Reconstructive & Hand Surgery in Ontario

Reviewers praise Dr. Wanzel's surgical skill, particularly for breast procedures and minor hand surgery, along with his calm bedside manner and the responsiveness of his front desk staff. However, communication gaps are persistent: several complain of weeks-long appointment waits, unreturned calls, and unanswered emails, while a few report disappointing results or post-operative complications.

Most patients report excellent outcomes with rhinoplasty and fillers, praising natural results and caring follow-up. However, a small number describe serious complications: one patient experienced eyelid closure issues and severe dry eye after lower lid surgery, another faced respiratory problems and asymmetry after rhinoplasty, and a third reported infection and unmanaged post-op pain. The polarized reviews (73% five-star, 25% one/two-star) reflect inconsistent surgical results.

Strong results and team care draw patients, particularly for reconstructive work and cancer-related surgery. However, a vocal minority report poor results, lack of aesthetic consultation, and brusque communication-especially around breast procedures and complex cases outside the surgeon's stated focus.

Five-star reviewers praise Dr. Ng's hand surgery expertise, clear communication before and after procedures, and calm demeanor. However, one-star reviews detail poor surgical outcomes (ganglion cysts recurring, trigger finger worsening after surgery) and describe him as rude or dismissive when patients report ongoing pain or complications. The divide is sharp: successful cases yield gratitude and strong recommendations; failed cases report months of worsening symptoms, long follow-up waits at Brampton Civic Hospital, and feeling disrespected when seeking help.

All four reviews rate the clinic five stars. Dr. Weinberg and his team earn consistent praise for technical skill, clear communication, and natural outcomes across filler, reconstruction, and body contouring procedures.

Most reviewers praise Dr. Wallman's surgical skill, attentiveness to concerns, and caring staff. Several report life-changing results in breast and eyelid work. However, a meaningful minority describe unmet expectations (breast reductions smaller than requested), long-term complications requiring revision elsewhere, and receptionist friction. High cost compounds disappointment when results fall short. Clear gaps exist between positive and negative accounts. Some attribute complications to patient selection or recovery variability; others feel dismissed when raising concerns. Staff quality is praised in many reviews but questioned in others.

Strong majority of patients report excellent results and comfort under Dr. Gallant's care, with particular praise for body contouring and breast surgery outcomes. However, several reviewers describe insensitive consultations and unaddressed post-operative complications, suggesting inconsistency in patient care and communication.

Strong surgeons, inconsistent patient experience. Dr. Weinberg earns consistent praise for reconstructive work, breast surgery, and noticeable results; multiple patients report traveling from across the GTA and calling him an artist. However, a meaningful minority experienced dismissive, rushed, or outright rude encounters during consultations and follow-ups, with some complaints going unresolved for months. Aftercare stands out when it happens: detailed post-op instructions, email access to the doctor, monthly check-ins. Yet a few reviews note the doctor rushed through post-op appointments or refused to address specific concerns. The team includes a responsive coordinator called Sandy, though front-desk communication can falter.

All eight reviews are five-star. Patients report natural results across surgical and injectable treatments, with praise for Dr. Basil's attention to what they wanted and his team's comfort-focused approach. Work includes facial surgery, rhinoplasty, injectables, and brow/eyelid procedures.

Strong track record across multiple procedures: breast surgery, hand reconstruction, and body contouring earn consistent five-star praise for technical skill and staff warmth. Office is clean and attentive during consultations, though some patients report minimal post-op guidance after hand work and past friction over deposit policies.

Most reviewers praise Dr. Chuback's empathy and surgical skill; one older patient reported she was dismissive and impatient with a hearing-impaired elderly family member. Limited evidence on core cosmetic services.

Dr. Zorn draws strong praise for her surgical skill, especially in breast reduction and reconstructive work spanning decades; patients report transformative results and appreciate her direct, no-nonsense approach. However, chronic wait times (hours beyond appointment), communication gaps when cancelling, and a blunt manner that alienates those seeking warmth create significant friction for a substantial minority of patients.

