POSTED UNDER Breast Implant Revision Reviews
Disappointed Doesn’t Even Begin to Explain my Experience
ORIGINAL POST
Disappointed Doesn’t Even Begin to Explain my Experience
I had a very disappointing experience with Dr. Chasan and ultimately regret choosing him for my reductive breast augmentation surgery.
Before my reductive breast augmentation with Dr. Chasan, I had a previous procedure he performed in 2024 that did not involve any serious complications. However, that experience was the first time I became concerned about how my care was being handled. When I asked why my incisions appeared to be healing poorly, I was told that I had “lasered my incisions too much.” That immediately concerned me because I had only undergone a few laser sessions, spaced appropriately.
I subsequently went to my own doctor for an independent evaluation, as I had been his patient for more than 10 years. He examined the area and confirmed that what I was experiencing was scar stretching and atrophy, not damage from having “lasered too much.” These were not problems I had caused. More importantly, my doctor did not dismiss my concerns or tell me to simply live with the problem. He meticulously worked with me for more than a year and a half to improve the scars and get them to an acceptable point. The scars now look significantly better.
The difference in care and approach was striking. My doctor took the time to listen, independently evaluate what was actually happening, explain it to me, and consistently work with me over an extended period to help resolve the problem. In contrast, my experience with Dr. Chasan left me feeling blamed for problems I was experiencing and ultimately dismissed when I continued to seek thoughtful aftercare.
Looking back, the 2024 experience was the first point at which I had a strong gut feeling that something was not quite right with the patient blaming after the fact and that I should reconsider proceeding with Dr. Chasan for my reductive breast augmentation. I wish I had listened to that instinct.
Despite that earlier experience and gut instinct, I ultimately chose Dr. Chasan for my reductive breast augmentation because he had written articles and extensive papers specifically about reductive breast augmentation, which was presented as an area of his specialty. That research and apparent expertise gave me confidence that he would be particularly knowledgeable about the procedure I was seeking.
Before my first breast surgery with him in February 2025, I already had high-profile implants from a previous breast augmentation that I had tolerated without any significant problems. My reason for seeking the February 2025 procedure was primarily that I had developed uncomfortable sagging and felt that my implants were somewhat too large for my frame. Because I had done well with high-profile implants previously, I was confused as to why I could not simply have a smaller version of what had already worked well for me, along with a lift to address the sagging.
Another concern for me was the lack of a thorough implant and aesthetic consultation before the February 2025 surgery. During my initial consultation, I was never given the time to go through before-and-after photos to see which results I most desired, which would have helped establish the look I was hoping to achieve. No actual implants were brought out for me to look at, feel, or compare, and we did not have a meaningful discussion about different implant profiles or sizes.
At the time, I simply assumed that as the surgeon, he would know what would be appropriate for me and that I could trust his judgment. Looking back, that was a mistake on my part. I was surprised by how little opportunity I was given to participate in the aesthetic planning of my own surgery. In retrospect, this became particularly significant because implant profile and my aesthetic preferences later became a major point of disagreement during my revision care.
In February 2025, I underwent my initial reductive breast augmentation with Dr. Chasan. Four days after the procedure, I already had a strong feeling that something was not right, but I kept those concerns to myself and allowed my body time to heal. I did not formally raise those concerns with him until July 2025, approximately six months post-op. At that point, I was repeatedly told that I simply needed to wait and heal. I did exactly that. I waited, I healed, and I continued to give my body time, but the concerns I had were not resolving or meaningfully changing.
Over the course of the initial surgery and the two subsequent revision procedures, I experienced and continued to deal with multiple issues, including left-sided animation deformity, asymmetry, an implant that remained excessively high and did not settle properly into the pocket, palpable implant edges along my inner cleavage, and redundant excess skin. Each time I raised concerns, I was essentially told to give it more time. Eventually, it became clear that waiting was not going to resolve the issues, which ultimately led to the first revision in October 2025. When the problems still were not adequately resolved, I underwent a second revision in May 2026.
In other words, I did not immediately seek additional surgery because I was impatient or unwilling to allow myself to heal. I repeatedly followed the advice I was given to wait and see what would happen. Unfortunately, my concerns proved to be valid, as I ultimately required two additional revision surgeries in an effort to address the problems that developed and persisted throughout this process.
