BUSA

yea nice work considering the balding area is so vast with limited donor. looks like he has plenty of beard donor. is he considering BHT? seems like another 1500 grafts wud serve him well.

talk about tight grafts placement with no shock loss. impressive.

no one is attacking you. if u wanna come up here and give poor advice thats on you but don't expect ppl to go along with it.

yes a HAIRLINE is what everyone sees and a high hairline doesn't make anyone look youthful which is the point of a HT. if they don't have donor hair then yes they are restricted to how low their hairline will be.

the patient has plenty of donor hair so what makes you think he won't have donor hair to address any future loss? do you perform BHT? thats adds another 3000-5000 grafts on average and some plenty more. 2000 grafts from the beard alone for most ppl if other body hair isn't present.

no one has plenty of donor hair if balding in their 20's? what an ignorant statement. plenty of ppl simply start losing their hair early but that doesn't mean they don't have donor hair to address their hairloss when they get older.

there has been plenty of patients in their 40. 50 and even 60's that have never had a HT yet started losing their hair when they were in their 20 yet have plenty of donor hair to utilize.

I started losing my hair at 21 and I'm now 43. my hairless stabilized 5 years ago and I have over 6000 grafts available to use so stop giving out poor advice!

again, started losing hair at 21. I'm a NW5. but according to you its impossible for me to have adequate donor supply cause I started losing hair in my 20's....:rolleyes: and that doesn't include the 10,000+ body hairs I have.

Well I guess I will have to step out of this after this post.

I was warned not to post as a doctor due to this danger of being exposed to attacks by an unknown person while I am known.

Why are you so angry? In the end it is just an opinion, never mind I am a doctor.

Why should a high hairline defeat the purpose of a hair transplant?

I think one of the worst results to end up with in hair restoration is a low hairline at middle-age and no donor to cover the balding area behind it.

Practically no one has plenty of donor hair if they have started balding in their early twenties.

I will not go into a FUT vs. FUE discussion at this level, but just to let you know, I do 80% FUE and 20%FUT due to patient preference.

Bosley? lol thats like wanting to build a car to compete in NHRA drag racing and going to Pep Boys to have them build it....:rolleyes:

head to Europe if u want it done right for a reasonable price. u can get it done right here in the good ole US of A but ull get ripped off.

but even if I had money to burn id still be heading Europe.

Hi there.

If you have decided upon a hair transplant, my recommendation is to do 2500 grafts to the front, with a high hairline design (almost unchanged hairline level), preferably FUT to keep more grafts for the future.

Regards.

let me guess.... you perform FUT not FUE right? lol what makes u think going FUT will result in more grafts for the future? FUE takes what you need and thats it. unlike FUT it does NOT damage surrounding grafts when carving a huge chunk of flesh from the scalp.

looks ok

how many grafts did erdogan recommend vs. the others?

Hi mate , there was very little between the two Dr's result wise.

I went with Doganay as i felt Erdogan wanted to use too many grafts , Doganays quote was in line with quotes from Lorenzo and Bisanga so i opted for him . I have to say the option of non shaven via the choi was a big pull.

 

David T.T.P ....cheers mate , will be posting this to help others as well as myself.

if u look at the majority of results posted these days on this forum they are FUE not FUT. there are still millions of ppl that think Bosely is the best HT center in the world. ignorance is still alive and kicking in the HT world cause no FUE doctors are advertising.

strip is not the gold standard. in fact, as more and more time goes by strip will be for very unique cases only. less and less ppl are turning to strip.

a low yield from any of the top 10 FUE doctors these days just does not exist unless the patient has unknown medical issues being either the "X" factor or an undisclosed condition. but that wud be true for FUE or FUT.

the top 10 FUT doctors can and do still have patients that are left with a bad scar and it has nothing to do with surgeon skill.

so the risk of poor yield from top FUE doctors is essentially zero

Hard to say for sure, but certainly have noticed elite FUE docs themselves talking about having lower yields with FUE, although the percentages have varied pretty widely, and the only formalized clinical trials were posted earlier in this thread.

 

Strip is still the gold standard. Maybe when piloscopy becomes widespread, FUE will rival FUT, but I don't think its quite there yet.

 

Let's think about risk/benefit:

 

After reviewing and cataloguing 2100 cases, 600 patient submitted, from the 5 major forums from 'elite' surgeons (yes I literally have data files on my computer with 50-150 cases per surgeon, stratified by graft count and technique), I've realized the chance of getting a wide donor scar are a fraction of the chance of getting low yield from an FUE surgery. The chance of a moderate, as opposed to excellent yield, from FUE is significant. I have seen this significantly less often with FUT.

 

Granted, the scars were not observed long term, and I am judging yield by pictures only, so what are these observations really worth? Pictures lie, especially pictures of hair, so not much.

 

The surgeons themselves know somewhat better, although of course they are not blinded to their own results.

 

Also, there are a host of other variables that I have previously discussed in this thread that were not taken into account. Still, I think we should keep some idea of the numbers in mind.

 

So, which is a worse outcome to deal with? Bad yield or bad scar?

 

That depends on how bad the scar, and how bad the yield.

 

One thing is for sure: neither risk is zero, and both are lower than they used to be, at least from viewing cases over the last decade. Saying anything beyond that is meaningless without double blinded clinical trials.

 

Being too strict about picking a "corner" is really pointless, and speaks more about a poster's predetermined biases than the surgeries themselves.