Dr. Kouchakan, Dr. Shafiee, and their team earn consistent praise for listening carefully and explaining procedures in clear language. Staff members like Bahareh, Jessica, Nazani, and Sahar are repeatedly noted for warmth and gentleness during treatments. The main friction point is appointment scheduling, which reviewers found cumbersome and insensitive to patients coming in with medical concerns. Iron infusion services feature prominently in recent feedback, alongside endoscopy and consultation visits. The clinic maintains a clean, welcoming space. Some patients reported lost referral documents and frustration with the booking process, though medical care itself received high marks across all named providers.

Dr. Jordan's technical skill in eye surgery and reconstructive procedures draws strong praise, particularly from patients with complex conditions like Graves disease or cancer-related removal. Yet a sharp split emerges: satisfied patients highlight minimal pain, skilled nursing, and thorough aftercare; dissatisfied ones report he becomes defensive when questioned, refuses second procedures patients request, and has terminated relationships with patients seeking clarification on treatment. Office staff inconsistency and cancellation policies add friction.

Dr. Hong's surgical skills and staff care earn consistent five-star praise, especially for reconstructive and cosmetic work; patients report feeling heard and supported through complex procedures. However, waits of one to two and a half hours are routine, and reception staff frequently fail to follow through on promises, leaving patients frustrated and distrustful of scheduling accuracy. \n\nReviewers single out the nursing team (especially Lin and Stella) for attentiveness and skill. Dr. Hong himself is described as efficient, observant, and able to explain procedures clearly. Patients note natural results across body contouring, facial work, and gender-affirming procedures. The clinic is located at 302 Sheppard Ave West and operates seven days; staff speak English and Cantonese. Cost is mentioned as reasonable relative to outcomes, but no specific prices appear in reviews.

Five-star reviews praise Dr. Brownrigg's rhinoplasties and non-surgical work (Botox noted as consistently excellent), plus scar-prevention expertise. One-star reviews center on rhinoplasties that looked unchanged from pre-surgery, despite 3D imaging promises and thousands spent. Patients reported steroid injections offered but ineffective, and say concerns were dismissed rather than addressed constructively. Evidence is thin overall: detail limited to recent rhinoplasty failures, Botox praise, facelift satisfaction, and reconstructive breathing improvements.

A split record: older five-star reviews praise the surgical team's skill and bedside manner, especially for post-weight-loss reconstruction. Recent one-star reviews report significant scar and body contouring regrets years later, with patients turned away to other surgeons for revision work.

Strong results on body and facial procedures from certain surgeons offset by mixed experiences with wait times, pricing clarity, and some surgical complications. Injections and chemical peels consistently praised; administrative friction and old satellite locations mentioned by reviewers.

Five-star reviews praise Dr. Haywood's surgical skill and warm approach, especially for breast reduction, with patients noting excellent scars and seamless experiences. One-star reviews flag delayed communication on post-op problems, rushed appointments, and inconsistent follow-up support when complications arose.

All five reviews praise Dr. Gantous for rhinoplasty work, noting his technical precision and attentive approach. Patients highlight his use of 3D imaging, detailed preoperative counselling, responsive email communication, and willingness to combine procedures when beneficial to facial balance.

Most patients praise Dr. Ejaz and Dr. Ammara Ghumman for calm, attentive care and smooth minor procedures with minimal pain and clear aftercare. The clinic feels clean, organized, and responsive to concerns. However, multiple reviewers report feeling pressured into unnecessary procedures with misleading claims about cost and OHIP eligibility. Quoted prices for lipoma and cyst removal were substantially higher than elsewhere. Trust issues arise when clinical judgment appears profit-driven rather than patient-first.

Half of reviews are glowing accounts of life-changing breathing improvements and warm surgical experiences, while the other half describe prolonged post-op complications, dismissive follow-up care, and a surgeon perceived as uncaring toward outcomes. Patients on OHIP coverage report especially poor treatment and difficulty accessing revision help; those paying privately appear more satisfied overall.

