Jump to content

The pros/cons of FUE. Myths dispelled.


Mickey85

Recommended Posts

  • Senior Member
Very well described post , thanks for sharing your experience , I have seen many good results of patients , having FUE treatment , and they were having quite a good result at Hair transplant in Indore.

Once again your post is spam .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
  • 7 months later...

For a normal haired human being how many grafts can be harvested from safe zone without going to unsafe zone for FUE method?

 

Doctor 1 who is on the India (official email reply from him) List here is saying 2500 then we go to unsafe zone.

Doctor 2 who is on the india list says 4000. Which is it??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

I think FUE is best and safe than other ...

 

 

Follicular Unit Extraction is a hair transplant procedure, in which the hair transplant physicians extract each hair follicle directly from the scalp. It is done randomly and it results in lower density of hair in the donor area which is not noticeable in most cases.

 

 

1. Pain Management

 

 

In FUE, stitches are unnecessary and there is no existence of any linear scar, so healing time is short and there is almost non-existent post procedural discomfort.

 

 

2. Scarring

 

 

There is no linear scarring as such in FUE but there are 1mm in diameter or less puncture marks which heal by themselves within 3 to 7 days.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 8 months later...
  • Senior Member

From previous (non cosmetic) surgeries and other sport injuries which were not stitched up I got some scars. I was told that I am a "bad healer" and tend to have bigger (non flat so to say) scars.

 

Does this make me to a poor HAT patient in general and/or particular to a poor FUE (or vice versa FUT) patient?

Edited by Gasthoerer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...
  • Senior Member

I am sorry if I am jumping in without going through the whole lot of the discussion on FUT vs FUE and most talking about benefits of FUE.

 

let me share my thoughts about FUE and FUT.

 

In fact if the person is less than or equal to type III and is in late 30's meaning the chances of progression to type V to VII in minimal. Then FUE alone is enough. As the donor area would support the harvest without actually thinning the donor area significantly.

 

However, if the person is bound to reach stage V and more then the person will need both FUT and FUE to maximise the grafts without compromising the donor density less than the critical value.

 

I presented this topic "Limitation of FUE in HT- are we removing more than desired". My theory is that there is a critical mass/no of grafts , if we reduce it beyond that number, we create a bigger problem then what we were trying to solve.

 

I feel the donor density should not be reduced more than 35% of the donor density. The FUT reduce the width of the donor area and then minor readjustment because of stretch back of scar. With Age we get some reduction in hair numbers and also hair diameter . If we reduce the caliber of hair by 10 microns the overall impact can be as much as 36% as mentioned by Dr Cole.

 

One has to remember that if we harvest more than 35% of the grafts from donor area in one surgery and then another 25%, we bring the patient donor area to 60% total reduction in thinness graph of baldness. Now if he looses 10% due to natural thinness with age he goes down to 30% and with reduction of caliber he becomes severely compromised donor density.

 

So one has to understand the safe amount of harvest of FUE from donor area. This trend of doctors who are not getting trained in FUT due to non surgical training will be compelled to do FUE and then what you will see is what is happening in Turkey these days that non qualified people over harvesting the donor harvest.

 

hope i am clear

14407735_10157450092725023_80882806_n.jpg.fe0a2d760f1e129a5de68080695cc3d4.jpg

DSC_0054.thumb.jpg.3c86cf627bf58192b4b64cd821db5c42.jpg

5b32f5c504672_fuefut.thumb.jpg.0a613a51e45bbed2c88e0f097a23ad2f.jpg

5b32f5c51fa14_hairlossvisibility.jpg.749732125a6323584c403b7825324efb.jpg

  • Like 1

---

 

I am a medical advisor to Lexington International and Hairmax. What ever I say is my personal opinion.

 

Dr. Mohmand is recommended on the Hair Transplant Network

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
  • Regular Member

Really interesting, and quite frankly, judging by its length, a controversial one.

 

Everyone has had both good and bad FUSS and FUE procedures. Ultimately it comes down to 2 things: If one can accept having a scar at the expense of a good result, and who the surgeon is that is conducting the procedure, for some are better at producing good FUE results, while others generate strong FUSS ones.

 

About my hair loss journey:

 

Happy Patient's Blog

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Senior Member

Sometimes, having a very minute scar may be better than having halos, low ass yields, thin looking hairlines with ridging and pitting etc. fUE Seems to work for some well and for some not so well.

Starting to think its good for all hair types.

 

Results can also be related to a doctors surgical protocol.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...
  • 4 months later...
  • 1 month later...

Follicular unit extraction.

this is a advance hair transplant techniques techniques but there are some pros and cons of FUE hair transplant surgery - 

Pros of FUE Surgery :

Feel better quicker

Wider harvesting options

A more discreet scar

Better for those more likely to scar

 

Cons of FUE Surgery :

Lesser graft quality

It all takes that bit longer

Subsequent FUE sessions may be problematic

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 years later...
  • Administrators

A lot of new users have no idea that FUE was once touted as an inferior technique. 10 years later, almost all surgeons perform FUE solely. It was a bit like surgeons refusing to accept follicular unit grafting because the grafts were too small. They thought mini-grafts were thicker, healthier and would survive better. We all know that wasn’t true now.


I’m a paid admin for Hair Transplant Network. I do not receive any compensation from any clinic. My comments are not medical advice.

Check out my final hair transplant and topical dutasteride journey

View my thread

Topical dutasteride journey 

Melvin- Managing Publisher and Forum Moderator for the Hair Transplant Network, the Coalition Hair Loss Learning Center, and the Hair Loss Q&A Blog.

Follow our Social Media: Facebook, Instagram, Linkedin, and YouTube.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Senior Member
On 2/21/2024 at 2:33 AM, Melvin- Admin said:

A lot of new users have no idea that FUE was once touted as an inferior technique. 10 years later, almost all surgeons perform FUE solely. It was a bit like surgeons refusing to accept follicular unit grafting because the grafts were too small. They thought mini-grafts were thicker, healthier and would survive better. We all know that wasn’t true now.

I agree, it has completely flipped now. I couldn't believe how hesitant some Doctor's were about it. Dr Lorzeno really was the one who showed that a clinic can restore high Norwoods using FUE exclusively. 

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...