Difference between going FUE-->Strip as opposed to Strip-->FUE?

[Gubter]

If we put the money cost aside - does anyone have an estimation of how many, if any, more grafts one would be able to get from the donor by first maxing out on STRIP and then getting the rest via FUE as opposed to first maxing out on FUE and afterwards if neccessary going the STRIP route?

The advantage of this would be that someone who has only done FUE will still have the option of buzzing the hair if it turns out that one cannot get acceptable coverage in the end as the hair loss progresses. That leaves the option of backing out from HT:s.

Whilst the STRIP-->FUE route might be cheaper and quicker, it will not give you that option.

But people keep saying that FUE yield is not as good as strip yield, so how big of a difference do you experienced users reckon the different routes will have?

[chrisdav]

There is a lot of debate on this subject but I would read both sides of the arguement and make your own decision.

You can probably find numerous threads on this if you search the net.

This link is quite helpful from Shapiro with clear bullet points.

Follicular Unit Extraction (FUE)

[bonkerstonker]

To be fair all this is just common sense it's best to go strip fue or you can do what i did and have fue in a slightly lower part of the scalp then strip above it you can see roughly what i did from the picture of my scar that i posted for you in the thread you made about scar sizes.

[Sparky]

If you definitely want to go this route, then I would say strip first because the strip won't have had fue's taken from it before hand.

All depends on your NW level I suppose.

[s2thoudriver]

Just have FUE for now until cloning is readily available (should be within the next 12 months).

No need to have FUT any more really, so avoid the ear to ear scar. All the debate about FUT vs FUE is down to surgeons preferred method or experience in certain techniques.

People say that yield is better with FUT due to less follicles being damaged as with the FUE process, but the grafts still have to be extracted from the strip, so the yield is only ever as good as the skills of the person doing the dissection.

[Cant decide]

Cloning will not be readily available in 12 months (Not even close).

I wish that were true.....

[Mickey85]

Originally Posted by s2thoudriver

Just have FUE for now until cloning is readily available (should be within the next 12 months).

No need to have FUT any more really, so avoid the ear to ear scar. All the debate about FUT vs FUE is down to surgeons preferred method or experience in certain techniques.

People say that yield is better with FUT due to less follicles being damaged as with the FUE process, but the grafts still have to be extracted from the strip, so the yield is only ever as good as the skills of the person doing the dissection.

FUT grafts are dissected under powerful microscopes, decreasing the chance of transection(might not eliminate it though). The ARTAS system is meant to help with minimizing transection of grafts extracted via FUE.

I don't believe the yield of most clinic's FUE results are on par with the yield of the same clinic's FUT results. I say most because there are a select few whom I believe achieve close to 100% yield via FUE. Most do not though.

[s2thoudriver]

Hi Mickey85

I would gladly sacrifice 5-10 % yield loss for the sake of having a large scar across the back of my head. However, if the donor is limited, the surgeon has years of FUT experience and the patient don't mind living with the scar, then FUT is proven to get results.

The clinic i had my FUE done at told me they stopped doing FUT years ago and quickly became as good as FUT with the evolution of FUE tools and techniques.

[BadBeat]

Originally Posted by s2thoudriver

Just have FUE for now until cloning is readily available (should be within the next 12 months).

No need to have FUT any more really, so avoid the ear to ear scar. All the debate about FUT vs FUE is down to surgeons preferred method or experience in certain techniques.

People say that yield is better with FUT due to less follicles being damaged as with the FUE process, but the grafts still have to be extracted from the strip, so the yield is only ever as good as the skills of the person doing the dissection.

Why do you say this? Please provide concrete evidence.

[Mickey85]

Originally Posted by s2thoudriver

Hi Mickey85

I would gladly sacrifice 5-10 % yield loss for the sake of having a large scar across the back of my head. However, if the donor is limited, the surgeon has years of FUT experience and the patient don't mind living with the scar, then FUT is proven to get results.

The clinic i had my FUE done at told me they stopped doing FUT years ago and quickly became as good as FUT with the evolution of FUE tools and techniques.

5-10% yield loss via FUE would be very acceptable. Some cases I have seen have been 30% or more. These were from the same clinics that publicly stated their FUE yield was as good as their FUT yield too. My thoughts after seeing the results were "That is 2,000 grafts?!". Of course I have thought that same of some FUT work as well but to a lesser extent.

I'm not against FUE at all, I think Dr. Lorenzo's work is absolutely amazing and rivals some of the best FUT surgeons work. However most other clinic's FUE work does not match their own or other clinic's FUT work...

I don't really see a problem with going with exhausting the FUE route first and then if needed, resorting to strip last. I'm weary of FUE mega-sessions though(2,500 or above). I would rather multiple sessions of 1,500-2,000 grafts.