Jotronic

Looks like he had a hair line lowering procedure where the scalp is actually pulled forward then grafts were placed into the resulting scar. That and of course loads of concealer and potentially a partial piece behind the hairline which is very common.

Paul had hairline and temple point work done as seen here..

I have a pic of Mel from when one of our clients was working with him on set. Definite hair transplant.

Hair321. You should ONLY listen to your doctor on this. Call, email, whatever you must do but find out what your doctor says and stick to it.

Nice!

It's a piece. Almost all actors will wear a piece at some time or another for photo ops and red carpet events not to mention actual performances on screen. Hugh Jackman has great natural hair but the temples are a bit receded thus why the partial piece is being used. Same for Matthew McConaughey but his loss is more recessed to a NW3 with a developing forelock.

Anyone see the latest over on The Hollywood Reporter dot com? Kevin Spacey is one of my top five favorite actors and he usually camouflages his hair loss by doing nothing more than adding a bit of concealer for most public appearances. His photo shoot on THR has him wearing one of the worst toupee's I've seen in the past several years. It's not just bad, it's 1970's bad.

I always thought that the scar itself does not necessarily have a direct 1:1 correlation to the punch as in, a .8mm punch will not necessarily result in a .8mm scar but slightly less due to the scalp's healing functions but I don't have any proof to substantiate that.

many times it doesn't, at least for the smaller punches, My own .8mm scars look smaller than .8mm but of course your mileage may vary. The visible scarring will be closer to the punch size for some patients.

Seems like Arocha has changed his stance on FUE scarring quite a bit since this video:

 

 

 

Exact quote "One usually has much more, anywhere from seven to fourteen times more scar with FUE than with strip. Done in good hands".

 

I'll leave it to you guys to decide why he changed his mind on FUE...

His quote does not state that FUE scarring is 7 to 14 times more visible, only instead that there can be 7 to 14 times more scarring. Those are two separate issues entirely.His logic regarding there being more scar tissue overall is sound.

I'm kind of confused. I looked up Dr. Katona and I found one listed for Chicago (MHR), Seattle (AHR) and then in the UK. Which one is it and which reviews did you read about his work?

I'd say he's a textbook NW6, not a 7. I had a lot more loss than this guy and I still wasn't a full blown 7. Still a nice result for 3700 grafts.

I have had estimates based on the total numbers of hairs I needed ~6k hairs.

On average this equates to around 2000 grafts according to the Dr. Moreover, the price you are quoted per hair not only is cheaper than what top surgeons charge per graft, but only few grafts will contain say 4 hairs. So if the majority of your grafts have 2-3 hairs, then this equates to around the same charged per graft by most surgeons. However, a lot will have just 1 hair. So in fact you are getting a better deal at per hair rather than per graft

 

The average number of hairs in a natural follicular unit will be 2.3 hairs on the high end for Caucasians and 1.8 for Asians and SE Asians. Your quote indicates you have an average of 3 hairs per follicular unit.

Charging per hair is one way for clinics to justify the smaller sessions they perform compared to clinics that can perform larger sessions. They will say that you don't know what you're getting with the "per graft" model and use this as a deterrent. What they don't tell you is that they are using chunky grafts that if viewed up close would look unnatural and in the end you are getting less hair per procedure even with more hair (unnaturally) per graft. For years the goal of the surgeon was to get the graft to be a natural FU bundle as it grows in nature. Now we have some surgeons trying to skirt the skill necessary for this level of refinement by arguing that these chunky grafts which are no different than mini-grafts from 20 years ago offer more coverage and density at a lower price. By marketing themselves toward the financial "benefits" they have effectively reversed years of progress for the procedure as well as the education of the patient not to mention the per hair model usually winds up being MORE expensive.

Yes, but the $ per hair is less than the $ per graft in many cases

Which cases?

This is a BAD deal for the OP. Far too much money for most likely not enough hair.

Wise move.

This local to Vancouver patient came to Dr. Hasson hoping for a major cosmetic improvement for his hair. While coverage was at the top of the list he asked Dr. Hasson to establish strong density for the front. Obviously, this means fewer grafts are available for the crown but Dr. Hasson worked with the patient to establish a balance for coverage and density in one procedure.

The result shown below was accomplished with 5732 follicular units in one procedure. The procedure was performed one year ago.

Hasson & Wong representative Mike Ferko will be in San Francisco for consultations from April 21 to April 26th. He will answer your questions about hair loss and what can be done to address it. He will also tell you about how Hasson & Wong perform procedures and what may be done with regards to your own case.

To register simple go online to our homepage and fill out the registration form that will pop up.

Hair Transplants | Hair Transplant Surgery | Hasson & Wong

I understood what you meant but one week with the robot, I don't know, sounds absurd to me. This is your head we're talking about here. You are the one that has to live with it, no one else has that privilege. I talk to guys like you all the time (this is not a shot at you) in that they think they've done their research and when something makes sense at first glance they jump into the water not realizing their is a giant stump just below the surface. I get particularly worked up about situations like this because of my own short sighted decisions about surgery twenty two years ago.

