Henry

You're 22 and you've already got a full beard? Some people are just blessed in certain areas and cursed in others. 

1 hour ago, BurnieBurns said:

A trichologist isn't a medical term. It's a more informal word for a hair expert with no regulatory body.  In medicine, hair falls under the scope of dermatology.

Some dermatologists specialise in hair, notably, Prof Rodney Sinclair, or Dr Jerry Shapiro

Thanks for the info.

Why are most hair transplant surgeons not trichologists? Or at least not saying that they are. Hmmm, maybe it takes a lot of time to study this profession or not as important? I don't know really but it seems really important if you're mainly dealing with hair and to minimize having bad hair transplant results because of underlying scalp diseases that wasn't detected. Just my opinion. 

Hey just to answer your heading on why people from all over the world trust eugenix, it's because you show your great work and you guys are good at marketing 🙂

Good one.

5 hours ago, wicker said:

I’d rather not say who the surgeon is as I still have to deal with them. The clinic is considered elite and are responsible for lots of famous transplants. They cost a lot.

The surgeon said scar revisions have a 90% success rate but idk. My scalp laxity has already returned so does that mean it's a good idea to try a revision, or do i just have stretchy skin and it will happen again? Their consent form said the scar shouldn't be more than 1-1.5mm and my previous scar was 1mm.

The scar is bad to deal with, but what Im really upset about is the srugeon had a tech do all the incisions on top without telling me, and now all those 2000 grafts have failed. THe surgeon transplanted the temple points himself and all those 800 grafts grew. The surgeon said I didnt have any conditions that would stop growth on top. I dont like how my surgery was handled and feel lost what to do next

 

When you say incisions, do you mean the incision points for the grafts to be placed or the placement of the actual grafts? Or both? I think in most clinics, the surgeon will do the incision points and then the technicians will do the actual placing of the grafts.

On 12/4/2022 at 8:33 PM, Surfarosa said:

The addtion of Viagra and Cialis for bloodflow is a new one - lol

Every doctor, take note. 😄

Great results by the way. Absolute success, congratulations. 

On 9/15/2022 at 6:11 PM, Fue3361 said:

Well, it has been a year, and as many people will say, 1 year is a great time to get an idea of what the final results are for a hair transplant.  I've updated my original thread once per month at least, and that thread has grown to 11 total pages, so it's quite hard to really go through in a time efficient manner.  This thread is to put everything into one place, the full progression, from day 1 to the final result. 

Important information for those who want it:
Clinic:  Dr. Thiago Bianco Leal (Brazilian Clinic)
Graft count:  3361 grafts
Hairs per graft : average of 2.2
Density : between 75-81 grafts/cm2

Medication:  I didn't take any medication prior to the transplant.  After the transplant, I was on a unique cocktail of cialis/viagra/arginine/minoxidil (4 separate vasodilators).  My understanding is that this is the my doctor's go to approach for densities as high as mine, as we all know, it is assumed that grafts have to fight for blood flow, and at such high densities, there is risks involved (up to potentially necrosis).  This is one of the things my doctor does to get as much blood flow into the scalp as possible.

Also important to mention that I have no male patter balding, as I've had the same hairline for almost 20 years.  Putting this many grafts in such a small area makes sense in my case, but not for anyone who is actually losing hair.  Grafts are a limit resource, and if you will have more loss in the future, it is important to use them sparingly.

Now, without further ado:  

Pre Surgery:

 

1 Day Post Surgery:

 

3 Week Mark:

 

2 Months:

 

2.5 months:

 

3 Months:

 

4 Months:

 

5 Months:

 

6 Months:

 

7 Months:

 

8 Months:

 

9 Months:

 

10 Months:

 

11 Months:

 

1 Year (12 Months):

 

 

I wanted to make this thread for a while now, to have everything in one place, and also to have information such as the Dr. who did the procedure in the title, for easier search options for new and existing users.  I don't think there's much need to do any more picture updates after this, as after this point, I doubt there will be any changes, and I'm quite confident this is the final result.  

And, since it has been asked for:

Donor Area (Post Surgery):

 

You were norwood 2 when you were 30 and you're norwood 6 now? Wow, this makes me worry about my case. I'm a norwood 3 now and I'm 30, did you take any finasteride or dutasteride when you were 30? Or nothing at all, anyway good luck, I always wonder why some doctors would never check your scalp microscopically before they do the procedure. Seems suspect to me. Who knows, maybe they'll do it the day of the procedure. Or maybe they've seen different cases a million times, they just know with one glance, I don't know, but good luck with your procedure sir. 

