CatsMeow83

4 minutes ago, BeHappy said:

FUT has been done for many years and many men and women had hair transplants done this way. FUT is still being done today too, of course, so don't think the pain is going to be so bad that nobody would do it. I think there's a bit more discomfort for the first 10 to 14 days while the staples or stitches are in, but once they are out you are fine. The first several days are hard for both FUE and FUT because you can't sleep on the donor area and that's with either method. If you already have a scar and you don't cut your hair extremely short then you are probably a great candidate for FUT. There's nothing wrong with saving $10,000 especially when it's with the same top clinic either way.

 

Thanks man - that's pretty much where I have landed.

2 hours ago, Briguy said:

Why are you paying US$ for the surgery when H&W are in Canada? Based on 3000 grafts and price per graft for both surgeries your figures seem correct but I believe it is Canadian$ you would pay.

Yeah - the USD thing did not go unnoticed.  I was a little surprised by this, but they explicitly stated that all prices were in USD.  They are clearly seizing on the strong USD by pricing everything in USD instead of CAD.  Those sneaky Canadians.  Can't say I blame them - although I was hoping to take advantage of the favorable exchange rate.  

1 hour ago, hairlossPA said:

The scar and recovery are what make me nervous however

Yeah - the post-op recovery is my main concern as well.  I would love to hear from someone who has had both FUT and FUE to get an idea of how they would rate the post-op pain/recovery of the 2 procedures. 

5 hours ago, Aftermath said:

FUT cons:

- more after pain, and restricted gym time for longer

 

This is my main concern.  You said you had done FUT.  Have you also had FUE as well?  Just trying to get a comparison as to the post-op pain and recovery of FUT vs. FUE from someone who has had both.

I mean, if FUE is like a 3 out of 10 on the post-op pain/discomfort scale, and FUT is maybe 4/5 out of 10, I don't have a problem with that.  But if FUT is like a 7 out of 10 or something much higher, then I guess I might reconsider.  Just trying to get a comparison between the two if that makes sense. 

 

 

2 minutes ago, Dr. Glenn Charles said:

FUT has some real benefits over FUE in some cases. It does not thin out the entire donor area like FUE can. You do not have to shave down donor area to do procedure making it easier to camouflage post operatively. Also in my opinion it has a 5-10% higher survival rate. 

This is the type of insight I was looking for - I didn't know this.  All extremely helpful.  

[Deleted - new post below]

57 minutes ago, Dhyan said:

Plan your vacations to India and  get your hair transplant done at eugenix with latest fue method ..and believe me you will still save a lot

 

 

I mean absolutely no offense by this . . . but there is no way in hell I am getting a medical procedure done in India.  I am going with H&W because I think they are the best in North America for the type of work I need done.  Of course, whether they are "the best" is debatable, like all discussions on this board, but I'm definitely looking for the best clinic to do the work, and not necessarily the cheapest.

I know there are a ton of threads debating FUT vs. FUE, and they have been very helpful.  But I was hoping to get some specific feedback on my situation.  My current plan is to schedule an FUT procedure with Hasson & Wong (Dr. Hasson, specifically).  I am choosing FUT over FUE solely due to the cost savings, but I am having second thoughts about whether I'm making a smart decision by opting for the more invasive FUT procedure simply to save money. 

Here is my situation:  

Basic Profile:  Frontal hair loss and thinning hairline.  H&W has suggested 3,000 grafts to restore hairline and densely pack thinning frontal and temple areas.  Both FUT and FUE options are available.  Scarring from FUT is not an issue or consideration for me due to an existing scar on the back of my head that prevents me from keeping my hair very short (scar is from old injury - not a prior transplant).  I have plenty of donor hair to accommodate current and future transplant needs, so that's not an issue or consideration here either.  The results of FUT and FUE will be roughly the same for me (this is what H&W has told me).  Based on similar H&W case studies and prior results, I believe I will get good results with either method, and if anything, may get slightly better results with FUT, at least based on my personal assessment of similar H&W case studies and their past published case results.

Cost Difference:  FUE = $23,000 USD; FUT =$13,000 USD.  So we're talking about a $10,000 USD cost savings by going with FUT.

My Quandary:  Is submitting to a more invasive FUT procedure worth saving $10,000?  I feel like $10,000 is a lot of money to save by opting for FUT, but is it stupid to go the FUT route just to save money?  Am I being ridiculous?  I'm not as big of a pussy as I sound like, but I certainly don't want to be in a lot of post-op pain or discomfort that I could have avoided by shelling out an extra $10,000.  

