SS2382

When you say FUT is (debatably) better to start with, what is debatable about it? I saw the Shapiro study saying you can maybe get 2-3k more grafts starting with strip but is this fact or opinion? It seems some people lean certain ways with these FUT and FUE debates and there really is no absolutes. The reason I ask is because I want FUE but also understand the idea and importance of preserving donor and thinking long term, however if it isn't guaranteed starting with strip will give more grafts id rather not start with it.

I get the consensus behind starting with stripping out and then moving to fue to maximize grafts, but why can’t it be the other way around? I get that if you did all fue and then went to strip you would get less grafts out of that strip, but wouldn’t those follicles you would have gotten already be transplanted in prior fue procedures? Is there any reason that starting with fut is better or would yield more lifetime grafts? I don’t see how someone can’t do all fue and then move to strip to get the last bit of grafts if they need. Is there something with the fue procedure that would limit the amount of grafts you get vs if you started with strip?

Yeah it is Dr. Bisanga. Seems very ethical and based on research I don’t think he would offer it if it would be a subpar result. I’m just not sure how often they work together or offer it in the US so I wanted to get a few opinions if the result could be different.

True, that’s why I was considering this. But the Dr. based on my research is one of the best, highly ethical, and I don’t think would offer surgery in the US if he wasn’t confident the results wouldn’t be there behind his work. They provided the names of the 2 lead techs. I was able to look them up on linked in and definitely see that they have 10-20 plus years experience. Again if it would have a chance of even the slightest difference in the result I would rather go to the clinic. I appreciate the feedback and opinions.

They are the techs used if they do surgery in the US. I’m not sure how frequent it is offered in the US. I could travel to the clinic however it wouldn’t be able to be until next year due to my schedule. I of course would prefer the more convenient commute and travel, and the surgery could be within a few months in the US which aligns perfectly with my schedule. However if there is a chance the result won’t be the same I would prefer to wait.

Was hoping to get some insight and opinions on my current situation. I have been talking back and forth with a rep from easily a top 5 doctor in the world. He is my number one choice and want my procedure to be with him. He has a clinic outside of the US, but is offering surgery in the US where I am from. This of course makes travel much easier. My only concern is with the technicians. They provided the names and experience level of the technicians, I was able to look them up and see that they have 10-20 years experience, however they are independent / contract technicians. They're resume say they work full time as techs, but was wondering if this could have an effect on the end result where it isn’t at the surgeons home base with in house technicians. They are technicians he has full faith in and has even trained them himself and has employed them in the past. the surgeon would be doing all punches and incisions of the recipient sites, where the techs will pull the grafts after they are punched and will also be placing the grafts. my question is, how much could this effect the end result? Would it be better to hold off and travel to the clinic where in house technicians are a part of the procedure, or is it a safe bet the result will be similar if I were to do it in the US? This Dr. Like I said produces consistent results and is my number one choice, but I don’t want to let the convenience of travel impact the decision if the result won’t be the same.

Do you ever regret not starting with FUT to maximize donor and be able to have gotten more grafts, or do you think this was the right move for you?

How about FUE scars? Are people typically able to wear skin fades without noticing the scars? I’m so back and forth between the two, but I think I’m leaning more towards FUE now. I do wear my hair pretty short on the sides and also am into heavy weight lifting. I think the recovery of the strip might be an issue for me as well as having to change my hair style. Might just have to accept not getting as many lifetime grafts or maybe go FUT down the road if need be. As far as my hair loss I’m not sure what class I would be considered. It is definitely diffuse but you can only see that pattern when it’s really short on top. A diffuse 3 then maybe. The way I style it gives off a good illusion of density and it’s only noticeable in the crown area as well as the hairline and temples which has kicked back a bit but not too bad. Overall still have a good amount of native hair that’s been stable on fin for 1.5 - 2 years with no sides, however everyone in my family with loss seems to progress to a Norwood 6 or 7.

Thanks for the input. This is my only hesitation with FUT because I like to wear my hair short. However FUT seems to be less variable then FUE with almost guaranteed quality grafts and I like the idea of having the extra donor available for more lifetime grafts.

For those of you who have had FUT procedures, how short can you typically wear your hair? I know it may vary depending on the individual but I’m trying to get an average length. Looking into making a decision soon and have been back and forth between the FUT vs FUE debate. I wear my hair short however after a lot of research I think an FUT procedure might be the way to go.