Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by PupDaddy

  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. Ingenious! Looks to combine the benefits of forceps placement into custom blade/needle recipient sites with the benefits of pen implanters, without the shortcomings of either method.
  10. dude85, Precisely as Spanker just said: DO NO RETURN TO THAT DOCTOR. He inexplicably populated your temples and frontal hairline with 2 and 3-hair grafts, which is a huge no-no. Go see a top hairline doc (e.g., Dr. Konior, Dr. Gabel, Dr. Diep, Dr. Cooley, Dr. Shapiro, etc.) to assess your situation. Like Spanker said, there are several possible approaches to fixing this: (a) camouflaging the pluggy work by transplanting lots of newly-exctracted 1-hair grafts in front of, and between the 2 and 3-hair grafts, (b) punching out some or all of the 2 and 3-hair grafts and replacing them eith
  11. One more question, if you don't mind: What size punch(es) were used by the ARTAS for this case?
  12. This is probably the best outcome I've seen for a patient where the ARTAS was used. Very nice! Question for Dr. Alexander or for Spex: Was the ARTAS used just to punch around the grafts, to punch and extract them, or to punch and extract the grafts and to make the recipient sites? Something else? In other words, what function(s) did the ARTAS perform in this patient's case and what function(s) did the surgeon and techs perform? Thanks!
  13. harry, The page you mentioned on Dr. Konior's site explains that the stick-and-place technique means making a slit and then immediately filling that slit with a graft vs. pre-making lots of slits and then filling them with grafts. My understanding is that Dr. Konior uses custom cut blades to make recipient slits, whether he is doing the stick-and-place technique or is making pre-made slits. The difference, as I understand it, is that stick-and-place allows for using smaller blades to make smaller recipient slits because immediate placement of a graft into the slit prevents the slit/site fr
  14. I don't think people are appreciating just how good this is. Only 1,600 grafts in the frontal third, undetectable as a transplant, utterly natural hairline that provides excellent facial framing, and even with the patient having applied a heavy dose of mouse or gel to his hair, the transplanted area appears to match the density of the patient's surrounding native hair. Beautiful work. Dr. K: What tool(s) did you use for the extractions?
  15. I stopped reading this poster's critique of Dr. Wesley right after he criticized him for not using a Neograft machine.
  16. Congrats, jkm3! I missed your first thread. Glad I spotted this one. I really like the hairline design, layout, and execution that Dr. Diep did for you this go around. Just the right amount of irregularity, IMO. Should turn out great. The first picture of your collection (the one taken from below looking up at your hairline) is illuminating, especially comparing it to the 1-year post op photos that were taken with flash and before you discontinued Minoxidil. I can see why you would want additional density. Happy growing!
  17. I don't read that sentence of Ezel's critique as saying that Dr. Feriduni didn't make all the graft recipient incisions. (Ezel?) I would be surprised to learn otherwise, especially considering that according to Dr. Feriduni's profile he uses custom cut blades for making graft recipient incisions. As I said, to my knowledge, Dr. Doganay is the only HRN-recommended physician found to have been delegating recipient site incision-making to nurses or technicians (non-physicians).
  18. The problem is that you are conflating "implanting" with "incision-making." They are distinct tasks with distinct meanings, depending on the tool used to make the recipient incisions. EVERY HT PHYSICIAN RECOMMENDED BY THIS SITE MAKES EACH AND EVERY GRAFT RECIPIENT INCISION HIMSELF OR HERSELF. THEY MAKE 100% OF THESE INCISIONS, 100% OF THE TIME -- except, we recently learned, for Dr. Doganay, who allows technicians or nurses to make a third or more of the recipient incisions. One of three tools is used to cut graft recipient incisions for hair transplantation: custom cut blades, needle
  19. There is nothing "subjective" about Dr. Doganay's admission, posted here through his own online representative, that for paleo's case Dr. Doganay delegated more than a third of the recipient area incision-making to one of his techs. The doctor's rep confirmed that Dr. Doganay only made 65% of the recipient area incisions, leaving the rest to a non-physician technician or nurse. That point is an established, objective fact. Here is another objective fact: No coalition or recommended physician allows non-physicians to cut graft recipient incisions in the patient's scalp. Nor should they ever
  • Create New...