Is there anyone who has had both types of procedures that could weigh in on their post-op experience?  Any major differences in post-op pain/discomfort?  Any other issues that I should consider that aren't addressed above?  Basically, am I being an idiot for going the FUT route just to save money?  $10,000 isn't going to make or break me, but it's still a lot of money no matter how you slice it.

Any thoughts are appreciated.

Just now, JeanLDD said:

JT has over twenty years experience in the industry and has worked for top clinics (including those recommended by this site, Rahal and Hasson/Wong),  networks with top-tier surgeons and regularly attends industry workshops etc. Also has high level production values in his vids and the majority of surgeons he supports for money are top-tier, most are represented by this website. Obviously its his work and he does it for money, but he does have high standards and is backed by experience, also as a repair patient who fixed himself up.

He might be a shill by definition, but there are shills who want to shill for helping people get the best results (and making money doing so), and shills that don't care whether they're helpful or not.

Makes more sense with this added context.  When I read the earlier post it sounded like doctors were hiring freelancers to come onto forums and wreak havoc.  Sounded like easy money.  Was considering a career change.

5 hours ago, jj51702 said:

He just represents whatever doc will pass him some money. 

I wasn't aware this was a paid gig.  How exactly does one go about getting one of these paid shill gigs?  

Asking for a friend.

11 hours ago, Since21 said:

This is going to sound contradictory. After having done both FUT and FUE, FUT is barbaric in comparison. Much more invasive, and the recovery time is literally like day and night. That said, I'm glad I did FUT first for the higher graft count, and then FUE for a smaller session. In my mind, it just makes sense to do FUT first so you don't 'moth eat' or thin out your donor site on the first pass with a high graft count. Buuuut... I wouldn't dissuade anyone from doing FUE either because you're not taking a chunk of scalp out of your noggin. 

Yeah - this definitely all makes sense.  I'm probably going to go the FUT route this first time for the reasons you state.  But I'm still a little wheezy about the more invasive nature of the procedure.  I never really considered FUT until I started seeing some of the results from guys like Hasson.  I always figured I would go the easier FUE route, so I am definitely having to adjust my mindset and get comfortable with something that's a little more invasive than originally planned.

14 minutes ago, Since21 said:

Sounds like he's just trying to steer you in the right direction. I had gotten in touch with Rahal's clinic and spoke to his rep when I was researching doctors for my first procedure, but as I dug a little deeper I had started to see enough negative results/experiences that I ultimately eliminated him from my list. Again, good luck in your search. 

Yeah - it appears I may be following your same path.  Based on some of the feedback I'm getting here, and after hearing more about AfterMath's incredible experience with Hasson, it seems like Hasson is probably the better play.  I have a consult on the books with H&W for next week, so I am eager to see what they have to say.  Now all I have to decide is whether to go FUT or FUE.  

4 minutes ago, JeanLDD said:

There have been many of them, especially around late 2016-2017 there were a lot of poor growth cases including some prominent posters with issues including one with a botched donor after under 2000 grafts. I had someone PM me about some density issues on one side and graft angles being off literally a few days ago (although the case was done many years ago). Another recent poster here is still only at 6 months roughly but says he sees very little growth. I think you're mixing up how loudly someone complains (Like Payam) vs how many problem cases there are. I know saying this sounds overly negative, but I find it incredible how some people are masters of finding problems with one surgeon but apparently forget how to do a basic Google search with others.

Tbh I would also recommend HnW.

Look, no matter which way you slice it, this is a very gray industry and the due diligence process is tough.  Not only does everyone have an opinion, but you have to parse which opinions are real and legitimate, and which are being pushed by shills or other folks with a vested interest (or other tangible bias).  The international aspect of this industry only further complicates the decision making process. 

Digging through it all is hardly a science.  You just have to make a judgment call based on the weight of the evidence, as you see it.

You have any pictures you care to post?  I am a little curious as to how SMP turns out.  

Did you do SMP only, or is this a follow-up to a hair transplant?

29 minutes ago, Melvin-Moderator said:

Well we still need to confirm  with Dr. Erdogan, exactly how many patients have surgery a day. Is it 3,6 or 9, this is very important. In addition, we need to know exactly how he supervises so many surgeries. 

Erdogan is the Ryan Seacrest of the hair transplant world.  Hardest working man in show business!

11 hours ago, Melvin-Moderator said:

How aggressive are you trying to be? I think ultimately you may end up a norwood 5 down the line.  I can see the pattern developing with wet hair. Now, I’m not saying don’t rebuild and lower the hairline, but I wouldn’t go ultra-aggressive, as you’re gonna want to save some grafts for future loss. 

