Proportions

Not a row pattern.

I would definitely check out all options and consider going abroad as well. It might even be cheaper as well.

This. Some doctors actually prescribe oral Minoxidil to use right after a hair transplant. This really is a matter you should discuss with your doctor. They will know best.

Great result. Final update?

Update? The area does look quite large, so the amount of grafts used sounds about right.

Left side does look better, but the right side doesn't look bad either. Update? Are you on any meds?

Interesting. Do they want you to wait until you're 70? 😄

From upper third of a 60 year old to upper third of a college student. Looking good.

Good result. Update? Are you still using oral or topical fin?

Looking good. Are you on finasteride or minoxidil?

Thank you, the answer I was looking for.

I got rejected for a transplant at age 24, solely because I was "too young", but I got approved for one now at 29. If H&W was the only clinic to reject you, why not just go with another one of the clinics that said yes?

Age?

The question essentially is - which option allows more grafts before the donor damage becomes visible. FUT+FUE FUE I just cannot imagine the answer being FUT + FUE. Therefore it puzzles me why are people doing FUT + FUE at all.

Thanks for explaining the differences between FUE and FUT, but the question was a bit different - about doing an FUE + FUT combo.

I just can't wrap my head around the advantage of doing an FUT + FUE. If you do an FUT, you need decent coverage to hide the scar. Which means you have significantly reduced the amount of grafts you can extract with FUE without going too thin. It seems so counter-effective to me. Why isn't it better to just choose FUE and deplete the donor a bit more for the same amount of grafts you'd get with FUT+FUE - without a scar you can get away with a lot more depletion without it raising any eyebrows???

Exactly. So again - what's the advantage of doing an FUT + FUE instead of just extracting more grafts with FUE?

Thanks. Do you think it's significantly less graft efficient to do an FUT after an FUE?

Planning my transplants, want to know if I should aim to get an FUT first to maximize my grafts in the long run.

If I have a naturally high hairline that ruins my proportions, why would I wait longer for getting a HT based solely on my low Norwood?

Wouldn't an FUT ruin laxity even more than FUE due to taking out a strip of scalp?

I have a naturally high hairline with minimal hair loss. 29M NW1,5 - I am planning to do a hair transplant to lower the hairline. Without finasteride. I don't mind getting more transplants in the future.

I've heard about FUT and FUE combination transplants, never understood what is the advantage. You get a huge scar at the back of your head, which limits how much you can extract from your donor with FUE in the future, as the scar needs coverage to stay hidden. Can anyone explain how that works? If my donor allows 8k grafts with FUE without depleting it - how can an FUT + FUE combo transplant provide more grafts without cosmetic compromises?

Seems logical to me. First, you lower the hairline by removing a part of your forehead skin - not a single graft spent. And only then start using your grafts as you recede further and the scar reveals itself. Leaves you with more grafts to spare by automatically spreading the existing hairs on top of your head over a larger area. I've heard arguments that men shouldn't undergo this surgery as they will recede behind the scar. But isn't it the same case with hairline hair transplant? You just keep receding behind the hair transplant. I apologize if this might seem like a dumb question, I'm not that knowledgeable in hair restoration yet.