esrec

Cost is not factoring into my decision. Im thankful to have some flexibility there. I mean that in the most respectful way. I think I came into the process thinking the narrative was more clear--short hair, dont want scar, ok with 80% effectiveness--go FUE, dont mind scar care about hair quality/yield, still with FUT. Since updating my research over the past month, it seems as that story has become more blurred, if even now in a positive way.

Thank you again. Im trying to get out of my own way here as well. You mention 7-10 days recovery with FUT, but what about the stitches in the back of the head? I have an image of a wound and it creating some serious downtime. I plan on taking a month off from work. Im ok with temporary pain and waiting for what I hope to be a (relatively) minor incision to heal. I just worry about being less than 100% 2, 3 and 6 months out. I live a pretty active lifestyle.

Thank you, also good perspective. I don't wear my hair short, but do care about a scar, but not nearly as much as I care about quality of outcome. It sounds like, even within the debate, that at this stage, an expert FUE surgeon can produce long term results/benefit with FUE that can match FUT. The intangibles then take over once youve nailed the surgeon. I'll post pics now.

Thank you for providing such great detail and being so informative. I really do sincerely appreciate it. I believe you addressed everything fairly. Another question---when you speak of yield is that separate from the quality of the grafts? The fullness and completeness of the looks is primary when I speak of "results". Lastly, I've heard some feedback that scar severity is now overblown? Is the recovery that intense? Thanks

Thanks. How much of this is subjective? Knowing Bernstein pioneered very early on and continues to, and Harris recently received a top surgeon award in created the SAFE method, I'm curious how "2nd tier" these surgeons could be. I understand price factors for many, but for outcomes purposes, I'd like to exclude this in my decision.

Thank you. I dont wear my hair short now, but of course I cant predict the future. The scar itself is less concerning than changes in scalp elasticity or numbess that I've heard of but dont necessarily worry about. Trying not to be an alarmist, but still factor. Perhaps im late on the scene--but the narrative seems to have changed in a positive way. 3 years ago I heard less debate on FUE vs FUT yield and quality which made the debate a little easier if outcome weighed most heavily. Am I fair in this trend being more recent? Its certainly complicated my decision.

@Dr Blake: Are you familiar with this ISHRS study? Didnt Dr. Harris himself recently publish something on the topic that was subsequently pulled from the forum? Wondering if this conflicts with your findings at all? I want the best possible outcome for my hair. If I can achieve equivalent results from the two procedures (from the right surgeon) and avoid a scar in process I would opt there. If results with FUT are still more predictable and consistent even in a top surgeons hands, I wouldnt want to sacrifice results for a small scar. It sounds as if there's still some heavy debate on yield and quality differences (ie if they still remain) and surgeon skill is maybe the biggest factor, and can (maybe) offset most of these differences.

I've been speaking with Dr. Bernstein In NY and Dr. Harris in Colorado. I have some definite frontal loss, as I use courve and toppik to mask it daily. I know that both have a great reputation and are pioneers in the space, but have differing opinions on the outcome. Dr. Harris feels strongly he can produce equivalency in all aspects (quality, yield, long term result) with FUE, via SAFE and standard FUE method, where as Dr. Bernstein remains a bigger proponent of FUT from a results perspective.

Got it. So the difference between grafts harvested between procedures is less consequential now than before? And are you saying with a session so small it would be more optimal (cost, etc aside) to opt for FUE now and save FUT for a larger session one down the road?

I am scheduled for 1800 grafts, I've come to understand that FUT yields more grafts (traditionally) but for anything under 3,000 FUE should produce a similar outcome. Any other thoughts / feedback here?

I'm currently weighing FUT vs FUE from two of the top surgeons in the world. One feels he can produce equivalent yield and results with FUE, the other maintains FUT remains the better option. How do you reconcile? Not sure, go with your instincts.

Sure. But I think you can appreciate what I'm driving at....which is deciphering science from skill. If FUE expertise can produce a truly equivalent yield outcome in the right hands vs inevitable limitations rooted in process differences. At this stage we can mostly agree both will produce solid outcomes.

That's the challenge... so much of the narrative factors all variables, above results. I understand this to a degree, as we must factor variables such as cost and lifestyle and hair length when making a recommendation to a patient. But, have these factors. blurred arguably the most important variable in any surgical procedure--results Would I like to avoid a scar? Of course, but not if a few extra wks of recovery yields an inferior outcome. Is cost factoring into my decision? No. We are in a vacuum---is FUT really the safer more conservative bet in 2015, or is that simply contingent on the surgeons skills and not science? These are fundamentally different things.

All things being equal---assume cost non-issue and would like to avoid scar but only if outcomes are equal. I feel like the narrative focuses on things other than outcome, when it should start there.

Are we at a point where FUE can yield just as strong results as FUT but doctor comfort and experience level may sway the recommendation more than science does OR Is FUT still the gold standard when outcome is the highest priority?

As a newer member I'm a bit surprised and disappointed by the tone here. It's a little sad to see such petty back and forth between physicians.

I think controversial topics in particular should be shared. Difference of opinion should not prevent valuable knowledge sharing. I am currently considering working with Dr. Harris or a well known NY surgeon. One of which is recommending SAFE because he can achieve equivalent RESULTS, while the other continues to challenge that premise. How can we resolve such debate if the doctors opinions, if even opposing, are not shared in a constructive manner? Ego should not override information.

I'm struggling to understand how I can speak with 4 doctors, two of which maintain that FUT remains the gold standard for quality of grafts and overall long term yield, while other other two maintain this is no longer the case, and that improvements in technology and experience have all but eliminated such differences. All 4 are indisputable leaders in the field. Are the lines between fact and philosophy really so blurry on this topic? To be clear, results are all that matter in my decision.

Disclaimer: Have done a good bit of research, but my first post here. I am in the process of narrowing down surgeons and finalizing which method I will use and was looking for feedback not just between FUT / FUE differences but the SAFE method specifically. I'm a mid-30's NY-based male projected for 1800 grafts and my top priority is long term aesthetic outcome. Quicker recovery and lack of scarring would be nice, but not at the expense of better yield and available supply for future procedures if needed. Quality of hairline #1 priority. Has anyone chosen the SAFE FUE method over FUT? Why or why not? I've received some feedback that this method compensates for the typical shortcomings of FUE from a yield standpoint, and that only lack of expertise with this method (and cost) would be a reason to choose another method, including FUT. To further complicate, this feedback has been challenged by another physician I've been speaking with. Both are pioneers in the field. No perfect answers here, just curious what you've heard about this newer method and if feedback and / or results have been realized. Thanks