Jump to content

Dr. Raymond Konior

Elite Coalition Physician
  • Posts

    228
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    4

Dr. Raymond Konior last won the day on June 24 2020

Dr. Raymond Konior had the most liked content!

About Dr. Raymond Konior

Basic Information

  • Gender
    Male

Hair Transplant Clinic Information

  • Hair Transplant Surgeon
    Dr. Raymond Konior
  • Hair Transplant Network Recommendation Profile
  • Hair Transplant Clinic Name
    Raymond Konior, MD.
  • Primary Clinic Address
    1s280 Summit Avenue, Suite C-4
  • Country
    United States
  • State
    IL
  • City
    Oakbrook Terrace
  • Zip Code
    60181
  • Phone Number
    (630) 932-9690
  • Website
    http://www.premierehairdoc.com
  • Email Address
    drkonior@sbcglobal.net
  • Provides
    Follicular Unit Hair Transplantation (FUT)
    Follicular Unit Extraction (FUE)
    Eyebrow Transplantation
    Prescriptions for Propecia
    Free In-depth Consults

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

Dr. Raymond Konior's Achievements

Mentor Real Hair Club Member

Mentor Real Hair Club Member (3/8)

  • Helpful

Recent Badges

120

Reputation

  1. The question relates to an inquiry regarding postop instructions, which forum members do not have access to. Written postop instructions are unique to an individual practice and are precise in nature. Patients are advised to follow instructions provided by their surgeons to assure the best result possible.
  2. Why are you asking another patient about instructions when you should be contacting me or my office? That is the most direct route to an accurate response since we will providing your care, not the poster on this forum.
  3. His goals were primarily devoted to hairline restoration. As of his last follow-up he was happy with his hairline and the appearance of a thinning crown. Should he opt for a second session later in life, an FUE harvest would be recommended because of limited elasticity following the strip harvest. You are spot on correct with your assessment. A homogeneous graft distribution with his fine hair would have be certain to leave a less-than-ideal result with a weaker part and hairline. Prioritization of those two areas was deemed high for this man. Gradient grafting is quite routine for the vast majority of men where achievable densities are anything less than dense-pack. Understand that we almost always graft with an end result that leaves a density deficiency, i.e. we do not restore full density with single-session hair restoration. Strategic graft distribution aims to make a "little" look like a "lot".
  4. This 50 year old male requested hairline restoration along with some conservative coverage in the crown. His exam revealed an advanced pattern of loss and very fine hair throughout the donor area. The limitations of coverage associated with fine hair and an advanced pattern were discussed in detail and a plan was devised to best suit his goals. A 3160 graft restoration was performed with density gradients designed to bias graft distribution in the hairline and left-part. In light of his very fine hair, the strategy of using a thick-to-thin transition along front-to-back and left-to-right vectors was deemed best for his overall needs. Immediate graft placement views demonstrate the density gradient plan that was implemented. preop front preop top view preop back view planned graft zones front view planned graft zones left-side view postop front view 1 postop front view 2 postop front view 3 postop comb-back view front postop top view postop back view postop left-side view 1 postop left-side view 2 postop comb-back view left-side immediate graft placement front immediate graft placement crown
  5. This 37 year old patient presented with a request for frontal hairline restoration. He requested an FUE harvest in order to maintain the ability to wear short hairstyles in the future. A 2092 graft frontal hairline restoration was performed using an FUE harvest. Presented is his seventeen month postop result. Perioperative graft placement photos, along with preop and seventeen month donor site photos are presented. Density inspection photos show the coverage that was obtained in the graft zone. preop front view preop top view preop planned graft zone postop front view 1 postop front view 2 postop front view 3 postop front comb-back view postop top view postop left view 1 postop left view 2 postop left comb-back view postop right view 1 postop right view 2 postop right comb-back view density inspection right density inspection center density inspection left day of surgery graft zone two day postop graft zone one week postop graft zone preop donor site one week postop donor site seventeen month postop donor site view 1 seventeen month postop donor site view 2 seventeen month postop donor site view 3