 

Some tangential things I've come across are concerning, although not really well substantiated. More than once I've heard and read about FUE docs getting FUT surgery for themselves, or recommending it to their family.

 

Strange. Why wouldn't you have faith in your own surgery? I think a large part of it has to do with the vector of the extraction being essentially blind. High frequency ultrasound will certainly help with this (see attached image).

 

Incidentally, I wish SK told us who he was talking when he mentioned these FUE surgeons on BT, but of course that would have hurt their business.

 

The central fallacy behind the graph that started this thread is that the shift in interest and market share to FUE is primarily consumer driven. Does this mean the procedure is better?

 

No, it means it is more marketable.

 

I eagerly await piloscopy. But short of that, I'm not that impressed by claims of FUE yields being equal to those of FUT, *even* those of Lorenzo. Hopefully the clinical trials will be completed soon, and this debate will become antiquated.

side effects. I'm sure it wud hav worked great to stop my hairless but strong side effects outweighed any benefit

why doganay over erdogan? both are great imo and u can't go wrong with either just wondering why u chose him? was it price or results or both?

most all of ur top FUE doctors these days have great yield. id say the top 15 FUE doctors have very similar yield success.

as far as FUT being able to utilize more grafts I think thats debatable these days.

well put. agree 100%. fin didn't work for me. but, it works for millions of others. there is no reason to think that a medication will suddenly stop working after a few years. unless, its some sort of virus ur treating and the virus is now adapting.

hair shafts are not viruses therefore if a medication is stoping or blocking somthn that will cause ur hair to die then it will do the same as long as you take it.

I've uploaded a 10 year study for Fin, and a 4 year study for Dut.

GSK Clinical Study Register - Study 113797

 

 

Medications do not suddenly stop working after a few years, that's ridiculous. Regarding the rest of your post, a lot of the best clinics have posted many good results with diffuse thinners.

maybe u shud take a long walk off a short pier.......

a HT can look ridiculous too if done by someone who doesn't know wat they r doin? SMP is no different.

I find SMP's look ridiculous, might as well colour your head with a black marker.

 

Is it really that bad to do even if I Stabalize the loss? I plan to add dutasteride to my regime in the next couple weeks to see if it will further help.

 

essentially I'm saying i've definitely slowed the loss a lot already, is it really that bad of an idea to get an HT now? I'd rather have some hair then zero hair down the line.

wow! dude looks 10 years younger. amazing results. chit, id be happy to have his before hair lol.

check this guy out. almost in the same boat as you as far as hair loss. worked fine for him. yea not apples to apples but certainly not apples to watermelons...

http://www.hairrestorationnetwork.com/eve/176881-dr-hakan-doganay-1842-grafts-7-months-ll-update-choi-implanter-pen-fue.html

yea excellent placement and design. totally natural. by 12 months it shud look great.

bhatti just doesn't get it wen it comes to hairlines. I've given up on any hope that he will improve.

can't see much. take some better photos

were still 10 years out before thats a real option. and prob 20-25 yrs here in the states with the way the FDA drags their feet.

you and ur conspiracy theories about marketing tactics and photographic tricks....:rolleyes: give it a rest wud ya. smh

The is not the correct section of the forum to start this thread. I think this should be under "Hair Transplant Experiences and Surgeon Reviews" or somewhere else.

 

You should give us some starting points. Anyway, HD videos published by clinics should be considered totally advertorial and you can not trust their honesty much. I believe the honesty of the surgeons who never posts their videos much more (who don't advertise themselves). Much better to see the results from the real patients as long as they are real patients indeed. An exception to this would be, pictures from the clinics who share their patient's progress honestly, and show the pictures without using any photographic tricks.

dp....

a 1000 grafts won't make a dent in most pp.'s donor zone. and yes a 1000 or maybe 1500 grafts wud make a huge difference in ur appearance. top HT doctors have great yield.

unless ur in ur 40's where ur hairless has pretty much stabilized ull always lose more hair as u age if ur in ur mid 20's now. so what? go back for more as u grow older.

thats the beauty of FUE vs. FUT is that u can have multiple surgeries without risking the linear scar getting worse and having to deal with the laxity of ur scalp.

u can't continue to go in there and carve huge chunks of flesh from ur scalp without it eventually causing the skin to stretch leaving u with a poorly healed scar requiring FUE to repair it. FUE doesn't come with those issues so a young guy can surely can have a HT if opting for FUE. I wud not recommend FUT at ur age tho.

1000-1500 grafts from another HT doctor won't look the same as it is in the hands of a top HT doctor who's yield is far better.

prob wudnt need more then a 1000 grafts. can't go wrong with either doganay or erdogan but if it was only a 1000 grafts I wud lean towards erodgan but really its a toss up imo. a difference of $2540 for doganay vs. $3040 for erdogan.

u shud post up a few more pics of ur donor area. doesn't really look thin but not incredibly dense either but if u hav family members that hav lost most of their hair u will lose more but if ur donor area is sufficient then transplant more as u need them. ull get at least a 1000 grafts from ur beard as well.

if u can tolerate the medicines without sexual side effects I wud surely get on some. remember with rogain what u have stopped from falling out will fall out if u don't continue using. it halts the loss for some but rarely grows for any. some do but its rare. the effects of rogain will be reversed if u stop using it. but then again it might not have done chit for you in the first place.

go to Europe. cheaper and better.