 

I'm not getting too aggressive.  Mostly keeping the hairline at the current low point in the center of my head, and filling in the temples and density.  If I do go any lower with the hairline, it would only be maybe 1 cm, if that.  If I end up on the highest end of the estimated range and get 3,000 grafts this time around, I still have 4-5K left. 

The hair loss you are seeing here happened over the course of 10+ years, and for the last 3 or 4 years, the loss and thinning has pretty much stopped.  But like you said, I could end up with a Norwood 5 down the road, although that would be the first Norwood 5 on either side of my family.  My hope is that if I do continue to experience new hair loss, that it will happen relatively slowly, so that by the time I get to a Norwood 5, the treatment won't even require native donor hair. 

EDIT: Also, definitely getting on Propecia as well, so hopefully that will help slow down any new hair loss that might decide to kick up again.  Fingers will be crossed.

13 hours ago, Markee said:

I'm strongly considering taking the plunge with Rahal sometime this year but for all his popularity I see very few resent results from him and next to none resent real life user reviews.  Here and there we get some posting from one of his associates  showing some ad based amazing before and after pictures or video posting but never see anything but his best 

 Just saying for the volume of patients this guy has I think there' should  be and wish there was more real user reviews around to help me feel confidence to go with  him is all 

 

I wish there more case studies as well.  I noticed he (or someone at his clinic) posted a handful of new results a couple weeks ago, and they were all pretty solid.  This whole process is nerve racking, because no matter which clinic you are looking at, their published case studies are showcasing their successes.  We all know that every doctor has bad outcomes we're not seeing. 

For Rahal, I get some comfort from the fact that very few people have negative opinions of his work (the same seems to be true for H&W).  If he had a lot of bad outcomes, there is no doubt that at least some of those disgruntled folks would find their way here or to some other forum, and be bitching up a storm.

20 hours ago, Aftermath said:

I second this

i wasn’t dissimilar to OP, in fact he has a better starting point, I went with hasson and I’m invtedibly happy, here’s some recent pics on this page

Man . . . your results really are fantastic.  Inspired me to go ahead and get that H&W consult before I make my decision.

On 1/3/2019 at 1:02 AM, Rawkerboi said:

You couldn't go wrong with Dr Hasson too, especially if you are considering FUT.

I decided to get a consult with H&W as well before I make up my mind.  They are a good bit more expensive than Rahal, so I doubt I will go with them unless they really convince me that they are bringing something to the table that Rahal is not.  But who knows . . . they may dazzle me.  Plus, Vancouver is definitely a more appealing place than Ottowa to spend a week during the dead of winter.

4 minutes ago, Melvin-Moderator said:

Guys,

 I will need to clear somethings up with Dr. Erdogan, we need to make sure this is not hearsay. We need to know how many patients he’s performing surgery on a day and how he’s able to supervise those surgeries. To be honest, 7 surgeries seems excessive and I don’t see how one person can supervise all 7.

With that said, we need to allow him to speak on the situation. Ive heard of formal training etc. Dr. Erdogan, has already said everyone of his techs performs surgeries on liifelike dummys for a certain amount of hours before even touching a real life patient. 

All very good points - our imaginations have probably started to run a little wild in this thread.

5 minutes ago, Der3k7 said:

Because he has so many great results posted over the years I gueaa

I think this is exactly right.  But . . . given some of the operational changes at the clinic (6 simultaneous surgeries, etc.), I think the guys that run this site really do need to conduct a little more diligence on what's going on at ASMED.  Erdogan is clearly an awesome doctor.  I don't dispute that.  But if he is going to rely so heavily on his technicians, I think the folks running this site need to get a better understanding of what qualifications and standards there are for the technicians that are doing most of the work.  Erdogan could probably address these issues no problem, and get most everyone here comfortable.

On 1/1/2019 at 6:16 AM, JeanLDD said:

You don't magically get a good result because a doctors in a first world country or does the entire procedure.

I hear you.  I mean hell, it's possible that there are ASMED technicians that have so much experience they would do a better job than Rahal or Erdogan themselves would do.  But in the majority of procedures, I think more doctor involvement = better results.  

Do we know anything about what qualifications there are for ASMED technicians, other than the 10,000 practice graft requirement that Dr. Erdogan noted in his response awhile back?  I would bet you a dollar to a donut that some of the technicians doing these procedures have no formal medical or nursing training, and nothing beyond a 12th grade education.  

EDIT: My last question is really one that we should consider, and see if the mods know the answer.  I think it's an important question given how the procedures are being performed at ASMED, and I don't see how any clinic could possibly be vetted and recommended by this site if we don't know what qualifications and standards are required of the lead technicians that are responsible for doing most of the heavy lifting in these procedures.