That looks great man, congratulations. 

On 11/26/2022 at 4:21 AM, Chesterfield said:

5 months

On 2/6/2022 at 10:01 PM, George Clooney said:

From where you started 11 years ago that's a great transformation.

Would love to see a shot of your hairline with your shiny new iphone in outdoor conditions!  

I knew celebrities had too perfect of a hair to be all natural. Here's one, in the flesh. 😆

Okay so FUE might be the most popular hair transplant procedure right now, obviously the thought of surgeons opening up the scalp seem scary to people (I've seen the word "barbaric" describe the FUT method by some redditor) and people not wanting a linear scar is probably the main reason for this, plus the recovery is longer. What I don't understand is a lot of clinics, even some of the recommended doctors here don't even include FUT in their packages or results. 

Is there a major advancement in the FUE technique where the lifetime graft yield is almost equal to FUT now? Or is it just patients or doctors just getting smarter with their planning for future hair loss?

I personally am still a believer of FUT, this might be nonsense (and dangerous mindset) but I think of it as a risk free 2k grafts, even if you get zero growth, you could probably still have 5k grafts in the bank for a repair. Or if it turns out to be successful, then you could have a denser result if you plan for another ht.

Am i wrong in this? I'm here to learn as much as possible so please don't reply patronizingly. 

Incredibly nice of that doctor to give you nearly 800 grafts for free. That's unheard of. The results look great. I've read that the right temple is always more recessed first than the left when it comes to male pattern baldness, so that might be on purpose by the doctor to leave you with a little thinning or recession to  make it look the most natural. Also, I'd enjoy this hairline for a a number of years first before thinking of having another surgery, and to see if the rest of your hair thins out, consider taking medications to protect them.

Hey guys, I just wanted to pick this community's brain about questions to ask a potential hair transplant doctor to determine their competency in Hair Transplant Surgery.

I have researched some of the basic ones like:

1. Asking how often they do surgeries.

2. Do they only do or specialize in HT.

3. Are they using microscopes for the graft grouping, and to use single grafts on the hairline. 

4. What part of the surgery will the doctor be doing

Anything else you guys could add?

2 hours ago, hxris-h said:

I’m 22 been losing hair since age 18 currently on fin only taking 1-2 a week 

would i need transplant or should i wait

In 2 minds of who to go with dr munib or dr arshad both quoting round 2000-2500 grafts

 

dr munib said he can only do the front

 

 

 

 

This is pretty advanced at such a young age. If you can look at this as a positive, if you have great donor hair and you end up a slick norwood 5 or 6 or even seven even at a young age, you can have a hair transplant right away without waiting, i mean at a norwood 6 waiting is pointless as you've already lost most of the hair that you're supposed to lose. (Still depends on your type of hairloss, if your donor is also minitiurizing, then that's a problem) You might need a higher dose of fin though, I'm not a doctor but such advanced hair loss i would think would need a much higher dose, once a day maybe? At least 3 times a week? 

34 minutes ago, ticker said:

Well I met Dr K and Dr Sethi :). They looked at my donor and said I am a good candidate. Why would they send me back home and during surgery day they will decline saying microscopic exam says your donor is not good compared to when we looked at you without microscopic exam. 

I'm just thinking of scenarios here, I've read cases of people getting sent home during surgery day for various reasons like scalp inflammation that wasn't detected on their initial consultation. 

7 minutes ago, ticker said:

Does implantation "technique" really matters along with skilled physician to avoid the permanent shock loss for diffused thinner? Like going with DHI and Not pre-made slits for diffused thinner as the slits are less wide?

I would say a skilled surgeon can decide if they can perform a successful surgery on you or not, regardless of the technique. What matters is the skill of the surgeon. Not the technique. Just my opinion.