I also sought the opinions of two independent plastic surgeons outside of this practice. Both independently identified the issues I was experiencing and agreed that they could be addressed and corrected. This was important to me because it reinforced that these were not simply unavoidable problems or issues that my anatomy made impossible to improve.
One of my biggest concerns was that my stated preferences were not respected. Before my second revision, I was adamant that I did not want an ultra-high-profile implant and specifically asked him to use a high-profile sizer. While I was under anesthesia and unable to see or participate in the decision, he determined during surgery that he did not like the appearance of the high-profile option because, in his opinion, the implants “looked flat,” and he chose the ultra-high-profile implant instead.
When I later questioned that decision, I was given a different explanation: I was told that the ultra-high-profile implant was necessary to correct the animation deformity. I was never given a clear explanation as to why an ultra-high-profile implant was the only option for addressing the animation deformity. What was particularly concerning to me was that I had specifically requested a high-profile implant, yet a different profile was ultimately selected. I had previously had high-profile implants without significant problems, which made the decision even more confusing to me.
Throughout this process, I also felt that I was never given adequate time or attention to discuss my concerns. Follow-up calls were consistently rushed, often giving me barely two minutes of his time. On more than one occasion, I traveled to San Diego specifically for follow-up appointments, only to be given approximately 15 minutes of his time. I essentially lost an entire day traveling for appointments that were over almost as quickly as they began. After undergoing multiple surgeries, dealing with ongoing problems, and making significant financial and travel commitments, I expected to have adequate time to discuss my concerns with the surgeon who performed the procedures.
There were also instances of contradictory postoperative instructions that further contributed to my confusion and loss of confidence. After my first revision, I specifically asked whether I should wear a stabilizer band, particularly because my implants were sitting very high. I had actually ordered a stabilizer band from Amazon because I felt it might be needed and wanted to have one on hand. When I asked him about using it, I was told not to wear one.
Then, after my second revision, during a FaceTime conversation, he asked me if I knew what a stabilizer band was and told me that I should wear one. I held up the stabilizer band I had already ordered and had in my hands and said, “Yes, this one. I asked him about this after my first revision, and he told me no.” Receiving completely different instructions regarding the same postoperative issue was another example of contradictory guidance that made it difficult for me to understand or have confidence in the postoperative care I was receiving.
One of the most troubling aspects of my experience was feeling blamed as the patient for the breast surgery outcome. Throughout all of this, I remained patient, polite, calm, and respectful in my interactions with him and his office. I never behaved in an angry, hostile, or overly confrontational manner. I was simply trying to communicate my concerns and find a reasonable solution after undergoing multiple procedures. That is why it was particularly upsetting to feel as though I was being treated as if I were unreasonable, difficult, or somehow an impossible patient to deal with simply because I continued to raise concerns.
This was particularly difficult to understand because he performed not only the original reductive breast augmentation, but also two subsequent revisions after having firsthand knowledge of my anatomy, the problems that had developed, and how my body had responded to the first procedure.
If he genuinely believed that my anatomy or the way my body would respond made an acceptable result unlikely, it raises the obvious question of why he proceeded with two additional surgeries rather than clearly communicating that concern to me beforehand. I do not agree with the implication that my body was simply incapable of producing a good result, particularly given that two independent plastic surgeons subsequently evaluated me and agreed that the issues could be addressed. I also do not believe it is appropriate to place responsibility on the patient for an outcome after the surgeon has elected to perform multiple corrective procedures.
What was perhaps most hurtful was what happened when I ultimately raised my concerns and was looking for a meaningful solution. Rather than offering a path forward, I felt that I was essentially being told to move on and deal with the situation myself. The communication ultimately ended with, “I wish you the best moving forward.”
After investing a substantial amount of money, undergoing three surgeries, repeatedly traveling for care, and putting my trust in this surgeon to resolve the problems I was experiencing, that response was incredibly hurtful. I was left feeling dismissed and discarded as a patient, as though after everything I had invested and gone through, I was no longer worth his time or consideration.
I have since found another plastic surgeon whom I trust to perform the revision needed to address the remaining problems, but unfortunately, I cannot have that surgery until next year. I am therefore left waiting for another procedure while also facing the additional financial expense of correcting the issues that remain.
My experience has taught me that patients deserve to be listened to, to have their preferences respected, to have adequate time to discuss concerns, and to know that their surgeon will work with them when something does not go as planned. Accountability and how a surgeon treats a patient after surgery are just as important as the procedure itself.