  6. This 27 year old female patient presented with a request to lower her hairline. She previously underwent a 500 graft FUE procedure, but that procedure was described as a failure in achieving her stated goal. A strip harvest was recommended because of the large graft number needed for her restoration and because she had no intention of shaving her head in the future. She underwent a 3024 graft hairline lowering procedure. Presented here is her eighteen month postop result. Included are immediate postop graft placement photos. Preop Front Preop Front Tipped View Preop Left Preop Right Postop Front Postop Left View 1 Postop Left View 2 Postop Right Postop Right Comb-back View Postop Density Inspection Immediate Graft Placement Front Immediate Graft Placement Right Immediate Graft Placement Left
  7. This 46 year old man presented with a history of having undergone a 1500 graft FUE hairline restoration. His previous surgeon promised a “no-shave” restoration so as to comply with his desire to maintain an inconspicuous appearance postoperatively. The patient complained that there was little if any density gain from his first attempted restoration. His request upon presentation was to restore frontal coverage and a reasonably defined hairline. His examination revealed scant frontal coverage with no semblance of a frontal hairline. His donor area revealed two distinct “strips” where FUE harvesting had been performed. Presumably, long hair had been maintained above and below each linear harvest zone for the intended goal of “hiding” his procedure. The grossly unnatural appearance of the donor area surprised and disappointed the patient. A secondary repair procedure was recommended, once again using FUE harvesting, but designing the harvest to blend the harsh appearance of the donor site scar pattern. A conservative session of 1500 grafts was recommended in an attempt to remain cautious because the etiology of the first session’s low yield was not fully apparent. Of note is that the patient was reluctant to use a shaved approach for the donor harvest, which prompted my comment, “You did that once before and look how it turned out”. Harvesting was confined to areas above and below each prominent FUE-strip-pattern scar. Graft placement was performed using a no-shave, stick-and-place technique. The restoration focused on hairline definition and generalized frontal density enhancement. Presented here are two-year postop results. Preop Front Preop Left Preop Right Preop Hairline Plan Postop Front 1 Postop Front 2 Postop Top 1 Postop Top 2 Postop Top Part View Postop Left 1 Postop Left 2 Postop Left 3 Postop Left Comb-back View Postop Right Postop Right Comb-back View Preop Donor View Immediate Postop Donor View Immediate Graft Placement View
  8. One would first have to consider the possibility of compromised graft growth arising from an intrinsic scalp scarring disorder such as lichen planopilaris where the skin essentially attacks the follicles with an end-result of low yield. Also, his history of multiple procedures most definitely had to be taken into consideration in that the many scars resulting from plugs, FUE grafting and the scalp reduction would have compromised his baseline scalp circulation. An aggressive graft plan could have been associated with a higher risk for low yield in the face of diminished baseline scalp circulation. The risks associated with a fast-track approach are unacceptable, especially when graft supply was considered tenuous at best, when a more deliberate and strategic approach would in theory increase the odds of a high graft yield, maximized coverage based on desired hairstyle, and a non-depleted donor area.
  9. This restoration was performed over one and a half years, not two and a half years. There was a one year interval after its completion which is when the final photos were obtained for presentation here. There is no reason any ethical surgeon would force a fast-track restoration. First, the patient had been operated on by several physicians with nothing positive to show in terms of graft survival. An experienced surgeon would first question whether the patient had some intrinsic healing predisposition that compromised graft survival. Committing to a one-shot restoration would have proved disastrous should his limited supply have been fully depleted with a resultant low yield as had been experience in his prior procedures. Second, he had a highly compromised donor site with extensive scarring and lower quality residual follicular-units. Attempting the one-shot approach would have risked an over-harvest of the scalp’s donor area with the potential for unacceptable visual thinning and detectable scars. Finally, a staged approach allows the surgeon to strategically build zones of coverage and density gradients based on the perspective of seeing what a prior procedure was able to accomplish. Understand that we are using a relatively small number of hairs to hide a vast expanse of scalp. It is the strategic integration of hair using density gradients, graft insertion angles and prioritization of placement zones that makes a little look like a lot. Thanks for all comments.
