Jump to content

PupDaddy

Members
  • Content Count

    609
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

13 Good

About PupDaddy

  • Rank
    Senior Member

Basic Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Country
    United States
  • State
    AR

Hair Loss Overview

  • Norwood Level if Known
    Norwood IV A

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Just as clarifying info to Zizou88's post, my understanding is that Dr. Konior is assisted in PG (placing grafts) by (at least) his lead technician. In other words, he is "involved" in that stage of the FUE procedure as well but his technician(s) also place(s) grafts in the recipient sites (which he makes). At least that is my understanding.
  2. Looks to me like different technicians implanted the left and right sides of your hairline and/or that the quality of the grafts differed as between the two sides. I think you could use a small session touchup of the left side of your frontal hairline. Otherwise, your transplant looks great.
  3. Gasthoerer, I dont' contend that one type of Category A tool is superior to another type of Category A tool (I wouldn't know), or that Category B tools are "superior" to Category A tools or vice versa. Category A tools and Category B tools have different purposes--apples and oranges. I'm only saying that I favor the use of Category B tools for insertion of grafts into premade recipient sites over forceps-only insertion of grafts into premade recipient sites. If Dr. De Frietas uses true implanter pens for his hairline work that could help explain why he isn't on my personal "tops" li
  4. We should make a distinction between (a) implanter tools that both cut the recipient site and implant the graft into that site, versus (b) implanter tools for inserting grafts into recipient sites that have already been made using a custom cut blade or needle. The critical distinction is that Category A tools are used by the surgeon (or technician at some clinics) to simultaneously make a recipient incision and plunge a graft into it, whereas Category B tools are used by technicians only to seat grants into recipient sites that the surgeon has already made. Category A tools include
  5. Thank you for that clarification, Dr. Yaman. We are seeing real progress in FUE protocol and cosmetic results with the advent of newer, well thought-out motorized systems with better control and better designed punches, as well as graft embedding tools such as yours and Dr. Erdogan's. Keep up the good work!
  6. Dr. Yaman, Am I correct that your new implanter device is for seating/embedding FUE grafts into PRE-MADE recipient site incisions? In other words, whereas traditional implanter pens (Choi, Lions, etc.) are designed both to cut a recipient incision and implant a graft into that incision, your tool is used only for the second part of the process, i.e. to seat/implant a graft in a recipient site that the surgeon has already made using a custom cut blade or needle? In that sense, this tool is used similarly to Dr. Erdogan's KEEP embedder, for example, yes? It is a tool used by the tranpl
  7. Trix, I think you might be asking why some surgeons DRAW hairlines with squiggles whereas others do not. It seems just to be a matter of personal preference. Just because a particular surgeon doesn't DRAW squiggles (micro and macro irregularities) along the planned hairline doesn't mean that the surgeon won't MAKE them when he makes the graft incisions. Some ht surgeons choose to pre-draw the irregularities and more or less follow them, some don't, choosing to do things a bit more free-style/free-hand. That said, some ht surgeons generally seem to favor a lesser DEGREE of irregulari
  8. I recall Dr. Konior posting a case here of a patient who wanted just a new hairline transplanted in front of his hair system. I don't recall whether any work was needed or done to the patient's temples or temple points, though.
  9. I don't know which other of Dr. Rahal's patients you're comparing yourself to just 4.5 months post op, but it looks to me that things are going great and you should have a tremendous cosmetic improvement (you already have) when all is said and done. Maybe check back with us with new photos at nine to ten months post op? And then 1 year post op? My guess is that compared to your pre op, your cosmetic situation will be strikingly better by then. Your hair characteristics appear good for ht (thick caliber, somewhat course, with wave), and already you've had significant growth. You went with a
  10. For only five months on, you're looking great! Dr. Alexander designed a beautiful hairline for you. Please update us as things progress. Thanks for sharing your experience.
  11. My thanks to Dr. Bhatti for addressing my questions about his "speed" approach to FUE extraction. Interestingly, after 139 pages (!!) of discussion, Drs. Feller and Bhatti seem not to be all that far apart in their opinions about FUT vs. FUE. Both have stated that FUT remains the gold standard for consistently high yield in hair restoration. Both have stated that FUE yield is more variable than FUT yield. Both have stated that FUT yield generally is better than FUE yield. And both have noted the negative effect of fibrosis on FUE yield in subsequent sessions. Where these two docs diffe
×
×
  • Create New...