GraftChaser

Replicel should know by now there is more scepticism than hope about their work.

Thanks anyway Sean for your post. Keeps the thread alive and updated.

17 hours ago, JeanLDD said:

 

 

The coverage value system used by ASMED and Lorenzo is the best mechanism I've seen for that calculation at this point. This vid on recent improvements to it and use of a new robot for recording and calculating these is quite interesting. Looks like it would be extremely effective at counting exact growth rates which will be helpful too.

 

 

Obviously graft numbers also dependent on the type of hairline and area to be covered and most top surgeons have differing approaches to this so it will never be exact from surgeon to surgeon. I suspect the reason behind the different graft numbers you're getting ultimately relates to the total area they want to cover. Without in person consults examining your hair and asking  exactly what you want to achieve  its impossible to get these numbers anywhere close to exact.

 

Also the guarantee of Cosmedica or ASMED isn't a guarantee that they'll definitely grow, just that they'll offer a touchup if it is below that number. Maybe the clinics misunderstood the question, better to just ask them if they will provide a refund or touchup of any kind in the case of growth below a certain point.

 

 

 

 

 

JeanLDD, thanks for the video. I hadn't seen it, even though I've had an in-person consult with Dr Koray. He does provide as much info as possible and that inspires confidence. Unfortunately, i couldn't afford his price so had to look at others.

My concern is not the different graft numbers from different clinics. That is perfectly understandable. My concern is with the clinics giving a graft number but not saying what the density would/could be with that number.

As for the guarantee, of course it goes without saying that it's not about definite growth. We all understand that. But at least  if the results are below a certain minimum, the clinic would offer some way of rectifying it, like Dr Charles here mentions that he does offer a touch up. That's good enough.

And no i don't think the clinics misunderstood because most of them are quite aware of what their competitors offer. In any case i gave them examples of other clinics and explained what i meant by "re-growth" , which in any case is terminology they are all too familiar with.

16 hours ago, Dr. Glenn Charles said:

A standardized format or template would be of great value in our field of medicine. I do offer a touch up if a particular area doesn't grow in as well as the other areas transplanted. I do this even though the consent form the patient signs states we cannot guarantee hair growth. I try very not to let patients expectations get beyond what is achievable. You can explain the best and worst scenarios and tell patient they will likely be somewhere in between .

Dr Charles, it's great to know you offer a touch up  even though you are not bound to.

Maybe the senior members here and the admin/moderator could pool their wisdom to draw up a format of the most common and useful pieces of information that a clinic could provide in every assessment of a patient. As Dr Charles says, it would be of value to the doctors also.

Dr Charles, thanks a lot for your response.

While i appreciate the value of the info questions 1-3 could elicit, we would have no way to verify the truthfulness of the replies. For instance, the number of years of technicians' experience could well be inflated and we wouldn't know better.

Question no. 4 is mostly answered by the clinics, either by way of general info on the website or in specific replies.

As for point no. 5, Turkish clinics Asmed and Cosmedica clearly mention 90% and 95% regrowth assurances respectively. Why can't the other clinics do the same? At least it reassures the candidate that if there is a huge variation in the percentage achieved, the clinic will attend to the consequences. Else, if a clinic botches up 50% of the transplanted grafts, it will just turn round and say the patient responded differently.

When i raised this question here, what i really meant was parameters specific to the patient's assessment in terms of pre-op status and post-op prospects.

Like why can't a clinic state upfront what kind of density would be achievable. If it has figured out the graft numbers, it has measured the area to be covered, density then should be a matter of calculation. If not with pictures, at least on a personal examination, a surgeon should be able to give that figure.

To me, a surgeon who's unwilling to give a clear picture to the candidate "appears" to be just leaving escape routes for poor results, and that shakes the confidence in the surgeon. I'm not saying the surgeon should over-promise every candidate. What i am saying is that after taking all factors into consideration during an assessment , a surgeon should  provide some clarity to the patient, a certain minimum result that the surgeon was willing to stand behind.

I have with me assessments from 5 very popular clinics. Two offer some specifics.

I wish there was a standardized format or template which all clinics would follow by way of a patient's assessment.

I've taken online assessments from some of the clinics. All of them have mentioned the number of grafts required. Most have not said anything about density (achievable) and refuse to put a number on it. One or two have given re-growth guarantees in percentage terms (90 or 95), others say there can be no guarantees.

What do people here think are the absolutely essential pieces of info one must have before committing to a procedure with a clinic. The final results of a transplant are one thing, but shouldn't the surgeons provide some minimum parameters to which one can hold them once the procedure is done. 

When a surgeon is evasive with pre-op info, it shakes one's confidence in the clinic.

Can we list 4 or 5   (or more) must-haves that must be included in a pre-op assessment?

Thanks all.

Thanks for your views guys. If you guys think a Replicel kind of treatment won't be available in your lifetime, it sure can't be available in my lifetime. I'm already 55+ :)

5 hours ago, bismarck said:

Also, there's no reason to think that having surgery would preclude you from Replicel treatment if/when it becomes available to the general public. 

Bismarck, i thought one huge advantage a Replicel kind of treatment would have is it wouldn't require harvesting a huge amount of donor grafts. So one could get more hair without depleting the available hair.

But it's pointless if it's still such a long shot. I think i'll go ahead and schedule my procedure.

I'd  like the members' view on this. Replicel seems to be now on the horizon and if it works out the way it's being made out to be, wins hands down over regular transplant sugeries. For someone who's about to go in for the procedure sometime soon, does it make sense to hold back and wait for Replicel?

I am surprised there is not much buzz on this thread. Members should be hovering around here because this technique, if it becomes viable, would be the best solution for hair loss so far.  I myself have been deferring a transplant since last year in the hope that perhaps in the next few months Replicel would  finally give us this breakthrough. I check the internet every day for the latest update. I wish members would regularly post here with the latest on Replicel.

This is a much needed thread, just as the crown is the most neglected/ignored part of the transplant discourse, specially by the surgeons (even some of the big names).

In my interaction with many of the surgeons, i find that most of them are pretty enthu about the hairline. But the moment i bring up the crown issue, they prefer to defer it to another day/year/procedure. One gets the sense that they would be just too happy to do the hairline and not get into the crown bit. Most of their before-after results also are all about the  hairline. Clearly most of these surgeons are lacking in crown skills and are afraid to do a shoddy crown job that could tarnish their reputation.

Personally, as a transplant candidate i think it is absurd to get a terrific hairline and carry a naked crown.

Hope this thread can throw up some 'crown specialist' names.

Jlw4622,

Wanted to know the surgeon's name, if it's okay with you.