  10. This 50 year old man presented with a history of multiple failed hair restoration procedures. At a young age he underwent several large-graft plug sessions and a midline scalp reduction. He reported that the majority of the plugs failed to grow and what did grow left him with unnatural patches of pluggy hair. The scalp reduction resulted in an exposed midline crown scar. More recently he gained knowledge about the use of FUE and underwent a large session hoping to enhance his appearance. Unfortunately, the FUE restoration proved to be a failure with no apparent graft survival. Sadly, his scarred and unnatural looking scalp had committed him to a life of wearing a hat or hair piece at all times. His examination revealed a small zone of plug hair in the right and left frontal hairline. The bald frontal scalp showed evidence of many “empty” or nearly-hairless plugs, as well as a large number of small, hairless scars, these a result of the failed FUE procedure. A midline scalp reduction scar was obvious. The donor area was heavily compromised with extensive scarring demonstrated by multiple four-millimeter circular scars from the past plug harvesting and multiple one-millimeter circular scars from the more recent FUE harvest. Although his donor elasticity was judged adequate for strip harvesting, the classic central donor harvest zone demonstrated moderate to extensive circular scarring, as well as poor quality residual follicular-units, these a result of collateral damage from past plug harvesting and his most recent attempt at an FUE harvest. Fortunately, he revealed good quality hair in the chest and beard regions. Recommendation for repair was made which proposed use a multi-stage, prioritization plan to restore hair with the frontal region having the highest priority and prioritization decreasing in a front-to-back fashion moving toward the crown. The plan proposed an initial salvage strip harvest in the lax but scarred central donor area, followed by FUE using selective harvesting from scalp areas continuing to have accessible follicular units and supplemental body harvesting from the chest and beard areas. Presented here is a chronological review of his initial four-stage repair. Session One - August 2017: 2700 Grafts (2400 Strip / 300 Chest FUE) – Front and Midscalp Placement Session Two – January 2018: 1550 Grafts (700 Chest FUE / 850 Scalp Temple Region FUE) – Crown Placement Session Three – July 2018: 1160 Grafts (1160 Scalp FUE) – Front and Midscalp Placement Session Four – February 2019: 1300 Grafts (900 Scalp Nape Region FUE / 400 Chest FUE) – Temple Points, Left Part and Crown Placement Postop Final Pics – One year from the final session; two and one-half years from the first session. Comment: Grafts harvested from the scalp were deemed lower quality because of the extensive prior harvests causing residual scarring in the central donor region and collateral damage to the remaining follicular-unit donor population. Chest hairs, although considered excellent with respect to texture and color, were predominantly low-caliber, single-hair units. Despite these quality issues, the patient was able to achieve adequate density and coverage such that he now lives a comfortable life without any need for a hair piece or hat. Future restorations using additional chest hair and beard hair are in the making. Preop Top View Preop Back View Preop Left Preop Right Hairline Plan Graft Zone Plan Day of Surgery Graft Placement Two-Week Postop Five-Month Postop Front Five-Month Postop Top Session-Two Graft Zone Session-Two Graft Placement Session-Two Body Donor Preop Session-Three Front Preop Session-Three Left Preop Session-Three Back Preop Session-Three Top Session-Three Graft Placement Preop Session-Four Front Preop Session-Four Tipped View Preop Session-Four Top View Preop Session-Four Part View Session-Four Graft Plan View 1 Session-Four Graft Plan View 2 Session-Four Part Graft Placement Session-Four Temple Point Graft Placement Session-Four Crown Graft Placement Final Result Front View 1 Final Result Front View 2 Final Result Left View 1 Final Result Left View 2 Final Result Left View 3 Final Result Left View 4 Final Result Left View 5 Final Result Left View 6 Final Result Right View Final Result Top View Final Result Back View
