Top

Reporting year September 2025 to September 2026

Clinical Outcomes and Patient Safety 2025/26

Our infection, return-to-theatre, revision and complaint figures for the year, published every September. Each one is defined, counted the same way every year, and can be checked against the two independent bodies that hold data on us.

Published
September 2026
Next update
September 2027
Published by
Attika Valli, CQC Registered Manager
Medically reviewed by
Dr Spyridon Vlachos, GMC 7522950

Complication rates at a glance, 2025/26

Across 1,623 procedures at our Baker Street hospital, all performed as day cases.

Key points

  • Zero never events in 2025/26, and a surgical revision rate of 0.6%, counting every revision, paid or unpaid.
  • One post-operative infection and two unplanned returns to theatre, each counted under the definitions below.
  • Every formal complaint answered within our published timescale.
  • Rated Good overall by the CQC, with independent data on us published by the CQC and PHIN.
  • Regular pain audits show TIVA with local anaesthetic keeps the need for opioid painkillers after surgery to a minimum.

How our figures compare with published complication rates

Context, not a league table. These large studies use their own definitions and patient groups, so they cannot be compared like for like with our counts. They show what a realistic range looks like, and that risk depends on the procedure and on whether operations are combined.

0.2%

Infection after rhinoplasty, in 4,978 patients (Aesthetic Surgery Journal, 2017)[1]

0.7%

Major complications after rhinoplasty: an emergency visit, hospital admission or reoperation within 30 days[1]

4.4%

Major complications when arm lift surgery was combined with other procedures, against 1.3% on its own, in 2,294 patients (Aesthetic Surgery Journal, 2016)[2]

0.94%

Complication rate for fat grafting at accredited US day-surgery facilities, 2019 to 2021 (Aesthetic Surgery Journal, 2024)[3]

How we count each measure

A figure is only as honest as its definition. This is exactly what each number above includes.

0never events

Never events and reportable incidents

  • 0 never events
  • 1 incident reported to the CQC
  • 0 medicines incidents reported to the Home Office
  • 0 reports to any other statutory body
  • 13 incidents and accidents logged

What these mean. Never events are the short list of serious incidents NHS England considers wholly preventable when safety procedures are followed, such as wrong-site surgery or a retained instrument. The correct number is zero, and ours is. The one CQC-notifiable incident was reported within the required timescale, investigated, and the learning built into our procedures; we do not publish clinical detail because it could identify the patient, and the CQC holds the full record. The 13 incidents and accidents are deliberately the broadest category, from a member of staff slipping in a corridor to a near-miss caught by a pre-operative checklist. We would rather have a culture that logs a trip on a step than one that records only what cannot be avoided.

0.6%surgical revision rate

Surgical revision rate

How we count it. Any further operation to improve the outcome of a procedure performed here, whether the patient or the surgeon asked for it and whether or not a fee was charged, counted in the year it takes place.

Why the definition matters. A clinic that counts only paid revisions, only those within twelve months, or only those it considers medically necessary will report a lower figure than one that counts them all. We count them all. Read more about what to expect from revision cosmetic surgery, or our guide to avoiding a poor surgical outcome.

1post-operative infection

Post-operative infection rate

How we count it. Any wound or surgical site infection that needed treatment — oral antibiotics, intravenous antibiotics, drainage or a further procedure — identified at any point in follow-up, whether by our team or by the patient’s GP. Minor infections treated with tablets are included, because they are the ones most often left out of published figures.

Context. Hospital-wide infection rates include emergency surgery and long inpatient stays, so they are not a fair benchmark for planned day-case surgery. Aesthetic-surgery databases are: infection affected 0.2% of 4,978 rhinoplasty patients[1] and 1.7% of 2,294 arm lift patients[2], which is why we would rather show you the figure for your own operation than a blended average. Our guide to the risks and complications of cosmetic surgery explains what to watch for after you go home.

2unplanned returns to theatre

Unplanned return to theatre

How we count it. Any patient taken back to theatre for a reason that was not part of the original plan — most often to drain a haematoma, a collection of blood under the skin. A planned second stage is not counted here, and a later operation to refine the result is counted as a revision instead.

Why it matters. It is one of the most widely used markers of surgical quality because it is hard to hide. Risk rises when operations are combined: in one large study, major complications after arm lift surgery rose from 1.3% on its own to 4.4% when combined with other procedures (Aesthetic Surgery Journal, 2016)[2]. That is one reason we plan combinations such as a mummy makeover conservatively, and sometimes advise staging them.

