Hi, I have performed many blepharoplasty (eyelid surgery), SMAS facelifts for over 30 years and have performed many minimally, invasive SMAS facelifts. The more invasive the procedure(s), the longer the recovery. If you are concerned about things at this point, it would be best to discuss these issues with your surgeon as only he/she knows what was done, how invasive the procedure(s) were and the expected healing time associated with the surgery. In my experience prolonged recovery is one of the reasons many facelift candidates are seeking minimally, invasive SMAS facelifts that offer a much more rapid healing time. Perhaps your surgeon has some suggestions on how to minimize the sensations that your are describing. The reality is, there are many different ways to perform a facelift from incision length, incision placement, level of tissue dissection (skin only, SMAS, Deep Plane, Subperiosteal), different degrees of tissue undermining, how to lift and support (imbrication versus plication of the SMAS layer), how much excess skin to trim, is excess fat going to be reduced and finally will the overall shape of the face be made more feminine or masculine (while avoiding the over pulled, windswept appearance). Price is determined by the reputation, location and experience of the Facelift Surgeon. In my humble opinion however, there are some basic requirements that must be met in order for a facelift to be "effective", yielding "aesthetic pleasing" and "naturally attractive" results. These include: 1. Some type of incision either curved around the front (preferred) or straight in front of the ear. This is how excess skin is removed which is not possible with an incision behind the ear alone. If you have so little excess skin on the face that "none" needs to be removed you are not a candidate for a facelift in the first place. 2. The facelift must address correction and softening of the "jowls" using a long lasting and effective technique. If you have "jowls” these are sagging facial tissues and the main indication for some form of a SMAS facelift. The underlying SMAS layer, of the face, must be dissected, lifted, trimmed and re-sutured (not merely folded or suspended with threads or sutures that will not last). The excess skin is then removed and the facelift incisions closed. 3. Facial shaping must be combined to properly shape the cheeks, chin, jaw line and lips for feminizing or masculinizing the face as the case may be. 4. Be certain that you choose a facelift procedure that allows you to resume your active lifestyle in a reasonable amount of time. If you have "jowls” these are sagging facial tissues and the main indication for some form of a SMAS facelift. The underlying SMAS layer, of the face, must be dissected, lifted, trimmed and re-sutured (not merely folded or suspended with threads or sutures that will not last). The excess skin is then removed and the facelift incisions closed. My most popular SMAS facelift is the minimally invasive, short incision SMAS facelift that has all the benefits of more invasive facelifts (traditional, mid-face, deep plane, cheek lift and subperiosteal facelifts) but with these added benefits: very small incisions and no incisions extend or are placed within the hair.minimal tissue dissection = less bruising and swelling = rapid recovery ( several days instead of weeks or months with the more invasive type facelifts mentioned)can be performed in 90 minutes or less, with or without general anesthesiaproper SMAS Imbrication techniqueno incisions within the hair = no hair lossexcess fat can be removed from the face and neckexcess skin removed from the face and neckcheeks, chin and jaw line can be augmented with dermal fillers (I prefer Restylane Lyft) or facial implantsmost patients fly back home to parts all over the world in as little as 3 days post-op I combine facial shaping with every facelift procedure. When jowls are present, these should be done in concert and not alone or separately in order to create a naturally, more attractive face. Following my beauty principles, women look the most feminine, youthful and attractive with heart shaped faces. Heart shaped faces have cheeks that are full and round in the front. Shaping cheeks that are flat or concave in the front (cheek augmentation) with precise placement of a dermal filler or by using silastic cheek implants for a permanent enhancement will create full, round cheeks that will feminize the entire face. When the chin is weak, this creates an imbalance making the nose appear larger, the mid face top heavy and the lower face look short that de-emphasizes the lips and allows early formation of a double chin. Chin augmentation using a chin implant will add projection to the chin creating harmony and balance to the lower face. I have found placement of a silastic chin implant, through a small curved incision under the chin (also allows excess skin removal) to be very safe, quick and highly effective. I have performed many facial shaping procedures using dermal fillers, facial implants (cheek, chin), liposuction and/or facelifts for over 30 years. In my experience and despite its recent increase in popularity, fat transfer (fat injection) offers "far" less of a reliable and predictable volume for facial shaping than an off the shelf dermal filler or silastic facial implant. For that reason, I do not use fat to shape the cheeks, chin, lips or jaw line. Tissue physiology is quite simple. Tissue requires a blood supply in and out as well as lymphatic connections to remain viable and alive. Once fat is removed from the body all of these things have been disrupted. Just because the removed fat is mixed with PRP or something else doesn't make the blood and lymphatics magically re-appear. The fat at that point is not living tissue which means that it's prone to being dissolved by the body (most likely in an uneven and unpredictable manner). Injecting fat back into the face does not create the required elements to make the fat living tissue once again. So the argument that fat is alive and viable in the face once it's been removed and re-injected makes no sense to me as a physician and surgeon. The other issue that I have with fat transfer is the lack of precision. Fat is thick by nature which means it's not the same consistency as an off the shelf dermal filler. Fat injections use an increased volume injected in an attempt to compensate for the volume loss that "will" happen. This means a lack of specific shape and volume that simply can not begin to compare with the specificity of using a silastic facial implant of a "known" shape and volume. In that regard fat offers too much of an unknown to make it a reliable and predictable method for facial shaping. There's a significant difference between a 3mm and 5mm thick cheek implant. You can imagine the magnitude of difference there is between retaining 60% of 25cc's of fat versus 35%. In my humble opinion, I just don’t see how fat could possibly be used to precisely shape facial features? Hope this helps.