Jump to content

TRANSECTION AND FUE


Recommended Posts

  • Regular Member

Transection rate is the number of follicles sliced in half, and unable to be transplanted and which may potentially no longer grow in their donor site either. If FUE is done improperly transection can be higher than strip, but ideally FUE is lower because it doesn't waste excess tissue and/or hair in this tissue. With Strip, grafts can be sliced blindly by the scapel, furthemore you will be left with at least a 1/4" halo around the area of the incision where the hair is either minaturized or no longer grows. I call this the "beast halo"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There will not necessarily be a 1/4" halo around the incision after a strip excision surgery. I have had had two procedures and I can barely find my scar. Yes there will be a scar, but with a good surgeon it will not be significant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Regular Member

If a doc said "there is a 30% transection rate with FUE," he means that 30% of the FU's harvested in this manner would be damaged (or destroyed).

 

There is a lot of debate as to which method (strip vs. FUE) will produce a better (lower) transection rate. I think Woods and/or his proponents claim that "in his hands" the FUE transection rate is negligible. The strip guys also claim that the transection rate is negligible in the course of disecting(?) the strip. The FUE guys, however, claim that transection occurs in the process of cutting out the strip.

 

Hope this helps.

 

[This message was edited by MarkV on February 05, 2003 at 07:19 PM.]

 

[This message was edited by MarkV on February 05, 2003 at 07:20 PM.]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators

Regarding the FUE and its recent presentation in Hot Springs, Dr. Bob Limmer asked me to post his following comments -

 

The recent meeting in Hot Springs, Arkansas, among HT surgeons many of whom have 20-30 or more years in the field was a fruitful exchange of ideas. As one of the participants who has watched and contributed to the evolution of this field, I again want to ask that we produce good scientific data on the donor harvest implantation methods under current consideration. This is especially relevant to the methods of donor harvest of individual follicular units by punch or partial punch methods. Everyone involved in this donor harvest method as good scientists should conscientiously and with microscopic magnification collect the data on follicular transection and follicular survival so that this data can be compared with the data bank on every method in current use. This collection of data is particularly relevant because of the past history of small punch donor removal which was abandoned because of the high follicular transection rates. The development of new tools and methods of use to reduce such transection rates may prove this method of donor harvest to be a viable alternative but data needs to be gathered to confirm or refute this premise. As long as the donor hair is the only absolute limiting factor in hair restoration, we should be certain that the methods of donor harvest preserve such donor hair as much as possible.

 

BLL,MD/jal

 

Sharing our ideas and photos is what keeps this site real. Please participate by posting and replying.

Never Forget - It's what radiates from within, not from your skin, that really matters!

My Hair Loss Blog

Sharing is what keeps this community vital. Please join in. To learn how I restored my hair and started this community, click here.

Follow our Community on Twitter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...