HTHope

do a quick search on this forum...you'll find many answers to your question

where is this clinic? What is the blue stuff on the recipient?

29 minutes ago, HisHairness said:

Thanks gents.

@Sam818 - I appreciate you sending that example. Definitely could be the case that I'm just a slow grower and my hair is certainly fine which might be a factor here. I will say that I do feel stubble continuing to come through on the crown which gives me hope that it's just a bit delayed. The hairline less so - I feel some stubble on the *literal* hairline, but then for the 1-3 inches beyond that, there's hardly the feeling of new stubble as I run my fingers over my scalp. Tough to describe the exact feeling but hopefully this captures what I'm trying to convey.

@CosmoKramer - thanks as well. One thing that I should point out is that my hair right now is all the same shaggy length. In other words, my natives started growing right after the procedure and those are the hairs that are long now (said another way, the new donor hair wouldn't have filled in to 2-3 inches already in length). So, I think you're point 2 is not the case here (good thinking though because that definitely could have been happening had the existing hairs been varying in length).

@Der3k7 please try to stay positive on this thread for now - I'm still somewhat hopeful. I'll let you rain on my parade once a proper conclusion can be made haha!

I was just about to post what you did. It might be difficult to see the newer hairs coming in when your existing is very long as it is. I wouldnt lose hope yet. Hold out til month 9-10. I'd def reach out to your doctor and get their input as well but you are correct- they'll likely just tell you to wait.

Hows your scalp health? Make sure to keep it in order if theres any issues like flaking or itching

nice job HDC. Im guessing this greatly improved this patients confidence

5 hours ago, asterix0 said:

Hi, thank you for your response. Where are you getting your information from for the yield, can you please provide some papers/statistics/studies?

Doing some more digging, in Dr.Feriduni's FUE vs FUT pdf , https://www.feriduni.com/images/FUT/FUE_vs_FUT.pdf , he posits:

"Quality of the hair follicles/transection percentage

Both techniques, on condition that they are carried out correctly, have in principle, a comparable quality level." He also writes later in the article that

"By combining FUE and FUT, a much higher yield can be obtained than with each of the treatment methods individually."

But how can both of these statements be true?

In my opinion, the "quality level", whatever that term means, of FUE would be less if your overall lifetime donor capacity is compromised, and then one would have to weigh the trade-off of less potential grafts available via FUE, vs the unknown of how the linear scar will heal with FUT. Of course it is also unknown how the scars will heal with FUE, but that document and many others state that FUE scarring is less detectable. 

I have seen bad scars from both procedures so I am not necessarily cheerleading for FUE scarring, so I understand neither is "bulletproof" in that regard. From much of what I have read the consensus seems to be that FUE scarring is more palatable and harder to detect than FUT, particularly with shorter hair cuts. Of course outliers can exist. The best thing a patient can probably do is start with a small procedure, see how the scaring is, and consider the next course of action from there. 

So, to reiterate, what evidence or studies exist that FUT yield show will be higher than FUE (with the latest technology and methods), and allow for more lifetime grafts? And if so, can we quantify by how much?

 

What youre asking for is very difficult to obtain.

I believe theres an FUE study showing the difference in transection of sharp vs dull punches by Dr. Shapiro tited "A Side-by-Side Study of 20 Consecutive FUE Patients Comparing the Use of a 0.9mm Sharp vs. 0.9mm Blunt Punch." The yields are vastly different. There are many many different variables for FUE hair transplantation and we dont know which (if any) are confounding variables. Punch type (Sharp, serrated, trumpet, etc), manual or motorized, punch system (oscillating, one direction, ultrasonic, etc), motorized punches have all kinds of settings that can be changed, technique of removing fue grafts (there are many that utilize different types of torsion and traction), donor characteristics of each patient such as the curl of their hair root and thickness of the roots. Implantation method can also affect the graft survival. Is the doctor using stick and place, forceps with pre made incisions, implanter pens, etc.

On the other hand the extraction part of FUT is very straight forward. A strip is taken out and dissected under a microscope. Many of the issues are moot at that point.

When hes referring to quality level, I believe hes referring to the quality of the individual grafts obtained. Its well known the quality of FUT grafts are going to be good. WIth FUE there are many physical forces involved to remove them (traction, torsion, friction, etc), all of which are not good for grafts. But if the grafts are obtained by a doctor who knows what hes doing with FUE with the right patient, then according to him, the grafts will be equal in quality.

With FUT you are taking from the safest area of the donor area- right smack dab in the middle of the occipital, parietal, and even temporal areas. With FUE you have to scatter your extractions out to get a higher number of grafts and you are going to be going out of this "safest" zone of hair. Therefore, by removing as many grafts as you can with FUT (with consideration of the donor hair characteristics and elasticity of the scalp) then moving to FUE to remove hairs scattered around the other zones, will naturally yield the most hairs.

its coming along really nicely and you still have time for improvement

IMO there is absolutely no way FUE yield will be up to par with FUT. FUE is a blind procedure. No matter how much skill you as a doctor/tech, when you are taking out thousands of grafts and working at speed, you are bound to transect or damage more. Hair grafts are also quite delicate and the more trauma/handling there is, the more likely they are to be damaged and or compromised. FUT is very accurate as you are dissecting under magnification.