  11. This 50 year old patient requested hair restoration. A total of 4114 grafts were performed over two sessions using FUE harvesting. First session grafting concentrated on the hairline and temple points. Second session grafting focused on transitioning frontal reinforcement into the midscalp and crown. Presented are one year postop pics along with immediate postop views of the graft placement. Preop Front Preop Left Preop Right Preop Crown Planned Frontal Graft Zone Postop Front Postop Front Comb-back View Postop Left Postop Left Comb-back View 1 Postop Left Comb-back View 2 Postop Right Postop Right Comb-back View Postop Donor Area Postop Top View 1 Postop Top View 2 Postop Top View 3 Postop Top View 4 Postop Density Inspection Right Postop Density Inspection Right-Center Postop Density Inspection Left-Center Postop Density Inspection Left Session 1 Graft Placement Top View Session 1 Graft Placement Left Session 1 Graft Placement Right
  12. This is a 34-year old patient with a history of undergoing a frontal hairline flap using tissue expansion of the left donor region. He presented to my office with complaints of an abrupt hairline, a frontal hairline scar, an unsightly left-side donor scar, and thinning in the midscalp and crown regions. His primary goals were: 1) create a more natural hairline; 2) camouflage scars along the hairline and in the donor area; and 3) enhance hair density in the midscalp and crown. His physical examination revealed: 1. An overly-thick frontal hairline flap with backward-oriented hair. 2. A disfiguring, hypopigmented scar that traversed the entire length of the hairline. 3. A prominent 1 cm scar in the left and back donor areas that traversed the path of the previously transposed hairline flap. 4. Significant density reduction in the temple region surrounding the transposition point of the flap. 5. Advanced miniaturization in the midscalp and crown. 6. A clinically apparent scar along the back edge of the flap. 7. Disproportionate thinning in the lower left crown which had resulted from this edge being displaced downward during closure of the flap’s donor defect. Surgical Plan: The entire left donor area and left occipital region were eliminated from consideration for donor harvesting because of severely limited elasticity and density reduction that resulted from removal of the flap and because of the preexisting wide scar. In anticipation of a large graft requirement to accomplish the many goals at hand, a multi-stage approach was developed that would begin with strip harvesting and later convert to future FUE harvesting once the donor region elasticity threshold had been fully utilized to preclude any additional strip harvesting. The right temple and occipital donor regions demonstrated sufficient density and elasticity to allow strip harvesting for the initial stages of this restoration. Result: Presented here is the result of two graft sessions that were staged seven months apart and utilized a total of 3,685 grafts procured via strip harvesting. Session 1 consisted of 2292 grafts, distributed into the frontal hairline scar region, the occipital scar, and the midscalp region. Session 2 consisted of 1393 grafts that were distributed into the crown, a gap located between the right end of the flap and the adjacent temporal hair, the right hairline scar, and a thinning left-side donor area surrounding the flap’s transposition point. Postoperative photos demonstrate results nine-months following the second session. Additional density gains are expected. Preop - Front Preop - Left Preop - Right Preop - Top Preop - Back View Planned Graft Zone - Front Planned Graft Zone - Midscalp Planned Graft Zone Session 2 - Crown Postop - View 1 Postop - View 2 Postop - View 3 Postop - View 4 Postop - View 5 Postop - View 6 Postop - View 7 Postop - Top View Postop - Back View 1 Postop - Back View 2 Flap Donor Scar - Anterior Flap Donor Scar Graft Placement - Anterior Flap Donor Scar Result - Anterior Flap Donor Scar - Posterior Flap Donor Scar Graft Placement - Posterior Flap Donor Scar Result - Posterior Graft Placement - Front Hairline Graft Placement - Crown
  13. This 45-year old patient presented to our office requesting enhancement of his frontal hairline. He underwent a 3100 graft frontal hairline and temple point restoration using strip harvesting. Presented are his 22 month postoperative pictures. Immediate postop views demonstrate his graft placement. Preop Front Preop Right Preop Left Planned Hairline Front Planned Hairline Right Planned Hairline Left Postop Front View 1 Postop Front View 2 Postop Front View 3 Postop Front View 4 Hairline Comb-back Front Hairline Comb-back Right Hairline Comb-back Left Hairline and Temple Point Inspection View Recipient Site Density Inspection View 1 Recipient Site Density Inspection View 2 Donor Site Scar Intraop Graft Placement Center Intraop Graft Placement Right Intraop Graft Placement Left
×
×
  • Create New...