I'm glad the doctor let you check out his transplant and scar. Did he do it on himself? I never understood the value in a doctor showing his own results as if he did a surgery on his own head. If his partner did it, that makes sense. If his staff did it, then who removed the strip?

The option to have more hair styles is dependent on what you feel is enough hair to pull those styles off. Again, the density will be determined by the size of the area the grafts are to be placed. The larger the area, the lower the density. You already said you are having to juggle some bills to pay for this at the discount rate so how will you pay for the second surgery that you admit you might wind up needing?

I've said my peace, you're the one that has to live with this so I wish you all the luck in the world.

Yes, I'd want to have a procedure with a clinic that "should have the hang of it by then". :eek:

Look, I know it is tempting to do because you are getting a serious price break but that is the typical situation that gets guys into trouble What happens when you need more work done because the first procedure wasn't dense enough? How long are you willing to wait with a result you may not be happy with while you save up more money to afford a second procedure?

Playing devil's advocate here, 1400 grafts may be fine for you because it ultimately depends on how much your temples will be addressed but your existing hair looks pretty full so any work done to lower your hairline and to address your temples would have to be pretty dense as well and the higher the density goes the more grafts are needed.

How many results did you see that were performed by the doctor since he's in charge of the placement for your surgery? How many other doctors have you reviewed that you can travel to? You don't have to go to Turkey, you can stay "local" to North America but I think you should hold off, save your money and take the time necessary to do some real research.

It varies quite a bit from patient to patient but one can expect some improvements between 7.5 months and 12 months. It could be as little at 10% to as much as 40% improvement in general.

Electrolysis will sort them

/\ This. Or a few passes with a laser.

Hey Jotronic,

This topic came up in another thread- and I'm not sure if you will see it-- but now that I'm curious, I have to ask (hope I don't annoy anyone asking a similar question in 2 threads)-- but your input is like Gold to some of us.. so here goes:

In your patient's BEFORE pic, he kind looks like Matt Lauer..

I am attaching a pic of Matt Lauer that shows his recent hair loss status.

If Matt Lauer were to get a hair transplant, could he be as lucky in getting as good results?

I'm guessing not because Lauer's donor region does not appear to be as high quality as your patient's pic. How much hope would there be for someone in Lauer's case, compared to your guy? I just wish there was a better way of predicting expected results.

Good question. From the limited view of his donor it looks fairly dense and with the salt & pepper color he would get good coverage. His hair also appears to be fairly coarse so that too would aid in coverage. The challenge is that his sides are pretty low so some grafts would be used for this area. The crown wouldn't be touched at all but just doing the front, having a nice hairline that is believable and coverage for the front half and blended to lowe density in the vertex would make a huge positive difference. Before anything though, I'd advice Mr. Lauer to start Propecia:)

The patient you referenced has characteristics that we typically find in our Spanish patients. Above average donor density, above average donor laxity which allows for big numbers and eventually big results.

Working on the HD video for this result. Stay tuned:)

Hold on. There are a few things that need to be clarified. You're getting 5mg Proscar for 70 bucks, right? You are supposed to cut the pill into quarters so 30 tablets should last four months. That's less than 20 bucks a month. You're not supposed to take 5mg at once.

Second, the crown is at the back of the scalp, not the front. With the medication you have about a 30/70 chance of maintaining but you have a much stronger chance of maintaining the areas behind the hairline and the crown area. This is a good thing because IF the front does go then you will have very little work needed to restore your hair. Once the back goes then you have a much larger hill (or mountain rather) to climb.

You should submit your pics to various doctors to get a feel for what kind of opinions there will be but be sure to take your time to read the vast amounts of information that is available online. It will be confusing mainly because a lot of it is contradictory but use your eyes and your common sense and think through things logically. You do this and you'll find the right answer for you. Remember, if it seems to good to be true it usually is but only if it is not backed up with multiple examples that you can see in photos and watch in video.

HSRP10,

Yeah, noticed that last night after I got home and didn't have remote access to edit. It's changed now, thanks for the heads up:)

This patient came from Scotland to have Dr. Hasson rebuild the frontal zone. 4507 grafts were moved in one procedure to build a new hairline with age appropriate temple recession. Dr. Hasson distributed the grafts from the new hairline through to the mid-scalp in order to blend the new hair into the existing hair for a natural progression.

Hair loss is progressive and is never truly stabilized unless something is being done proactively, such as taking Propecia or Rogaine on a regular, not sporadic, basis. Consistency is key. The degree of native hair loss you have experienced is not dramatic so it appears like a normal issue.

This is a separate issue from the result of the procedure as you should have an obvious improvement for the number of grafts placed and the area they were placed in. I would contact your doctor, if you have not already, and get his input and see what his thoughts are on how to address your problem.

Well, that depends. Again, were you on Propecia or Rogaine? If not then this is a simple yet unfortunate continuation of your natural hair loss pattern. It doesn't really look like any definitive form of permanent shock from the procedure to me. Regardless, it does not explain why there is no improvement from the procedure. 2900 grafts should have made a significant improvement regardless of the amount of continued natural hair loss.

I see a change but unfortunately in the wrong direction. You've lost more native hair in addition to not having much change from the surgery itself. Are you on preventative medication such as Rogaine or Propecia?