Outcomes divide sharply. Some patients report excellent long-term results from breast reduction, tummy tuck, and reconstruction. Others faced rude interactions, year-long silence between consultation and surgery date, botched procedures (inverted nipples, uneven abdomen, thick scars), and refusals to correct problems. The office mixes up appointments, keeps incorrect patient records, and runs severely behind schedule. Review evidence is limited: only 30 texts cover 31 total reviews, with older accounts potentially confusing Dr. Wong with Dr. Vanessa Wong. Recent 1-star reviews cite specific failures (weight-focused pressure, communication breakdown weeks before surgery, no follow-up for 11-year-old surgical errors), while 5-star reviews from 4-6 years ago express strong satisfaction with results. This suggests recent operational or interpersonal decline.

Reviewers consistently praise Dr. Roumeliotis and his team for managing complex facial reconstruction after trauma, with particular note of emotional support during recovery. Limited review detail prevents assessment of broader service quality, wait times, or cosmetic procedure outcomes.

Experienced rhinoplasty surgeon with a devoted following who report natural, long-lasting results and high confidence in his work. Significant cluster of unhappy revision patients, however, describe feeling unheard during consultations, repeat visits without tangible improvement, and disorganization in post-op care and communication.

Most patients report strong results and warm staff interactions, particularly from named team members Liz, Diana, Shannon, and Jenn. However, a handful of older reviews flag inconsistent bedside manner during consultations and revision surgeries, especially with ear procedures.

All 15 reviews are five-star. Patients consistently report that Dr. Best listens carefully, explains procedures clearly, and delivers results that exceed expectations-from rhinoplasty breathing improvements to nearly invisible scar revision. Her team, including assistant Shanthi, creates a welcoming clinic atmosphere.

Most satisfied patients praise Dr. Hynes' skill, the staff's warmth (especially Karen at front desk), and smooth healing. Yet serious gaps emerge: one patient experienced asymmetry after abdominoplasty with zero follow-up from the clinic despite repeated contact; phone lines are consistently busy or divert to an unrelated device seller; and complications go unaddressed. Past reviews glow, but recent ones flag a stark decline in accountability and communication. Since review evidence is limited, note that detail provided here reflects only these 17 reviews.

Both reviewers praise Dr. Mark Baily and staff member Karyn for genuine care and detailed explanations before and after procedures. Long-term focus on patient comfort and pain relief, with responsive aftercare support.

Reviewers split sharply on Dr. Overduin's practice. Five-star patients praise her carpal tunnel releases, mole removals, and minor skin surgery as quick and well-healed, with staff described as respectful and thorough. A significant minority report serious concerns: surgical scissors left unsealed on trays, discriminatory treatment based on race or religion, poor follow-up after complications, last-minute scheduling, and aggressive office conduct when questioned. The practice handles hand surgery and reconstructive cases competently according to satisfied patients, but operational issues and documented incidents of discrimination and sanitation lapses dominate negative accounts. One patient detailed ongoing complications from trigger finger surgery met with minimal support, and multiple reviewers noted the aging facility lacks privacy and professional polish.

Limited review evidence: two five-star ratings over 8 years praise Dr. Bailey's empathy and a staff member named Guri, but concrete details about services or results are sparse.

Most reviewers praise Dr. Chitte's surgical skill, especially for hand trauma and breast reconstruction, noting his patience and careful listening. However, a persistent thread of complaints spans years: delayed or missing referrals to physio and family doctors, unreturned voicemails, and long in-office waits. Administrative friction appears to have worsened after a clinic transition.

Dr. Turley receives consistently strong praise for bedside manner and reconstructive hand surgery, with several patients reporting excellent healing from trauma and functional repairs. However, a vocal minority report poor cosmetic results, overly deep incisions for minor procedures, and significant office access issues. The clinic's automated phone system does not accept messages, and multiple patients describe arriving to find the office closed during posted hours or being turned away after surgeries were cancelled.

Not enough recent reviews yet to synthesise a reliable sentiment read for this business.

