JayLDD

https://www.hairrestorationnetwork.com/profile/31703-ht0416/content/ He refuses to post pre-op photos and virtually no one on the thread thought this was a failed result, because it isn't. He said this 6 months ago: "Sorry about the lack of activity from my side. Since i wrote my last post 6 months ago (16 months post op) i thought that was my final result. Since then i can honestly say texture of hair has got a lot better. I have stopped using Alpecin shampoo as i think that was one of the main reasons i was disliking my new hair due to it making hair look different colour. Before my transplant i never used!!! I stopped taking fin at 1 year then resumed it for 1 month at 15 months. Both occasions I had many side of effects. Stopped taking since i do see odd hair in sink and shower in morning. Overall I would say i am alot happier with my hair transplant from dr erdogan!!!! Rating 7/10 (with a little touch up to hairline would improve rating to a solid 10) Touch up would let me expose hairline." He also said this about it being too dense "at the moment as soon as i expose hairline where it is so dense at 70cm2 it looks as if im wearing something on my head. " And now says this " also the density was very poor standard 3000 grafts (70cm2) more like 30cm2"

I agree that any good surgeon should be doing this. Especially for a patient like OP who had a very poor and thinning donor also.

I was which I'm sure helps. If you're not on finasteride you can hardly attribute it to shockloss, on top of that if your head is shaved for a procedure of course its going to look thinner than when its at regular length. Without finasteride more hair that isn't DHT resistant will be lost and that's not in doubt, so its not surprising that the recipient hairs didn't come back.

The original point you made was inaccurate, this patient did not suffer shock loss cosmetically important shockloss issues. You're trying to sound helpful or make yourself sound smart by stating something which in this case clearly isn't relevant. I'll put the two photos up to compare, you're clearly talking out of your ass. Blaming doctors for this and hiding its possibility like you did (like in this case where it hasn't even occurred) is also dishonest. It's called the ugly duckling phase because there's a big red mark in the shape of a hairline left and no growth, it has absolutely nothing to do with shockloss. I've had multiple surgeries before including those with significant implanting into areas of existing hair and haven't experienced anything remotely resembling shockloss, so evidently it doesn't happen to "everyone".

Blatantly and 100% wrong, this patient did not have any issues in the slightest with recipient shockloss and its very obvious from the pre-op photos. People overly worry about recipient shockloss because of ignorant posts like this mentioning it when there's zero sign of it occurring. For the 10 or so less hairs on the entire scalp less than to begin with, there's a 99% chance that you can attribute it to progressive hairloss, automatically assuming shockloss is braindead. Native recipient density is virtually the same the only difference between a longer length in the pre-ops.

4.5 months. Still new sprouts every day

Imo HLC at this link https://www.hairtransplantcenter-turkey.com/hair-transplant-training/ do by far the best work from these options, among the worlds best in general also for FUE. I think I saw Dr. Lupanzula in Belgium offered an extended internship or something along those lines also. There are very few FUE surgeons globally who do good work or that I would have a procedure from even among those who have dedicated their lives to it, very much suspect you'd be looking at at least 6-12 months to provide a competitive service, on top of the fact that hair transplants are ultimately a team effort and finding competent staff and technicians is an extreme difficulty on top of just knowing how to perform the procedure.

For 99% of people virtually all the transplanted hair is MEANT to fall out from around 2-4 weeks. Did your doctor tell you absolutely nothing? Of course it doesn't look dense at 19 days, the transplanted area has fallen out and that is what is supposed to happen. It doesn't start to grow until the 3-5 month mark, with the full result at roughly 12 months, possibly a little less possibly a little more. Sit back and relax because long time before you know whether it was a success or not.

Pull the hair at the hairline back with your hand and take a close up shot, it's impossible to see what's going on even in that front on photo. I agree it doesn't look like a serious issue however. Shock loss is not a risk unless you're implanting into areas of existing hair, I haven't seen a single example of it anywhere and Dr. Feller for one has said the same in a video.

This guy does a great week by week documentation. Agree with Melvin that thinking about and recording it on a week by week basis likely to just cause stress. Personally find it hard not to do the same however. As Melvin said also worth keeping expectations very low until at least the 4th month mark for the beginnings of growth.

I think its fair to say if you had surgery in Toronto and it wasn't with Hasson/Wong then you didn't do enough research. Take it from someone who has looked broadly at all the major forums and organisations for top surgeons, particularly if you're in Toronto 99.99% of experts on the matter and and knowledgeable members of transplant related forums are going to be screaming to choose HnW in that circumstance. A lot of mediocre clinics have some good results, the question is how consistently they occur. Don't take it personally, if you think I'm being harsh, I would seriously recommend you raise this question of who to consult in Canada, particularly Toronto on this and other transplant related forums + with various knowledgeable people on the subject, I guarantee the same will be said as what I'm telling you. Not shilling for the clinic either, some other options worth looking into being Rahal (also Canada) , Konior, Freitas, and Baubac for example.

100% what Pelo said. No one who has 10-15% growth like this at 7.5 months ends up with even a remotely acceptable results. Blows my mind you presumably live in Canada and opted for a clinic other than Hasson/Wong. Surgery with a lack of basic research is never a good idea. The "thicker" side barely looks like 15% growth either by the way. You would certainly be fair to expect more from modern hair transplants. I'd recommend consulting Rahal and Hasson/Wong right now if you live in Canada. You'd be a world first if this turned into an acceptable result and are very likely to need repair work down the track so ought to start researching.

Well done on being that civil in the face of those "arguments" lmfao.

