In surgery, visualization is everything

[Dr. William Lindsey]

I have had 2 patients in today for consultations who frequent these sites, and they asked that I post this as it "made sense" to them.

 

In the course of our conversations, I explained to these men that it is my practice to close cut, or shave the recipient area. Many of my regional competitors do not do this and I am sure that my reputation of cutting the hair in the recipient area has cost me a few patients--unless they know the reason.

 

I would explain it that hair transplantation (making recipient slits and placing grafts) is much like reading the paper or doing a puzzle in the paper through a clear plastic plate. Its not hard since you can see through the plate to the letters. Now, lets imagine you put spaghetti and sauce all over that same plate and tried to still view the paper. You can't, at least not well. Well, that's why we aggressively trim the recipient area hair, so we can see what we are doing!

 

Imagine trying to place in DENSE PACK fashion, 1800-3000 grafts with bloody hairs falling all over the place. Just when you move a hair out of the way, it pulls 2 placed grafts out. The procedure takes longer, the placers get frustrated and dense packing is not easy. Imagine the same placement on a nice clean surgical field constantly irrigated by saline to allow true DENSE PACKING.

 

When explained like this, it is rare for a patient balk at this. They may have to organize their schedule a bit to allow for other hair to grow longer to camouflage the trimmed area, but almost everyone we deal with understands and appreciates our reasoning.

 

Dr. Lindsey RESTON VA

[Bill - Seemiller]

Dr. Lindsey,

 

Thanks for your explanation on why you select to shave the recipient area during hair transplant surgery.

 

I believe most physicians will agree that shaving the recipient area in cases where hair is being transplanted in between a good amount of native hair would make the surgery easier to perform however, where there is a difference is the requirement to shave.

 

From a patient perspective, I can see why patients are attracted to physicians who don't require shaving. After all, this is a cosmetic procedure and the 5 or 6 month inconvenience of waiting for native hair to regrow to its original length is often hard to imagine.

 

However, having had 3 surgeries, I must admit that my third surgery where the recipient area was shaved was the cleanest surgery of the three and also easiest to care for post-op. Oddly enough, I experienced a lot of shock loss with my first two surgeries so any natural or previously transplanted hair I hoped would remain to help me get through the "awkward" healing stage failed me as the majority of it was shocked.

 

The good new is, for patients, they have a choice. The evidence can be presented before them about the advantages and disadvantages of shaving, and they can choose for themselves.

 

Best wishes,

 

Bill

 

P.S. I look forward to seeing the patient and surgical photo albums that you are going to post in the near future.

[bverotti]

Very good post, I particularly like the spagetti comment.

 

When patients want to have grafts implanted between existing hair we also prefer to shave the recipient area.

The patients spends a lot of money and wants the best possible result. Being able to see clearly what is going on is key, like pointed out by dr. Lindsey.

Implanting between existing hairs is almost like asking to perform the placement with the lights turned off ... it is possible but it certainly not in the patients best interest.

[Dr. William Lindsey]

Another good analogy with the lights off berotti.

 

Dr. Lindsey Reston, VA