Based on my experience, I would not choose Dr. Chasan again, and I would not recommend him to anyone seeking reductive breast augmentation.
Before my reductive breast augmentation with Dr. Chasan, I had a previous procedure he performed in 2024 that did not involve any serious complications. However, that experience was the first time I became concerned about how my care was being handled. When I asked why my incisions appeared to be healing poorly, I was told that I had “lasered my incisions too much.” That immediately concerned me because I had only undergone a few laser sessions, spaced appropriately.
I subsequently went to my own doctor for an independent evaluation, as I had been his patient for more than 10 years. He examined the area and confirmed that what I was experiencing was scar stretching and atrophy, not damage from having “lasered too much.” These were not problems I had caused. More importantly, my doctor did not dismiss my concerns or tell me to simply live with the problem. He meticulously worked with me for more than a year and a half to improve the scars and get them to an acceptable point. The scars now look significantly better.
The difference in care and approach was striking. My doctor took the time to listen, independently evaluate what was actually happening, explain it to me, and consistently work with me over an extended period to help resolve the problem. In contrast, my experience with Dr. Chasan left me feeling blamed for problems I was experiencing and ultimately dismissed when I continued to seek thoughtful aftercare.
Looking back, the 2024 experience was the first point at which I had a strong gut feeling that something was not quite right with the patient blaming after the fact and that I should reconsider proceeding with Dr. Chasan for my reductive breast augmentation. I wish I had listened to that instinct.
Despite that earlier experience and gut instinct, I ultimately chose Dr. Chasan for my reductive breast augmentation because he had written articles and extensive papers specifically about reductive breast augmentation, which was presented as an area of his specialty. That research and apparent expertise gave me confidence that he would be particularly knowledgeable about the procedure I was seeking.
Before my first breast surgery with him in February 2025, I already had high-profile implants from a previous breast augmentation that I had tolerated without any significant problems. My reason for seeking the February 2025 procedure was primarily that I had developed uncomfortable sagging and felt that my implants were somewhat too large for my frame. Because I had done well with high-profile implants previously, I was confused as to why I could not simply have a smaller version of what had already worked well for me, along with a lift to address the sagging.
Another concern for me was the lack of a thorough implant and aesthetic consultation before the February 2025 surgery. During my initial consultation, I was never given the time to go through before-and-after photos to see which results I most desired, which would have helped establish the look I was hoping to achieve. No actual implants were brought out for me to look at, feel, or compare, and we did not have a meaningful discussion about different implant profiles or sizes.
At the time, I simply assumed that as the surgeon, he would know what would be appropriate for me and that I could trust his judgment. Looking back, that was a mistake on my part. I was surprised by how little opportunity I was given to participate in the aesthetic planning of my own surgery. In retrospect, this became particularly significant because implant profile and my aesthetic preferences later became a major point of disagreement during my revision care.
In February 2025, I underwent my initial reductive breast augmentation with Dr. Chasan. Four days after the procedure, I already had a strong feeling that something was not right, but I kept those concerns to myself and allowed my body time to heal. I did not formally raise those concerns with him until July 2025, approximately six months post-op. At that point, I was repeatedly told that I simply needed to wait and heal. I did exactly that. I waited, I healed, and I continued to give my body time, but the concerns I had were not resolving or meaningfully changing.
Over the course of the initial surgery and the two subsequent revision procedures, I experienced and continued to deal with multiple issues, including left-sided animation deformity, asymmetry, an implant that remained excessively high and did not settle properly into the pocket, palpable implant edges along my inner cleavage, and redundant excess skin. Each time I raised concerns, I was essentially told to give it more time. Eventually, it became clear that waiting was not going to resolve the issues, which ultimately led to the first revision in October 2025. When the problems still were not adequately resolved, I underwent a second revision in May 2026.
In other words, I did not immediately seek additional surgery because I was impatient or unwilling to allow myself to heal. I repeatedly followed the advice I was given to wait and see what would happen. Unfortunately, my concerns proved to be valid, as I ultimately required two additional revision surgeries in an effort to address the problems that developed and persisted throughout this process.
I also sought the opinions of two independent plastic surgeons outside of this practice. Both independently identified the issues I was experiencing and agreed that they could be addressed and corrected. This was important to me because it reinforced that these were not simply unavoidable problems or issues that my anatomy made impossible to improve.