Three reviewers over a decade old consistently praise Dr. Callaghan for making them feel secure during breast augmentation, from initial consult through recovery. Surgery outcomes were strong, staff attentive throughout, and the surgeon personally invested in executing exactly what patients requested.

Dr. Levis delivers hand surgery with lasting pain relief: reviewers report straight fingers after Dupuytren contracture repair, no pain after carpal tunnel work, and full thumb function restored years later. Her team at St. Joseph's is described as compassionate and professional.

Dr. Zhang's surgical skill, especially in microsurgery and scar minimization, earns strong praise from patients satisfied with reconstruction outcomes. However, multiple reviewers report abrupt, dismissive, or condescending interactions during consultations and procedures, incomplete postop communication, and follow-up that sometimes fell short of promises.

Surgical outcomes and Dr. Platt's expertise draw consistent five-star praise. Yet a polarized rating split (48% five-star, 48% one-two-star) reflects deep frustration with front desk conduct. Patients report exceptional care during consultations and procedures, but encounter rude, dismissive receptionists, ignored voicemails, and refusal to send confirmation emails. Receptionist Evelyn receives individual praise when involved; other staff create barriers to booking and follow-up.

Both reviewers report excellent outcomes and attentive care. Evidence is limited to two five-star reviews, but they emphasize surgical skill, listening to patient preferences, and a supportive team.

One repeat client credits laser acne therapy with lasting confidence gains, praising technician Hailey C. for clear communication. Another reports expensive, ineffective spot removal and suspects bias against darker skin tones.

Not enough recent reviews yet to synthesise a reliable sentiment read for this business.

Five-star reviewers praise Dr. Lista's expertise and staff warmth, but negative reviews spanning years dominate: botched breast augmentations, infections left untreated, 45-minute to 90-minute waits without updates, and a pattern of dismissive behavior during consultations. Several patients report sagging, asymmetry, or uneven scarring months to years post-op, and costs escalate sharply from phone quotes ($14,000) to final bills ($26,555+).

Five-star patients credit Dr. Kim with skilled hand and wrist surgery that resolved chronic pain and restored function, though one complicated case involved a bone graft. However, half the reviews are one-star: patients report unresponsive office staff, weeks without contact after referrals, judgmental interactions during appointments, and dismissive treatment of concerns. One patient was charged a $50 no-show fee despite canceling by voicemail and was later denied treatment. The split sentiment suggests capable surgical work undermined by communication failures and poor office management.

Not enough recent reviews yet to synthesise a reliable sentiment read for this business.

Long-term patients report solid outcomes from breast reduction and carpal tunnel work, with one praising swift recovery after following post-op advice. A separate breast augmentation case involved complications and alleged dismissal of concerns, with the patient seeking a second opinion elsewhere.

Dr. Fiaz performs routine surgical procedures with skill and attentiveness, and the clinic's weekend availability draws gratitude. Office operations are inconsistent: some patients report five-minute waits and spa-like calm, while others describe hour-plus delays, no receptionist, and overcrowding with no courtesy calls.

Patients who get in report exceptional surgical results and compassionate care, but access is a real problem. Waits of 2+ years for consultations and scheduling mix-ups are common, and a few patients felt dismissed or deprioritized when needing follow-up support.

Dr. Heller has built a strong reputation for surgical skill and thorough work, with many patients crediting her with life-changing or life-saving care. However, recent experience suggests significant variability in patient interactions; one reviewer found her abrasive, dismissive, and impatient despite adequate surgical outcomes, a sharp contrast to the compassion others describe.

Review evidence is limited. The business states it is board-certified with over 23 years of surgical experience, hospital privileges at three major Ontario networks, and past leadership in plastic surgery. Services span body contouring, breast surgery, non-surgical cosmetics, and gender-affirming procedures across the GTA and beyond.

Not enough recent reviews yet to synthesise a reliable sentiment read for this business.

Not enough recent reviews yet to synthesise a reliable sentiment read for this business.

Not enough recent reviews yet to synthesise a reliable sentiment read for this business.

Not enough recent reviews yet to synthesise a reliable sentiment read for this business.