Stand alone HT vs hairline HT

[hairloser1]

This is my first post even though I've been using this site to do research for several months. A little background... I'm 41 and have used propecia for 10 years and minox diligently for 15 years. My hairline and temples had receded quite a bit by the time I was 25.

 

My question is about the guys I've seen pictures of who are primarily receders (nw2 - 3) and get hairline work done in the receded areas around their existing forelock. Obviously these aren't "stand alone" ht's as I've heard other people refer to. I wonder if the potential efficacy of the "big 2" at keeping native hair for a much longer period of time is encouraging more of these types of ht's? Eventually, even on finasteride this native hair will thin and disappear (5, 10, 15 years later).

 

I'm definately not criticizing guys for doing this. I'm in the same situation (nw2 - 3). I would like to get about 1500 grafts around my hairline to thicken it up and just fill in the first half inch of my forelock and bring down my receded corners about a half inch. It would be a very conservative approach and I would still have quite a receded hairline but would be age appropriate. I think it could definately make a nice cosmetic difference for the next few years (who knows how long) but after that I would need another HT. I plan on having a consultation with at least one coalition doc. I basically go back and forth between short-term and long-term thinking (short-term - 3 years - excitement because my hair will look better!, long-term - 5 years+ - what have I commited myself to!)

 

Sorry for rambling, I guess these are basically my questions:

 

For those that may have had this type of HT, did you develop a long-term plan like indefinate use of meds and then future HT's as needed until you get to a point where you have replaced enough hair to feel good about how it looks with no further work?

 

Some people think a HT should be able to stand alone and look OK with no further HT's or even the use of meds. I guess the reason for this is obvious (lack of finances for future HT, unexpected life events preventing future HT, etc.) however, for people with a good amount of native hair this isn't usually possible. This thinking would seem to limit HT's to people with most of their native hair already gone on top. Any thoughts on this?

 

Thanks for any feedback.

[hairloser1]

This is my first post even though I've been using this site to do research for several months. A little background... I'm 41 and have used propecia for 10 years and minox diligently for 15 years. My hairline and temples had receded quite a bit by the time I was 25.

 

My question is about the guys I've seen pictures of who are primarily receders (nw2 - 3) and get hairline work done in the receded areas around their existing forelock. Obviously these aren't "stand alone" ht's as I've heard other people refer to. I wonder if the potential efficacy of the "big 2" at keeping native hair for a much longer period of time is encouraging more of these types of ht's? Eventually, even on finasteride this native hair will thin and disappear (5, 10, 15 years later).

 

I'm definately not criticizing guys for doing this. I'm in the same situation (nw2 - 3). I would like to get about 1500 grafts around my hairline to thicken it up and just fill in the first half inch of my forelock and bring down my receded corners about a half inch. It would be a very conservative approach and I would still have quite a receded hairline but would be age appropriate. I think it could definately make a nice cosmetic difference for the next few years (who knows how long) but after that I would need another HT. I plan on having a consultation with at least one coalition doc. I basically go back and forth between short-term and long-term thinking (short-term - 3 years - excitement because my hair will look better!, long-term - 5 years+ - what have I commited myself to!)

 

Sorry for rambling, I guess these are basically my questions:

 

For those that may have had this type of HT, did you develop a long-term plan like indefinate use of meds and then future HT's as needed until you get to a point where you have replaced enough hair to feel good about how it looks with no further work?

 

Some people think a HT should be able to stand alone and look OK with no further HT's or even the use of meds. I guess the reason for this is obvious (lack of finances for future HT, unexpected life events preventing future HT, etc.) however, for people with a good amount of native hair this isn't usually possible. This thinking would seem to limit HT's to people with most of their native hair already gone on top. Any thoughts on this?

 

Thanks for any feedback.

[MrJobi]

Hi

 

There is no proof indicating that you "will" continue to receded if you are on meds. I think it could be two things 1- effectiviness of the meds 2- slowing down of hairloss. My hairloss has stabilied since being on propecia for the last 5 years ( or more). Also, I hope to find a better treatment in the future.