6 minutes ago, ticker said:

Here is my confusion. I had an in-person consultation with Dr Couto few months back and he rejected my case saying I have DUPA by doing micro scopic evaluation. His Jr Doctor said atleast my frontal areas can be transplanted if not crown but Dr C said he wont operate due to DUPA and only medication is the option for me. I had an in person consultation with Dr Konior and Dr Sethi and they are good to operate on me  but they didn't do any microscopic evaluation of my donor and in their opinion DUPA is not a Blocker for HT. Other elite surgeons who saw my photos also they are ready to operate as long as I take medication. So can I ignore Dr C's assessment as every other elite doctor is ok to perform HT on me even though they didn't do microscopic evaluation? If a DUPA patient shouldn't get HT then why other doctors think I am a good candidate as opposed to Dr C's assessment?

 

The reason i can think of (and this is just based on my logic and research which absolutely means nothing next to a doctors opinion) is that dr. C probably doesnt have the patience for the amount of work needed to pick and choose every single graft that contains healthy, unminitiurized hairs. Or another reason maybe is that once the other doctors examine you under the microscope, they would say the same thing and would decline operating on you as well. I would suggest on doing in person consultation everytime and requesting to get your scalp checked under the microscope.

3 hours ago, Curious25 said:

I agree - but it’s important to remember what hair transplant surgery is - so between a diffuse NW6 with thin hairs like you mention, and a restored slick NW6 who has a better illusion of density because of the stronger and strategically placed hairs . . . Which one has more hairs on their head?
 

The former , as their donor is untouched. 

 

So even if medication merely just stabilises these weak hairs as they are, once they get a restorative surgery from a skilled physician, given all variable factors equal for arguments sake, their illusion will ultimately be the superior one, because of the support these native hairs will additionally provide. 
 

 

True, it would have to be a very skilled physician though, they are expensive or usually requires you to travel overseas. The diffused thinner would have a much harder time of looking for a skilled surgeon.

Let's say an average skilled physician operates on both people, i would argue the slick norwood 6 would have a better result, the diffused one might have permanent shock loss and at least 30 percent of grafts transplanted not growing, the diffused thinner might end up with exactly the same density or even less density.

Wow what a weird case. I'm a very anxious person and these kinds of stuff really make me go crazy when researching about hair transplants. It makes me question if i should even do it. Lol. I hope we can see some pictures. Anyway, hope you're mentally strong in dealing with your case. 

I would say, pretty good result.

On 11/26/2022 at 11:50 PM, Curious25 said:

Weird post, considering you’ve later contradicted yourself? 
 

A restored NW6 is effectively a diffuse thinner. 
 

Diffuse thinners can be perceived as more fortunate, as they tend to be more likely to experience regrowth as well as stabilisation on meds. 
 

There is also no reason as to why a stabilised diffuse thinner can’t expect to receive a good hair transplant result under the hands of a competent surgeon.

Yeah but transplanted norwood 6 have an illusion of density even if it isn't really, mathematically. Also those transplanted hairs grow longer, so you can style them however you want to make it look thick, diffused thinners on the other hand cannot grow their hair as long because of minitiurization (even with medication sometimes) so they're stuck with a thin looking hair. 

I've read or watched on some youtube videos that thinning on this side (temple points and sideburns) is pretty normal? Do I need to worry about this part going completely bald? Do some of you guys have this too? 

(This is just nonsense i want to write, i know it's not true. It depends on on the person really)

A lot of hair transplant surgeons will turn you down if you're a diffused thinner (even if you've stabilized it with meds) a norwood 6 on the other hand can have an illusion of a full head of hair that you can style, in 2 years with hair transplant. So living a life of diffused thinning is arguably worse because you have no choice but to just stare at your thin hair or just accept it and go bald.

2 hours ago, HelpfulFriend said:

I think it comes down to risk vs reward, and is very dependent on each person.

I asked Dr Konior about this, and we ended up shaving down about 1cm further in than my hairline was, as the hair was already beginning to miniaturise in this area.

He also explained that, as mentioned, you could shock grafts and quicken the pace in which they disappear. If the hair is dense, then it seems like it's better to transplant around it. And sometimes hairs can hang out for a very long time if they're undisturbed.

We also need to remember that when the hair is moved up to the front, a hole much bigger than a hair is placed as to fit the whole follicle. If you do this heavily into a dense area, you could feasibly impact it's appearance. 

Very informative thank you, so different doctors have different opinions on this I guess, or the case that i watched probably had a lot of minitiurization going on in the area with a lot of hairs, even if it looked really dense. I'd just let my doctor decide (if i ever decide who) if this can be done with my diffused balding all throughout the top.