There are a large number across here and Realself who say he does not give touchups to poor results who have had that experience, Legend also said in this thread he asked one of their consultants and they confirmed this. There wasn't just one patient here (the one with the deleted thread you're referring to) who claimed a bad result either. Obviously I'm looking at a limited number of patient posted Diep cases because there aren't a huge number lately, but it seems to be common that they have been done by 1mm punches and in which scarring is more of an issue than usual, and even 0.9mm is larger than average. Yes scarring is patient dependent but when there are people who have visible scarring under the 2000 graft mark at above a number 2 length I think that's worth considering. "Sometimes unhappy patient's don't want a touch up they want a refund, which is understandable, but to make the doctor look worse they will say he offered nothing, believe me this happens I've seen it happen myself." I agree with this and have seen it too, but I've specifically seen a variety of people saying that they were still made to pay full or close to full amount for a touchup procedure. I'm not saying he's a bad surgeon or even that he isn't one of the best in the US for recipient results, but he does use larger punch sizes than average among top surgeons and he clearly doesn't offer touchups for poor results like most surgeons represented on this website do. It's backed up by a large number of sources including Legend directly asking which makes it clear. It's a variety of patients on a variety of websites making the claims, not just me.

I'm guessing about a 30% increase in sprouts after the 6 month mark up to 12. Mainly textural and thickening changes though which were drastic, especially up to 8 months. The hair was between 50-60 microns.

Two issues I think should be noted about Diep. Firstly he uses punch sizes with an area almost double that of 90% of top FUE surgeons and occasionally the scarring is very visible even at low graft numbers, realistically a 1mm punch is 100% going to damage surrounding hairs in the donor also.The phenomenon demonstrated in this pic from a Bisanga report Secondly from what I've read he doesn't offer any kind of compensation for a poor result, which the vast majority of other surgeons do, even if its just a touch-up or a partial refund. I don't know that for sure but its what from multiple patients, certainly in every case I've read of complaints there didn't seem to be any form of resolution from the clinic. In recent times he seems to be very consistent and certainly among the best in North America in terms of recipient results for FUE, but I think patients should be aware of those points before they choose him.

Week after 4 months I've been buzzing it down as of yet just because it looked odd with the uneven growth. Going to let it grow from now. Areas closer to the temples seem to be growing much faster than the middle. Some of the hairs I can see in the mirror seem to be too fine to come up on the camera yet.

You're a NW4 without a doubt, not a NW2A. Pretty close to a NW5 also. I would find a surgeon who was willing to approach coverage across the majority of the scalp. Considering you're not on finasteride you will lose more hair than 1800 grafts will give you in a few years. For FUE I would only consider a megasession approach of someone like Erdogan, although definitely worth considering FUT with clinics skilled at large megassessions like Hattingen and Hasson + Wong. FUE might not be a great idea considering the miniaturisation in the donor which is also quite visible. Imo 1800 grafts would be a waste of time and risk though. Your fear of going through multiple procedures and in the longer term not coming out much better than you are now is definitely justified unless you find surgeons skilled at high graft counts and broad coverage on high norwoods.

The redness isn't too worrying, for myself it took at least a year for it to stop being noticeable and even then there was a small degree left. Seems to be common among others also, but if the density is stronger it is less of an issue and goes unseen.

"Lorenzo and Freitas continue to extract, they had to train technicians due to the high demand for operations, and however their quality remains in spite of it." Well which is it, do they continue to extract (I'll give you a hint, they don't) or do they use techs? Blatant double standards, you can't have it both ways. I agree their quality remains in spite of techs, but you can't attack Erdogan for using them and that he doesn't have enough involvement in the procedure despite Lorenzo and Freitas not doing extractions themselves either, which you call fine supposedly. Another inaccuracy to mention is that Couto doesn't do "most" of the operation, he does all of it.

Its fine to have a preference for doctors, but this comment is based on a lie. Freitas does not extract the grafts, techs do across multiple patients per day. Lorenzo does not extract the grafts, techs do, techs do across multiple patients per day. Do these surgeons 'not even operate" in their clinics or are there different standards for Turkish surgeons vs Spanish surgeons? When you say he doesn't operate his clinic and then proceed to list clinics which similarly don't have the surgeon perform the extractions, its hard to take you seriously. Saying that Erdogan doesn't intervene in the operation is defamatory quite frankly. Not that your picks aren't fantastic surgeons though, in terms of artistry I don't think any are at the level of Freitas. Its also a question of what the patient is looking for, if you are after a large FUE megassession then there are none better or at the level of Erdogan period. If you want a small hairline refinement Konior or Keser and their use of stick and place is likely a good option, for midsized sessions someone like Freitas or Baubac. To OPs point, there's never going to be consensus because different people have different requirements and desires for what they want in a procedure as well as contrasting aesthetic tastes. I do feel its fair to say many of the highly rated Americans are in general very overrated in their FUE though.

For 2600 grafts across the whole scalp and 6 months in this is probably what you can expect. You don't need an extra 1200 to achieve full coverage without needing to use toppik, you need an extra 5000, and even then there will be thin areas.

Mainly changes in texture in that they became less kinky and curly. Very minor increase in density in the hairline also. Luckily I had zero shock loss, which I'm quite impressed with considering I had over 2000 grafts in the second procedure into areas with preexisting hair.

I know what you mean in terms of a slight lack of density in the frontline, but you're 8 months in so likely to get some further improvement. Overall its a very good result, no one gets absolute perfection in a single procedure but you're not far off. By 12 months wouldn't be surprised if its at that point to your liking, not it would be an extremely small touchup to get there.

I think anyone looking at the discussion would have a different view of who is being emotional and uncivil here but I'm happy not to respond to you.