 

With that being said, a stand alone HT look good as well but there are so many factors as well.

[Manko]

hairloser1 - Your pattern sounds similar to my own. I had an HT done on my hairline by Dr. Hasson in 2003, and so far things are good. I'm starting to notice that behind the HT there's some receding, but so far it's only noticeable by me, when it gets to a point that it's noticeable to anyone else I'll have to go back.

 

I originally noticed that I was starting to lose my hair when I was in my early 20's (I'm 40 now), but it was entirely hairline recession, and not any real thinning on the top, but I've used Rogaine for close to 20 years, and propecia/proscar for about 10. I'm sure that this is the routine I'll follow for the rest of my life. Good luck.

 

Manko

[Bill - Seemiller]

hairloser,

 

Welcome to our forum community.

 

Unfortunately, "stand alone" hair transplants are rare and can almost be considered a fallacy. Genetic hair loss is progressive up to an undetermined and unpredictable point based on your genetics. It is quite possible that hair loss drugs such as Propecia and Rogaine will slow down or hault future loss, but there is sadly, no guarantee. Use of these medications is typically a part of a good hair restoration long term game plan.

 

Many hair transplant patients (NW2 or NW3) with receeding hairlines will often find years later (such as Manko), that there natural hair has slightly receeded even more which may eventually require additional or subsequent hair transplant surgeries.

 

Best wishes,

 

Bill

[hairloser1]

Thanks guys.

 

Bill, well stated. I agree completely.

 

Manko, I also plan on using the meds forever, at least until something better comes along. I can't prove it but I know I'd be a nw4 or 5 right now if I'd never used rogaine and propecia. In my thrities I had a couple people who hadn't seen me since my twenties ask if I'd had a HT because my recession had not progressed and actually improved some.

Anyway, if you don't mind me asking, how much of a cosmetic difference did the 1500 make?That's about the same # I'm thinking of. Was it a fairly substantial cosmetic improvement?

[Aquarius]

Don't you want to thank MRBJ as well?

 

I only wish I did it sooner!!!

Best thing I ever DID !!

Thank Christ all I do is obsess over the best thing I ever did,while working as a bean counter from home.

HAS ANYONE OTHER THAN YOURSELF "EVER" TOLD YOU HOW GREAT YOU LOOK? Or that you are redundant .

I think after three luxurious H/t's you should get out of the house and get laid.

[NervousNelly]

Hairloser1,

 

I think that you have the term "Stand alone HT" incorrect. (or else I do) You can be a NW2 and still receive a stand alone HT because if done correctly it will still look normal should you lose more native hair. True you may have a desire for another HT, but it looks normal and you don't have to get another procedure if you choose not to. The key is the correct height of hairline and density. Too low and too dense it certainly would not be stand alone. Otherwise it could be. If for example you transplanted hair ONLY on 1 side of head to fill in a thin area, then this would NOT be stand alone. Understand the difference? At your age there is nothing wrong with your thinking of filling in the frontal area only. This is fine and infact is a good approach.

[Bill - Seemiller]

NN,

 

I know we have talked about stand alone hair transplants before, and we may be defining them differently.

 

I believe a NW2 with a receeding hairline can rarely obtain a stand alone hair transplant, at least, based on the way I am defining it.

 

To me, a stand alone hair transplant is one that will look natural even in the event that additional natural hair is lost. If a NW2 with a receeding hairline receives a natural looking hairline from a hair transplant and then receeds back to a norwood 5, the existing hair transplant will most likely look unnatural and a follow up hair transplant is necessary.

 

In my opinion, diffuse thinners potentially make good candidates for a "stand alone" hair transplant. Even if more natural hair is lost, they will have thinner hair but it will still look natural.

 

Just some food for thought.

 

Bill

[NervousNelly]

Bill,

 

I guess there are different ways of looking at things. I understand what you are saying. I always look at it as in the hands of an ethical and skilled surgeon a NW2 may still be able to get a stand alone HT. If dense packed too much with too low of a hairline then any further loss would certainly look unnatural. I guess it will depend on the situation.