How many FU's per square CM is wise?

[fakeplstctrees]

I just saw a procedure in another thread, where Dr. Rahal did over 7,000 grafts. He averaged 278 hairs per sq cm, that seems really high. I have consulted with several other doctors regarding my second procedure, and they all said that too many in one area will only yield about 70% or so. I know Dr. Rahal is a superstar and all, but how is it possible to put that many in one area?

[Dr. Glenn Charles]

If you asked 10 different hair transplant surgeons what is the maximum safe follicular units per sq cm you would probably get 10 different answers. I u'f to generally do not exceed 50-60 FU's per sq cm. I would rather place 60 FU's in a sq cm and get 56 FU's to grow rather than placing 80 FU's per sq cm and only have 68 FU's grow. Less waisted follicles is better in the long run. Everyone has a limited supply.

[Spanker]

Can you lonk that post? about 100 per cm2 is what a normal person with no loss has, so over 200 does not sound right.

 

I think no more than 50 per cm2 is wise. A little higher in some places, but you should probably do that on an additional surgery.

[mattj]

That density figure you saw of 278 hairs was a patient's donor density, not the density at which grafts were placed.

[mahhong]

Also, I could be wrong, but I think the OP was talking about the number of hairs per cm2, and I think the 100 per cm2 figure applies more generally to follicular unit, which can contain anywhere between 1-4 hairs. I think that's right anyway!

[mattj]

Also, I could be wrong, but I think the OP was talking about the number of hairs per cm2, and I think the 100 per cm2 figure applies more generally to follicular unit, which can contain anywhere between 1-4 hairs. I think that's right anyway!

 

The OP referred to hairs and to FUs. It's easy to get mixed up between the two.

[HARIRI]

IMHO, the ideal grafts per cm2 is 50. Janna (Dr. Shapiro's master tec) wrote a whole topic about it in one of the forums. Too many grafts in cm2 doesnt make sense, we are balding anyways, so fair even coverage in all areas is very important so atleast we can use some TOPPIK or NANOGEN blends with it. I asked Dr. Rahal to do me 50 per cm2 as condition so i save my precious grafts for next time.

[Jotronic]

278 hairs per sq cm equates to roughly 120 FU per cm2. This is considered above average donor density but nothing ground shaking.

[gillenator]

Also, I could be wrong, but I think the OP was talking about the number of hairs per cm2, and I think the 100 per cm2 figure applies more generally to follicular unit, which can contain anywhere between 1-4 hairs. I think that's right anyway!

 

I agree, and btw, most FU's are two hair FUs on most patients.

[gillenator]

I am always surprised that no one mentions or even considers the grade of hair caliber in the equation.

 

Since hair caliber is the single most critical factor considered in gaining the illusion of coverage, the major consideration then should NOT be density by numer of hairs or even the number of FUs per cm2 established.

 

Compare a patient who has a very high degree of coarseness to his hair compared to someone with very thin hair caliber. If both had a completely bald surface area to start with, would both be considered for the same number of FUs per cm2? NO WAY!

 

The patient with the higher grade of caliber would need far less than the patient with lower grade caliber. Then add some curl or wave, and then narrow the color contrast. Now what? Would those additional factors change the equation once again? You bet it does.

 

About 4-5 years ago, the various hairloss forums were buzzing with many posters expressing their goals by cm2. So and so got 70 FU cm2 and so and so got 80 cm2 from Dr. X and Dr. Y. And many were wanting the very same level of density without ever considering their individual hair characteristics. "Dense packing" became the prevalent buzz words! Yet in the end, dense packing was counter productive to actual yields (regrowth) and the era died!

 

Many of these newer posters did not realize that increasing the amount of recipient incisions within a defined measured surface area would increase the level of trauma, decrease available blood supply, and then decrease corresponding yields in the end. Like Dr. Charles stated, donor supply is limited so why waste it!

 

One size does not fit all. We are all different including our individual hair characteristics, and therefore we all should be evaluated based on those individual differences.

Edited October 6, 2011 by gillenator

[mattj]

I don't think those matters of hair caliber, curliness and skin/scalp colour contrast are ignored. They seem to come up frequently.

[gillenator]

I don't think those matters of hair caliber, curliness and skin/scalp colour contrast are ignored. They seem to come up frequently.

 

I was referring to considerations within this thread topic.