bunsenburner

Dr Bloxham: I understand the percentage of penetrated hairs and maturation rate is very low at the 3 to 4 month mark. It follows logically that most patients would therefore see little change at this point. However, what is the most growth you have seen at this phase? Or what is the most change a patient could possibly expect 3 to 4 months after the operation? For example: if a patient had a job interview or presentation approximately 100 days after the operation, is it possible they could look improved at this stage? Thank you. Good information too.

BaldPatient2: I agree with the other members. 6 months is very early. Most physicians suggest waiting 18 months before evaluating the results.

Well said, Bill. I concur completely.

Excellent transformation. Good work.

Dr Keller: Clear improvement. Nice work.

Nice result. Congratulations to both Scooter and Dr Arocha.

An excellent overview of the FUE field. Good work.

Garageland: Thank you for the reply.

I once sat on a hospital committee aimed at determining whether or not the institution should invest in a very expensive robotic assisted surgical device (used in male urological surgeries). The administrators in the group were very excited at the prospect of the robotic device. They believed it was a marketable assert for the hospital. They believed patients would view it as cutting edge technology, and elect to have their surgery done (it was used in several very common surgeries) at this hospital because of the robotic device. Several very prominent and respected surgeons also sat on the committee. They felt oppositely. They said the machine was more cumbersome than helpful in the operating theater, and they did not believe it offerered patients a better chance at a positive surgical outcome. Most stopped using it after a few attempts (despite demonstrating good skill with the machine) because they felt simple tools in their own hands were more effective. I see many parallels with this discussion. I first considered both FUE and FUT. The FUE clinics I found most consistent and impressive shared one common denominator: they used a manual FUE approach. I believe the best FUE results come from those who practice in this model. I do not believe a robotic device will prove itself superior to a trained hand. And I do not think a robotic device can elevate a clinic without this refined protocol to the level of those who have mastered the manual approach.

Garageland and Lorenzo: Thank you for commenting. It is good to hear variables are minimized and objective photographs are attempted during both the before and after sessions at Hasson & Wong. However, it would still be advantageous for "YouOnlyLiveOnce" to clarify his earlier statements. I still believe the severity of the pre-surgical images are the best gauge of the success of the matured post-surgical images. It is crucial that these not be exaggerated. It sounds like this is not the case, but it would still be helpful to hear from "YouOnly LiveOnce."

Garageland and Lorenzo: Thank you for commenting. It is good to hear variables are minimized and objective photographs are attempted during both the before and after sessions at Hasson & Wong. However, it would still be advantageous for "YouOnlyLiveOnce" to clarify his earlier statements. I still believe the severity of the pre-surgical images are the best gauge of the success of the matured post-surgical images. It is crucial that these not be exaggerated. It sounds like this is not the case, but it would still be helpful to hear from "YouOnly LiveOnce."

Garageland: Thank you for sharing this presentation. I understand this patient came to Dr Hasson for hairline lowering. Was the decision to shape the hairline flat like this Dr Hasson's design or was it requested by the patient? The shape appears different compared to similar cases from Hasson & Wong recently. Excellent example of a great FUT scar.

Very interesting effects used in the video. I don't believe I have seen a hair transplant video filmed like this before. Nice work on the patient too.

I would investigate Dr Konior further. His work is very refined and consistent. You may want to ask his objective opinion about FUE versus FUT for your case as well.

Decker: Congratulations. The results look great. And it seems you are experiencing early growth and have even more to go.

Great work. The case was clearly well planned and executed.

Interesting study. Beebz: Which doctor will perform which aspects of the procedure? MrMatt: I presume the funding is coming from a private organization. Possibly a professional medical organization or guild.

I don't find the slight differences in lighting concerning. Reproducing conditions is always difficult, even when all variables are minimized. What I do find concerning is the comment made by "YouOnlyLiveOnce." Can you elaborate on this further? You say Dr Hasson "messed up" your hair in the before pictures to make it look worse or thinner; you also believe this was not an accurate representation of how your hair looked on a daily basis. Were the photographs with the "before" hair "messed up" the only ones taken? Or did he take a series with the hair normal and then others with the hair messy? Were any of these images used for online marketing or patient recruitment purposes? The final results are usually judged by how the patient looked before the procedure. If the before images are being purposely exaggerated, it is hard to assess the final results.

KellyMac: I'm going the FUT route too. I researched both methods and decided FUT was the more consistent and reproducible procedure. I am going to have to delay my surgery briefly, unfortunately. I recently accepted a position on a project in a different state, so I will not have time for surgery and the recovery period for some time.

htreporter: I concur. A very satisfactory result and presentation. Well done doctor.

Dr Bloxham: Thank you for the explanation. The vascular theory sounds logical to me. The patient looks good in the video too. I hope to receive updates.

Dr. Lindsey, Very interesting video. I hope this patient does heal with a less conspicuous scar.

NewHare: I'm intrigued by the M-FUE technique too. I was considering both FUE and FUT when I first started researching a transplant. I decided FUT was the better technique for me, but the idea of FUT results without the linear scar is appealing. I actually consulted with Dr Feller and Dr Bloxham in December, and spoke with Dr Bloxham about the M-FUE technique extensively. We all three agreed that FUT was best suited for my case. However, I may look into M-FUE for smaller vertex work at a later date. You should try to speak with Dr Bloxham about M-FUE if you get the opportunity. He's obviously passionate about it, and it is a worthwhile experience just to listen to him explain the history, process, different manners in which it is performed, and where it is today. He showed me some images I had not seen online too. It was my understanding that they will post these presentations when all the data has been collected. As HTsoon mentioned above, both doctors also stressed that FUE after FUT procedures can be a good option as well. They did have some concerns about "thinning" the donor region with FUE and possibly making the FUT scar more visible. However, they do employ strategies to avoid this as much as possible.

Nice explanation, Dr Feller. Highly informative. I think the advice to have a local physician examine the area (if the patient is truly concerned) is wise too.

Bill's explanation is consistent with what I have heard from hair transplant doctors. Well said.