One of my biggest concerns was that my stated preferences were not respected. Before my second revision, I was adamant that I did not want an ultra-high-profile implant and specifically asked him to use a high-profile sizer. While I was under anesthesia and unable to see or participate in the decision, he determined during surgery that he did not like the appearance of the high-profile option because, in his opinion, the implants “looked flat,” and he chose the ultra-high-profile implant instead.
When I later questioned that decision, I was given a different explanation: I was told that the ultra-high-profile implant was necessary to correct the animation deformity. I was never given a clear explanation as to why an ultra-high-profile implant was the only option for addressing the animation deformity. What was particularly concerning to me was that I had specifically requested a high-profile implant, yet a different profile was ultimately selected. I had previously had high-profile implants without significant problems, which made the decision even more confusing to me.
Throughout this process, I also felt that I was never given adequate time or attention to discuss my concerns. Follow-up calls were consistently rushed, often giving me barely two minutes of his time. On more than one occasion, I traveled to San Diego specifically for follow-up appointments, only to be given approximately 15 minutes of his time. I essentially lost an entire day traveling for appointments that were over almost as quickly as they began. After undergoing multiple surgeries, dealing with ongoing problems, and making significant financial and travel commitments, I expected to have adequate time to discuss my concerns with the surgeon who performed the procedures.
There were also instances of contradictory postoperative instructions that further contributed to my confusion and loss of confidence. After my first revision, I specifically asked whether I should wear a stabilizer band, particularly because my implants were sitting very high. I had actually ordered a stabilizer band from Amazon because I felt it might be needed and wanted to have one on hand. When I asked him about using it, I was told not to wear one.
Then, after my second revision, during a FaceTime conversation, he asked me if I knew what a stabilizer band was and told me that I should wear one. I held up the stabilizer band I had already ordered and had in my hands and said, “Yes, this one. I asked him about this after my first revision, and he told me no.” Receiving completely different instructions regarding the same postoperative issue was another example of contradictory guidance that made it difficult for me to understand or have confidence in the postoperative care I was receiving.
One of the most troubling aspects of my experience was feeling blamed as the patient for the breast surgery outcome. Throughout all of this, I remained patient, polite, calm, and respectful in my interactions with him and his office. I never behaved in an angry, hostile, or overly confrontational manner. I was simply trying to communicate my concerns and find a reasonable solution after undergoing multiple procedures. That is why it was particularly upsetting to feel as though I was being treated as if I were unreasonable, difficult, or somehow an impossible patient to deal with simply because I continued to raise concerns.
This was particularly difficult to understand because he performed not only the original reductive breast augmentation, but also two subsequent revisions after having firsthand knowledge of my anatomy, the problems that had developed, and how my body had responded to the first procedure.
If he genuinely believed that my anatomy or the way my body would respond made an acceptable result unlikely, it raises the obvious question of why he proceeded with two additional surgeries rather than clearly communicating that concern to me beforehand. I do not agree with the implication that my body was simply incapable of producing a good result, particularly given that two independent plastic surgeons subsequently evaluated me and agreed that the issues could be addressed. I also do not believe it is appropriate to place responsibility on the patient for an outcome after the surgeon has elected to perform multiple corrective procedures.
What was perhaps most hurtful was what happened when I ultimately raised my concerns and was looking for a meaningful solution. Rather than offering a path forward, I felt that I was essentially being told to move on and deal with the situation myself. The communication ultimately ended with, “I wish you the best moving forward.”
After investing a substantial amount of money, undergoing three surgeries, repeatedly traveling for care, and putting my trust in this surgeon to resolve the problems I was experiencing, that response was incredibly hurtful. I was left feeling dismissed and discarded as a patient, as though after everything I had invested and gone through, I was no longer worth his time or consideration.
I have since found another plastic surgeon whom I trust to perform the revision needed to address the remaining problems, but unfortunately, I cannot have that surgery until next year. I am therefore left waiting for another procedure while also facing the additional financial expense of correcting the issues that remain.
My experience has taught me that patients deserve to be listened to, to have their preferences respected, to have adequate time to discuss concerns, and to know that their surgeon will work with them when something does not go as planned. Accountability and how a surgeon treats a patient after surgery are just as important as the procedure itself.
Based on my experience, I would not choose Dr. Chasan again, and I would not recommend him to anyone seeking reductive breast augmentation.
Fab0829's provider
Replies (0)