9formal complaints, every one answered on time

Complaints and minor issues

How we count it. A formal complaint is any concern a patient asks us to handle under our complaints policy. We received nine in 2025/26 and responded to all nine within our published timescale. Separately, 37 minor issues were raised and resolved informally at the time. Each one is logged and reviewed, because small issues show where a process needs fixing.

If you are not satisfied with our response. Our policy sets out three stages: local resolution, internal appeal, then external escalation. You can raise concerns with the Care Quality Commission, which regulates us, or with the General Medical Council where a complaint concerns an individual doctor. You can also seek free guidance from Citizens Advice, or take your own legal advice. Centre for Surgery is not an ISCAS subscriber, a voluntary scheme that providers pay to join, so that route is not open to our patients; the CQC and GMC routes are open to everyone.

Continuous improvement

What we changed in 2025/26

Counting is only useful if it leads somewhere. Three changes we made this year.

01

Updated patient satisfaction questionnaires

We updated the questionnaires patients complete after treatment, so the feedback we collect is clearer to give and easier for us to act on. They sit alongside the validated outcome measures described below.

02

A faster route for concerns after surgery

If something does not feel right after your operation, there is now a more streamlined process for raising it, so concerns reach the right member of the team and are addressed sooner.

03

Regular pain audits

We audit post-operative pain regularly. The audits show the benefit of combining TIVA with local anaesthetic, even for larger procedures: it has minimised, and in many cases removed, the need for opioid painkillers after surgery.

That matches the published evidence. A meta-analysis of 317 randomised trials (EClinicalMedicine, 2024) found less nausea and vomiting and better quality-of-recovery scores after TIVA than after inhaled anaesthetic gases[4], and a systematic review of local anaesthetic wound infusion in plastic surgery found it reduced opioid use in 12 of 13 studies that compared it with another form of pain relief[5].

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs)

Complication counts tell you how often something went wrong. They say nothing about whether patients are happy with their result. For that we use Q-PROMs: externally validated questionnaires that capture the patient’s own assessment, not the surgeon’s, completed before surgery and again after it, in line with Royal College of Surgeons guidance. The BREAST-Q, FACE-Q and BODY-Q each measure what that particular operation is meant to change.

How the data is reported matters as much as the data. A systematic review of 79 BREAST-Q studies found that more than half did not report a response rate (Aesthetic Surgery Journal, 2021)[6], so a glowing score may describe only the patients who chose to answer. When we quote a Q-PROM score, we will tell you how many patients it is based on and how many were asked.

CQC rating and PHIN data

If anything on this page disagrees with what the CQC or PHIN publish, theirs is the authoritative record. Industry awards are a separate matter from regulation and outcome data, and we list them on our awards and accolades page. Our CQC rating page explains the inspection in full.

Surgeons operating in the theatre at Centre for Surgery, Baker Street

Who performs your surgery, and under what anaesthetic

Outcome data is only useful if you know what it describes. At Centre for Surgery:

How to read a clinic’s outcomes data

Any clinic can publish a page of reassuring numbers. Three questions tell you whether they mean anything.

1

Is the denominator stated?

A rate means little without the number of procedures behind it. That is why this page leads with counts and tells you the volume they come from.

2

Are the definitions stated?

An infection rate that leaves out infections treated with tablets, or a revision rate that counts only paid revisions, is not comparable with one that includes them.

3

Is the comparison fair?

Fat transfer procedures such as a BBL carry a different risk profile from an eyelid lift, so each should be judged against its own published data[3].

A note from our medical reviewer

The figures on this page are small numbers, and I want to be honest about what small numbers can and cannot tell you. One infection in a year is a good result. It is also one patient, and to that patient it was not a statistic. Two returns to theatre is a low number; it is also two people who had a worse fortnight than they expected.

What I would ask you to take from this page is not that we are perfect — no clinic is, and any clinic claiming zero across the board either has very low volumes or is not counting properly. It is that we count, we publish, we say how we counted, and we point you to two independent bodies who hold the record. That is what you should be able to expect from anyone offering to operate on you. If a clinic you are considering cannot show you a page like this, ask them why.