On 1/1/2019 at 6:16 AM, JeanLDD said:

Why would they risk reputation of putting techs on the job after "weeks" after spending literally millions on a new clinic and prior to that having techs with multiple years experience? 

Jesus man, I don't freaking know.  I also don't know why he's running 6 surgeries at the same time.  I know nothing about his clinic protocol, other than what he posted on this forum awhile ago.  And based on his own words, it's possible that a technician working on your procedure has only mere weeks of experience.  I don't know what the odds of that are, or whether it actually happens in practice, but I do know that it is absolutely possible based on what Dr. Erdogan posted to this forum, re: the experience and training of his technicians. 

Again - I'm going off his words here - which is all I have to go on.  Everything else is just speculation. I agree that this scenario would be risky on his part, but I'm not getting the sense that best practices are being observed right now at ASMED.  I absolutely understand that doctors need to delegate heavily in these procedures.  I work as a licensed professional as well, and delegation is also a big part of my job, so I get it.  But I also know first hand that you can only capably supervise and oversee so many things and so many people at one time.  No doctor can manage and monitor 6 active patient surgeries, and supervise and oversee 20+ technicians, all at the same time.

58 minutes ago, Sean said:

6 patients a day is too much.  Let alone more than one patient.  

People argue that manual fue causes too much fatigue and it is ok to use motorized or other devices etc for less fatigue.  however, what the fuck does more than one patient a day cause?  That is probably more fatigue then a safer manual punch being used for extractions.  

Ultimately it is up to you to consider if your paying top dollar for a tech surgical extraction or a tech based clinic doing more than 1 patient a day.  

What really justifies the per graft price then? A work of a surgeon or a tech led team.   

That screen showing surgeries is bothersome, surgeries are intricate up close and need to be seen under a loupe, what good does a large screen with multiple surgeries prove?  What’s the benefit?  

This is very informative and If these surgical protocols were followed in the united states, the medical boards would not allow them. (Including tech based surgical extractions as it is considered SURGERY)

Payam, hoping a positive outcome is achieved soon and you are able to live life without these worries.  Really hope your situation is rectified soon.  

I couldn't agree with you more.  I am new to this forum, but I find it more than a little crazy that some people (including some of the mods, apparently) seem to be totally fine with this 6 patient surgical medley that Erdogan is doing.  I mean, how many surgeries can one person capably supervise at one time?

2 hours ago, JeanLDD said:

Rahal is a top tier surgeon so if you can afford it you’re unlikely to doubt your decision, but for his FUE he does not perform the extractions, nor the implanatations. It’s the exact same process as Erdogan utilizes. So if you feel a doctor should be present for the entire procedure, your choice doesn’t actually fit the criteria.

As I said in my comment:  "I certainly don't expect Erdogan or any other doctor to personally handle or oversee an entire 8 hour FUE procedure."  Neither Rahal nor Erdogan handles the entire FUE procedure, that's a given.  The issue is how qualified are the folks doing the work while the doctor is elsewhere. 

Rahal is a Canadian doctor, so there will always be a doctor, PA, or registered nurse in the room during the procedure (this is the bare minimum that his medical malpractice insurer requires).  In other words, there is always a medical professional in the room while the procedure is being performed. 

Erdogan isn't subject to these same regulations and requirements in Turkey, so there may be times during the procedure where there is no doctor, registered nurse, or other medically trained professional present.  This is what I find problematic, but again, maybe it's because I'm an American, and I'm used to there being a higher standard of physician care and supervision.

The other key difference is that if Rahal's technicians screw up, I have plenty of remedies at my disposal, including the peace of mind that the clinic has medical malpractice coverage.  If Erdogan's technicians screw up, all you can hope for is that Erdogan makes things right.  You don't have any other meaningful redress, other than coming to this forum and bitching up a storm.

2 hours ago, JeanLDD said:

Also nowhere did he ever say technicians did 10000 grafts on a simulator and were suddenly operating on paying patients

Dr. Erdogan's exact words were: "Each team member is trained using the K-Head (a life-like training model) placing and extracting a minimum of 10,000 grafts before placing or extracting any graft on a live patient."  This means that the technician working on your procedure may have a week of experience (10,000 practice grafts), or he/she may have ten years of experience with hundreds of patients under their belt.  Some technicians obviously have more experience than others.  Which ones am I going to get on surgery day?  Am I getting the most experienced technicians?  The least experienced?  Who knows.  You hope for the best.

Bottom line: you don't know whether the technician placing your grafts at any given moment has a week of experience, or a year of experience.  This fact is indisputable.