Yes, FUE should theoretically allow you to wear shorter hairstyles, but even then its dependent upon many factors. For example, I have dark thicker hair and lighter skin and with over 2500 grafts I was only able to go down to a #2 guard on the sides and back yet it still showed evidence of scarring. After another small procedure of about 800 I can no longer even do a 2 and had to move up to a 3 guard. The outline of extraction still shows even at a 3. I've seen guys with amazing FUT scars get away with a #3. Too many factors to consider.

But if youre strictly looking at yield, FUT wins imo. If I was a norwood 5 or higher I would consider doing FUT with an elite doctor until I was tapped out then switch over to FUE to strategically take out as much of my donor as possible without it being too thin where my FUT scar would show. Theres also the possibility of camouflaging the FUT scar with beard grafts. 

2 hours ago, H & W Doug said:

Hi HTHope,

These are 1 day post-op

Wow looks fantastic. What size punch was used?

Any donor pics?

Do you know what size punch was used on you?

1 hour ago, ruca2 said:

I don’t want to be an alarmist, but that right side really does look awkward. This is a very good indication that his pattern of implanting grafts in straight rows might not look great when grown out as well. You're still extremely early in the process and it may be exacerbated by pulling on the hair but it doesn't look right at the moment. Actually resembles the old mini grafts a bit because all you see is straight rows of hair which doesn't happen in nature. Very questionable as to why he would do this. Efficiency or convience would be my guess because he is obviously capable of producing strong results. This patterned implantation and suspect extraction technique make Dr Diep seem like he's taking shortcuts. I'm not saying that this will turn out badly after a year because more than likely it will look fine but his technique seems questionable.  

I see you had previous work from diep. Did you experience the same type of implantation and harvesting from one side?

which clinic?

I'd say the best post op instructions are the ones YOUR ht surgeon gives you. Hopefully you researched them enough and in turn trusted them enough to cut into your head, might as well listen to them for their post op instructions as their previous results are what caught your eye.

On 12/11/2019 at 9:55 AM, pkipling said:

@lkemen724 - Here are the photos from my donor area after my procedure with Dr. Mohebi. I had 2,000 grafts. 

Top Left: Post-Op

Top Right: 4 months

Bottom Left: 6 Months

Bottom Right: 12 Months

 

random question, but why did the doctor mark out the entire donor area yet only extract from half of it?

@H & W Doug hi Doug, any pics of the donor immediately after surgery?

results look very good. how short did you cut your sides and back? did you notice any areas of thinness in your donor?

great writeup. Can you please explain how the transplant has changed your life? Has it helped with the opposite sex? You obviously have more confidence as you describe.

@soontransplanted update? Did it improve to your liking? What did the clinic offer?

On 6/20/2020 at 2:53 AM, Doron Harati said:

Yes, NW6 people needs 2 HTs year after year (can be done after 9 months).

The question is about how good is your donor area, I am lucky because my donor was damaged hard at my first HT in I Turkey, but they didn't touch my head sides grafts which is a strong donor area on my case, also in HDC we know how to persevere donor area with 70% survival rate, so I can go for another 2 HTs in the future, which can cover all my scalp if will be needed, you are welcome to contact me on private.

What exactly do you mean by “preserve donor area with 70% survival rate?”

do you mean only 30% of the donor is only harvested over a lifetime?

I believe dr Vories posts frequently here. It would be nice to get his opinion

@Michael Vories, MD

That’s a nice improvement considering the number of grafts used

Any reason why the harvesting went so high up into the crown? 

1 hour ago, xabi86 said:

These are the pictures taken today. Donor will understandably be depleted. Had 3521 with Dr Rahal (FUT) and 1787 (FUE) also with Dr Rahal.

i need more work done. The crown looks thin still and frontal area also needs more work. As I have lost native hair it seems and I don’t take Fin.

I saw Dr Bisanga and he has said my donor is depleted.

If I am honest, I am quite upset with my situation. The hair looks thin and I do certainly need work.

personally, I dont think it looks too bad. How old are you?

On 6/13/2020 at 6:58 AM, xabi86 said:

Hello all,

 

I need to have another surgery given I have had two already. I have been told that my donor is depleted by two different doctors for the results I want to achieve. The only option is body hair transplant.
So my question is please to forum members, which are the best body hair transplant clinics in your opinion or those that have shown the most promising results?

would you mind sharing pics of your donor? I vaguely remember your donor still looking quite good. Which doctors evaluated your donor to be depleted?

On 6/14/2020 at 11:44 AM, john1972 said:

I got the common sexual sides, and still bared with it for a few months but it didn’t go away, then felt a strange on it can’t really explain but just didn’t feel myself.

Took over six months to feel normal again and for the sexual sides to start going back to normal, all ok now thank god never ever again would I go near Fin.

Thanks for the details. Have your results suffered since? I know you mentioned some thickening happened with your hair while on fin and min