• 목록
• 답변
• 글쓰기
• 게시판 리스트 옵션
  • 수정
  • 삭제

Year in Review: Most Popular Plastic Surgeries and Emerging Trends

Posted on [post_date] [post_comments] [post_edit]

This is the annual review of what we actually performed at Centre for Surgery — drawn from our own mix rather than from social media speculation or industry pieces. It is a question from "what is the most-talked-about procedure" or "what is going viral on TikTok"; it is the simpler question of what consultant plastic surgeons in a CQC-regulated London clinic spent their time doing across the year. The answer holds reasonably steady from year to year, with marginal shifts driven by underlying changes in patient demographics, available techniques, and the wider regulatory landscape.

For the wider commentary on UK cosmetic surgery trends, see our companion piece on . This page specifically on what our patient caseload looked like.

The procedures that dominate by volume

is consistently our highest-volume single procedure, typically accounting for around 25% of our annual caseload. The procedure has remained the most popular cosmetic surgery in the UK across BAAPS audit data for several years.

What has shifted within the breast augmentation caseload is the type of result patients now ask for. Implant size requests have moved noticeably smaller. Anatomical implants, smaller-volume implants in the cc range, and submuscular placement for thin tissue patients have become more common; very large round implants and overly augmented appearances are now distinctly less requested. The conversation at consultation is now more often about how to achieve a result that does not look augmented than about how to maximise visible size.

The question that comes up most often in our is implant pocket location (subglandular, dual plane, submuscular) — driven by the patient’s existing tissue thickness, breast shape, and lifestyle considerations rather than by surgeon preference.

A consistently growing portion of our breast caseload is — for 15-20% of breast cases. The combined procedure addresses two related but distinct problems at once: the volume loss that accompanies pregnancy, breastfeeding, and weight changes, and the position changes (ptosis) that accompany those same factors plus ageing.

Where appropriate, we use a vertical (lollipop) lift technique rather than the older anchor (inverted T) approach. The vertical incision less visible scarring and works well for moderate ptosis, though the anchor approach is still appropriate for more significant tissue redundancy. The right technique for an individual patient depends on the degree of ptosis, breast volume, and skin quality — not on a one-size-fits-all preference.

typically accounts for around 18% of our annual caseload, performed in two main contexts. The first is liposuction as a standalone procedure for genuine stubborn fat in patients with good baseline body composition. The second is liposuction as a component of larger procedures — combined with abdominoplasty in lipoabdominoplasty, with breast surgery in mummy makeover, or with breast augmentation to refine the chest wall and axillary region.

Within the liposuction caseload, we have seen growing interest in:

What we continue to emphasise at consultation: liposuction is a contouring procedure, not a weight loss procedure. The best results come from patients who are at or near their goal weight and have specific areas of stubborn fat that have not responded to lifestyle change. The evidence is clear that operating outside this profile produces poorer results and higher complication rates.

accounts Pricing for Men around 15% of our annual procedures, with the highest demand from two patient groups: post-pregnancy women whose abdominal wall and skin envelope have not returned to baseline, and post-weight-loss patients (both natural weight loss and now increasingly GLP-1-driven weight loss) with significant abdominal skin redundancy.

The procedure is technically demanding and the most consequential body contouring operation we perform. Variations include:

Combined with breast surgery in a , abdominoplasty becomes part of one of our higher-volume combined procedures.

has grown steadily across recent years and now consistently accounts for 12-15% of our breast caseload. The drivers:

Revision breast is technically more demanding than primary surgery. The pocket may need to be modified, capsules excised partially or fully, implant size or shape changed, and skin envelope reduced or supported with a lift. The consultation for revision work is more involved than primary, with more imaging review and more careful planning.

Procedures growing within the caseload

Demand for has grown consistently year on year. The procedure — bilateral mastectomy with chest masculinisation — is well-established with reliable techniques. The demographic for this work is significantly than for cosmetic surgery, and the consultation pathway differs from cosmetic work, with more attention to psychosocial readiness and coordination with other care providers where relevant.

has grown consistently in our caseload, driven both by greater in discussing intimate concerns and by the increasing recognition that post-pregnancy and post-puberty changes can be effectively addressed surgically. Common variations include labia minora reduction (the most frequent), , labia majora reduction, and mons pubis liposuction or excision. These procedures are increasingly combined where multiple concerns coexist.

The most consequential growth area in our caseload is body contouring after weight loss — both the established post-bariatric pathway and the newer post-GLP-1 pathway. Procedures here include , , , , and breast lift, often staged over multiple operations across 6-18 months. See for the full discussion.

The GLP-1 effect is real. Patients who had no realistic prospect of major weight loss before are now arriving at the post-weight-loss contouring stage in significant numbers, and we expect this category to continue growing across .

Procedures that have stabilised or moderated

Brazilian butt lift (BBL) demand has not grown the way some commentators predicted in . The procedure continues to attract patients, and we continue to perform it for appropriate candidates — but the have not matched the social-media-driven hype, and patients are more now about a procedure with a real (and well-publicised) safety history.

Buccal fat removal saw a brief spike in but demand has moderated. Patients are increasingly aware that the procedure is irreversible and that the slim, hollowed mid-face appearance it produces may not age well into the patient’s 50s and beyond.

Very large breast implants — the requests have moved smaller, in line with the broader natural-result preference.

Non-surgical work continues to grow

Alongside the caseload, our non-surgical work has grown steadily. The treatments where the clinical evidence supports their use:

What we do not offer: any of the unregulated injectables marketed as "fat dissolving" or "magic" treatments outside the medical regulatory framework, devices with claims that exceed published evidence, and treatments aimed at under-18s (which would in any case fall foul of the Toxin and Cosmetic Fillers (Children) Act 2021).

The patient profile underlying these numbers

Our patient demographic skews female (consistent with national figures showing women account for around 93% of UK BAAPS procedures), with the largest age band in the range. The most common starting point for consultation is a specific concern that the patient has carried for a defined period — usually months or years — rather than an impulse decision. The patients we operate on most often have done significant research before arriving, are clear on what they want, and are willing to engage with the realistic limits of what surgery can achieve.

We turn away a meaningful proportion of patients — for some procedures, 25-40%. Reasons include unsuitable medical status, unrealistic expectations, signs of body dysmorphic concern that would not be helped by surgery, recent or active mental health issues that would benefit from first, weight outside the appropriate range for the procedure, or signs that the patient is being pushed toward surgery by someone else rather than choosing it themselves.

Booking a consultation

If you are any of the procedures discussed here, the next step is an in-person consultation at our . Call or use the .

Centre for Surgery · CQC-regulated · GMC specialist-registered · · · ·

Filed Under:

Share this post

Primary Sidebar

I agree to marketing communications ()

I agree to receive marketing communications ()

Centre for Surgery is a CQC-regulated private hospital on London’s Baker Street, delivering plastic and cosmetic surgery through GMC-registered specialist surgeons. Our expertise spans facial procedures including and , , for men, and body contouring procedures such as and . Patient safety, surgical excellence and natural-looking results sit at the heart of everything we do.

Centre for is a CQC-regulated private on London’s iconic , offering plastic and cosmetic surgery led by GMC-registered consultant surgeons.

Marylebone

London

W1U 6RN

Mon – Sat, 9am – 6pm

Saturday consultations available