Dr Spyridon Vlachos, GMC 7522950, medical reviewer for Centre for Surgery

Frequently asked questions

Read what patients say in our Centre for Surgery reviews, or call us on 020 7993 4849.

Why does your reporting year run September to September?

It matches our internal clinical governance cycle, which runs to our annual audit. Publishing to the same cycle means the figures on this page are the same figures our clinical governance committee reviewed, not a separate set prepared for the website.

Why do you give counts rather than only percentages?

At our volumes, percentages can mislead in both directions. A single event can double a rate, and a rate can look small while hiding a real number of patients. Counts let you check the arithmetic.

Can I see outcome data for the procedure I’m considering?

Yes. Ask your surgeon at consultation, or contact us and we will tell you what we hold for that procedure and how many patients it covers. You can also read verified patient reviews and see before and after photographs of our own patients.

How does this compare with having surgery abroad?

Outcome data from overseas clinics is rarely published in a form you can check, and follow-up usually ends when you fly home, so complications are often treated, and counted, somewhere else. Our guide to the risks of cosmetic surgery tourism explains what to ask before you book.

Who can I contact about anything on this page?

Email contact@centreforsurgery.com or call 020 7993 4849, and your question will be passed to our clinical governance lead.

References

  1. Layliev J, Gupta V, Kaoutzanis C, et al. Incidence and preoperative risk factors for major complications in aesthetic rhinoplasty: analysis of 4978 patients. Aesthetic Surgery Journal. 2017;37(7):757–767. doi:10.1093/asj/sjx023
  2. Nguyen L, Gupta V, Afshari A, et al. Incidence and risk factors of major complications in brachioplasty: analysis of 2,294 patients. Aesthetic Surgery Journal. 2016;36(7):792–803. doi:10.1093/asj/sjv267
  3. Weidman AA, Foppiani J, Valentine L, et al. Complications from fat grafting and gluteal augmentation in outpatient plastic surgery: an analysis of AAAASF (QUAD A) data. Aesthetic Surgery Journal. 2024;44(7):722–730. doi:10.1093/asj/sjad345
  4. Kampman JM, Hermanides J, Hollmann MW, et al. Mortality and morbidity after total intravenous anaesthesia versus inhalational anaesthesia: a systematic review and meta-analysis. EClinicalMedicine. 2024;72:102636. doi:10.1016/j.eclinm.2024.102636
  5. Roy CF, Azzi AJ, Davison P. A review of wound infusion with local anesthetics in plastic surgery. Annals of Plastic Surgery. 2019;83(6):e110–e117. doi:10.1097/SAP.0000000000001916
  6. Har-Shai L, Ofek SE, Brandstetter A, et al. Quality of patient-reported outcome studies utilizing the BREAST-Q: a systematic review. Aesthetic Surgery Journal. 2021;41(11):NP1448–NP1458. doi:10.1093/asj/sjab057

Request a consultation

Speak to a patient coordinator

Tell us what you are considering and a patient coordinator will call you within one working day to arrange a consultation with a surgeon at Baker Street.

  • The surgeon who assesses you is the surgeon who operates
  • A two-week cooling-off period before cosmetic surgery
  • Finance available, subject to status

020 7993 4849Monday to Saturday, 9am to 6pm · 95–97 Baker Street, London W1U 6RN

    Request a consultation

    Tell us what you're considering and a patient coordinator will call you within one working day. Whether you know exactly what you want or you're still weighing things up, we'll point you to the right consultant. Prefer to talk now? Call 020 7993 4849.







    Not sure which procedure? Describe what you'd like to change in your own words — a sentence is plenty.

    Your enquiry is treated in strict confidence. We respond within one working day, Monday to Saturday.

    This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

    Patient Library

    Planning and safety, explained

    50 articles on choosing a clinic, anaesthesia and safety, written for patients and medically reviewed by Dr Spyridon Vlachos, Specialist Plastic Surgeon.

    The Centre for Surgery newsletter

    Patient guides and hospital news, in your inbox

    New articles from our Patient Library, recovery advice from our surgeons and news from our hospital on Baker Street.

    • Written for patients
    • Medically reviewed
    • Unsubscribe at any time

    Regulated by

    regulated by CQC

    Rated Good overall
    Our CQC report

    Our surgeons are members of

    • royal college of surgeons
    • International Society of Aesthetic Plastic Surgery
    • European Academy of Facial Plastic Surgery
    • British Association of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgeons (BAPRAS)