing. These findings, based on a large sample and structured PROMs, reinforce the classification of blepharoplasty as a procedure with therapeutic, not merely cosmetic, benefits. Further prospective studies may strengthen these findings.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Arslan et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: