England

Hey Sean, Yeah - you're bang on. I'm at 2 months right now and pretty much in the doldrums as expected, I'm finding the whole experience strangely pleasant though! I've uploaded a series of pictures to an album in my profile and I'm 90% through writing my story - when finished I'll definitely post here. I've seen the results on your thread - simply awesome result - I'm really happy for you. Cheers

For me this case wasn't posted in order to try and demonstrate that FUE is bad, per se - it's about what happens when FUE is performed with a larger punch and the problems that this causes. It's a demonstration that if you do opt for FUE it should be with a top surgeon. As I mentioned previously (and as the doc concurred), had the surgeon who did the work on the sides done the work at the back, using appropriately sized extraction tools (~1mm or less) there would likely be no problem. Typical transection rates in FUE with the top surgeons are very low - the hair is normally shaved so that the direction of the hairs is quite clear (at least for Caucasians) - and the extractions are performed under magnification. In my recent FUE, transection rate was just 4.5% - the extraction tool was 0.9mm for both 1's, 2's and 3's (I have fine hair). There are some disadvantages of strip too with grafts lost and nerves cut during the slicing process, I've had a strip surgery too so hopefully I can directly compare the results from both in 10 months time. What I think this case does show is that if you're going to get an FUE transplant, you need to think very carefully about who you select to be your surgeon.

In Hariri's defence, almost nobody posting their opinions on any thread comparing top surgeons has had surgery with both/all of them, so a true experienced opinion is a rare commodity indeed, and one statistical data point is pretty irrelevant anyway. Just like the rest of us, opinions are based on experiences of dealing with a collection of patients from said surgeon and forming an opinion as a result, almost every comment which was relevant to the original question draws on similar experiences. To recommend any doctor - which many have done on this very thread - you necessarily must imply that you don't believe the other options are as good. Suggesting that the patient care or ethics of one surgeon are better is not the same thing as accusing the other doctors of being unethical or having poor patient care. It's all relative, and people should be allowed to voice their opinions without fear of being belittled. It is the combination of different opinions which makes the forum such an accurate and representative source of information. From my own perspective I can vouch for the patient care of Dr Feriduni being second to none - I can't think of a single thing they could have improved. For example, I was invited back every day for 2 weeks to have a checkup/wash, taxis paid for every time.

Duplicate Post

1 - What is your long term strategy for my hair transplant journey? This is a broad question which will necessitate the doctor analysing your donor density, the loss in crown as well as looking at any miniaturisation elsewhere on the head, planning the best utilisation of the available donor and ensuring that if your hair loss progresses you will have sufficient donor to cover those areas too. They may mark the areas which need to be treated, in most cases this involves the drawing of a hairline but for you probably an area drawn on the crown. The doctor should tell you his vision for numbers of grafts required in areas (present and future) as well as the cosmetic improvement you should expect to see given said plan. Bear in mind Stem Cell research is by no means guaranteed and some links have been found to cancer, so as per the Bourne Ultimatum, 'hope for the best, plan for the worst' - you need to plan for a Stem Cell technology free world. Since you mentioned you are thinning in your front, this would become far more of an issue for you in the future than a bald spot which you can't see when you're looking in the mirror, so you need to keep your options open. 2 - Can I meet some of your patients and see some of your results? VERY very important that you actually meet with multiple people who were treated by this surgeon, as well as see results they present similar to yours, online or on their computer. Not only does this help you review the surgeon, it also gives you realistic expectations. If you can find someone independently (ie, not someone the surgery recommend you see) that is even better. 3 - What process will I have to follow before, during and after the surgery? The surgeon should tell you key information like whether you have to shave your head, costs, how long the surgery will take and who will perform which parts (it's very important that you understand what will happen before hand so you arent unnerved during the operation). This may include understanding the process of injections, the extraction, incisions, placement, and who on their team performs what. The surgeon should also inform you of the necessary after-care process, what you have to do and how long it'll be before you can go out in public, what to expect after surgery eg swelling, and growth timescales. Finally, the surgeon may recommend taking preventative hair loss medication such as Propecia to stabilise your hair loss. This will give you a much more precise feel for what you are committing to - how long it will take, how much it costs, what will happen, and what you will have to do for the rest of your life. ----------------------------------------------- For any of the above question to be relevant at all, you have to be absolutely sure that the surgeon you're meeting with is an ethical one. You can't tell this from the surgeon, and that's where sites like this one come in - a poor surgeon could answer the questions above dishonestly and you would have no way of knowing - this is how many guys get sucked in. It's also important for the same reasons to consult with multiple top top surgeons and compare their recommendations. By 'top surgeons' I mean IAHRS registered surgeons who are recommended on this site and for whom you have found numerous patient posted stories online which you like the results of. I really want to emphasise the point to you that the difference between a transplant from a poor surgeon and a world class surgeon is LIFE changing. Please don't take that decision lightly. They are NOT all created equal. Also, I have only watched your most recent video - have you decided between Strip and FUE yet?

The reality, in my opinion, is that the doctor who is claiming doctors can't achieve 40 grafts per sq cm is proven wrong by thousands of cases which are posted on here, all at a density of 40 / sq cm or above. It is not true that 20 grafts per sq cm by this doctor will result in the same or better appearance as the 40 grafts / sq cm by a top doctor due to yield issues. In fact, 20 grafts per sq cm is typically not sufficient to achieve an illusion of density at all. I would be very surprised to see any recommended doctor on this site claim what you stated. There are some possible reasons why a doctor could recommend going less density, such as there being a large area to cover, limited donor supply, big risk of future loss. The other important factor is how much native hair you already have in the area, if you have a lot (say 40-50 grafts per sq cm) then it's possible 20 could be enough whereas 40 could put you more at risk of shock loss. However, the reason that you state the doctor gave is not one of these possible reasons so I personally would avoid, assuming that your question paints an accurate picture.

Really happy for you, Sean. You must be made up with this result, and as you said you've still got more density to come. 3,000 FUE is a large procedure and what a success you've had! Looking forward to more updates!

Agree with what Chris said, Strip is marginally more consistent and on average yields very slightly higher. Dr Feriduni is one of the few FUE surgeons in the world I would trust to go with FUE over strip, because in the wrong hands it can be significantly inferior to strip. In the hands of the very best surgeons, eg Feriduni, Rahal, Shapiro, it can yield almost as high as strip. I personally can only talk about the customer service at this stage - I will reserve judgement on the final result (I am in the doldrums right now, 2 months after surgery). I would happily meet up at a later date when my hair grows in. Hopefully in 6-10 months time I'll be raving about the end result ;-) Edit: I'm sure you were informed that with any surgery (strip or FUE), there are no guarantees. 90-95% can be achieved, and may be the average, but you can never be absolutely certain with surgery.

Mattj - thanks - my strip scar being relatively thin and easy to hide was one of the reasons I didn't want to risk it getting any worse (or longer) by having another strip. Considering I had my treatment done at a relatively poor clinic I got quite lucky with the scar I think. Cdog - I had 2,500 ish extractions. I think you're right in that light hair helps. The dots were slightly red at first but are fading now and just look like pores if visible at all, I don't think they'll go white due to my skin tone. Fantastic that you can't see any dots on your hair with 2 weeks growth. Have you healed any more since your original post? @Both - the main reason I posted was for people considering scars of strip vs scars of FUE - this gives a direct comparison on the same head of hair. At just 2 weeks post FUE op (a relatively large one), it was the strip scar that stopped me going outside without a hat. While everybody who has researched knows that FUE isn't technically scarless, when it's undetectable with short hair it's far 'more' scarless than strip. :-)

As an interesting point of comparison, I have both a strip scar (from 7 years ago) and have recently had FUE surgery. Here is a picture showing me immediately post-op and 2 weeks later. It's interesting to observe that just 2 weeks after the FUE surgery, the strip scar is far more visible and problematic:

Looks like you got an excellent result from your previous FUE surgeries. Very interesting case, thanks for posting. It's interesting that the sides which were worked on by a 'top notch doctor' don't have the same issues with scarring - I think most top FUE surgeons use 0.8 or 0.9mm blades & punches these days. It does highlight the one caveat with FUE which is that you have to ensure you go to one of the very best surgeons. I guess if you had gone to the same doctor for the rear extractions you may be in a better situation right now, but either way it looks like an excellent overall outcome.