Temple Hollows: When Doing Nothing Is the Right Answer

In short. A stable childhood shape, mild hollowing that reads well, and a ceiling no treatment reaches. The case for leaving a temple alone, stated as a finding.

Key points

• It is a conclusion reached from the examination — that the hollow is a shape, mild, or in proportion — and recorded with its reasons.
• It is not a failure to decide and not a delay, and a patient who understands why is better served than one who is treated.

Most of medicine consists of deciding what not to do, and here that decision is reached more often than patients expect. Three situations account for most of the occasions when the honest recommendation is to leave a temple alone, and none is a refusal to help.

The stable childhood shape

Where the hollow is present in photographs from the patient's teens, is the same on both sides and has not changed in twenty years, it is a shape. A shape does not progress, and adding volume above it changes the surface without changing the frame. The conversation is about proportion, not loss.

Mild hollowing that reads well

Not every hollow is a defect. A temple with some definition reads as bone structure, and many faces are flattered by it. Where the hollow is mild, the borders are in proportion and the patient's own photographs show a face that has aged well, treatment has little to add and something to risk.

The face proportioned around it

A face with a wider cheekbone, a lower hairline or a broader jaw is often built around a temple that would look hollow on someone else. Filling it makes that face read as rounder and changes the balance between upper and lower. Patients sometimes arrive wanting another face's temple, and the useful part of the consultation is saying so.

The ceiling that applies either way

Whatever route is taken, no treatment restores the temple a patient remembers. Bone cannot be rebuilt by an injectable, the processes that produced the change continue afterwards, and the region is shallow enough that overfilling shows. A patient who knows the ceiling before treatment can judge whether the gap is worth crossing.

If you still want to proceed

That is a legitimate position, and nothing here argues against treatment for its own sake. It argues for treatment chosen after the cause has been named, with the ceiling stated and a clear idea of what would count as a good result. A patient who can describe that has expectations with somewhere to land.

Whether what you have is a loss or a shape is dealt with in telling the two apart. What volume can and cannot change if treatment goes ahead is set out in the limits of volume, and the risks that apply to this region in particular are covered in vessels, bruising and nerves.

Related reading

• Temple Hollowing or Bone Shape: Telling the Two Apart
• How a Temple Hollow Changes the Upper Face
• Temple Assessment: The Anatomy That Decides the Plan

Frequently asked questions

If nothing is done, will the temple get worse?

It depends on which cause is present, and the assessment is what separates them. A temple that is a childhood shape will look much the same in twenty years. One that reflects fat loss will change as the fat changes. One that reflects bony remodelling will change slowly and continuously. None of those is a reason to treat now, and knowing which one applies is.

Is doing nothing just a way of avoiding a decision?

It is a decision, and it is the one most often reached in this region when the assessment is carried out properly. It is recorded as a finding, with the reasons, so that a future assessment starts from what was established rather than from nothing. The opposite habit, treating a stable shape because a patient asked, changes a face and leaves the complaint.

How often is a temple hollow actually not treatable?

The question is not whether it is treatable but whether treating it would produce the change the patient wants. Where the fossa is narrow, where the hollow is a feature of a face that is proportioned around it, and where the appearance is stable and photographs well, treatment is possible and is unlikely to improve on what is there. That combination is common.

Risks & Limitations

• Material placed into a named vessel in this region can travel and cause damage at a distance; this is uncommon and serious when it happens.
• The branch of the facial nerve that lifts the brow runs superficially here, and injury to it can produce brow weakness that may not fully recover.
• Bruising and swelling in this region are common and are more visible than the size of the area suggests; the result is judged months later, not at ten days.
• Overfilling is visible here earlier than on the cheek, because the region is shallow and its borders are close.
• A transfer of the patient's own fat is less predictable than an injectable, and more than one stage may be needed.

When to Seek Care

• Severe or increasing pain, a tense swollen area, or skin that is blistering or changing colour — seek urgent care.
• Blurred vision, loss of vision, or pain behind the eye — seek emergency care immediately.
• Weakness on one side of the face, or spreading redness with fever.
• Hollowing on one side only, or a change that appeared over weeks, which needs a medical assessment first.

References & Further Reading

• American Society of Plastic Surgeons (ASPS) — facial aesthetic surgery and safety guidance
• International Society of Aesthetic Plastic Surgery (ISAPS) — global procedure and safety resources
• National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE, UK) — relevant guidance
• Cochrane Library — systematic reviews
• Chinese Medical Association Plastic Surgery Branch — clinical guidance

Medically reviewed by Tongchun Mao, MD (毛彤春), Deputy Director & Head of Aesthetic Surgery. Last reviewed: 19 September 2026.

This page is patient education, not medical advice, and it does not cite individual studies. Discuss your own case with a qualified clinician. To arrange an assessment at Chongqing West District Hospital, see Contact & Consultation.